limited liability company
Recently Published Documents

This article analyzes the impact of stock price efficiency on the Covid-19 event in 2020. As a capital market tool, shares are interpreted as evidence that a person has equity participation in a company or limited liability company. The emergence of the impact of Covid-19 on the price index is detrimental to the country's economy. State-Owned Enterprises (BUMN), which are the drivers of economic growth, has also been affected by the Covid-19 pandemic. This analysis needs to be carried out to find out the impact of Covid-19 on the stock price of IDX BUMN20 regarding the effects before and before the outbreak of the Covid-19 virus in Indonesia in 2020. The research method used is exploratory descriptive with a quantitative approach and the data collected is descriptive. Secondary data from the IDX and the Central Statistics Agency regarding the condition of economic growth and the SOE stock price index in 2020. Based on the results obtained, the first conclusion is that Indonesia's economic growth from 2019 was 5.02% and in 2020 was 2.07%, so that economic growth decreased from 2019 to 2020 by 2.95. Furthermore, the IDX BUMN20 stock index also fell to 18.39% throughout 2020.

Dental clinic/office launch and development is non-easy task, which require not only a lot of efforts but also some level of the investments, especially for the commercial real estate and expensive equipment. And very often the amount of finances which one person or family is bringing to business may not be sufficient. Including of shareholders can help to reach that goal. Including the partners (ie, cofounders or shareholders) to your private clinic/ office in a legal form of Limited Liability Company (LLC) are possible upon two stages: (1) upon the business launch and (2) upon the business existence. The second variant is more complicated and has to be analyzed.

Kegiatas usaha perseroan terbatas dilaksanakan oleh organ perseroan terbatas yaitu Direksi perseroan terbatas, Direksi dapat mewakili perseroan terbatas untuk melakukan kontrak dengan pihak terkait. Tindakan mewakili Perseroan Terbatas oleh Direksi harus sesuai dengan aturan sebagaiman dalam Undang-Undang No. 40 Tahun 2007 Tentang Perseroan Terbatas atau yang telah ditentukan dalam Anggaran Dasar Perseroan Terbatas. Apabilan tidakan Direksi Perseroan Terbatas  melaksanakan Kontrak yang dapat merugikan Perseroan karena bertentangan dengan Undang-Undang No. 40 Tahun 2007 Tentang Perseroan Terbatas atau yang telah ditatur dalam Anggaran Dasar Perseroan Terbatas maka kontrak yang dibuat mengandung Ultra Vires. Jika Direksi melakukan tindakan Ultra Vires maka sesuai dengan Pasal 61 Undang-Undang No. 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas, kepada Pemegang sahan berhak mengajukan Gugatan terhadap Perseroan ke Pengadilan Negeri. Limited liability companies are carried out by Directors of limited liability companies. The directors can represent limited liability companies to enter into contracts with related parties. The act of representing a Limited Liability Company by the Board of Directors must be in accordance with the provisions in Law No. 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies or those stipulated in the Articles of Association of Limited Liability Companies. If the actions of the Board of Directors of a Limited Liability Company implement a Contract that could be detrimental to the Company because it is contrary to Law No. 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies or those stipulated in the Articles of Association of Limited Liability Companies, the contracts made contain Ultra Vires. If the Board of Directors carries out Ultra Vires actions, in accordance with Article 61 of Law No. 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies, the shareholders have the right to file a lawsuit against the Company to the District Court.

Abstract, State assets in the form of shares of business entities are not state assets, but have been transformed into business entity assets. Likewise, government officials who become Directors/Commissioners and other shareholders have an equal position with private shareholders. The Board of Directors in carrying out their duties and authorities has the authority and protection in every business decision making, but this does not escape supervision through the BJR (Business Judgment Rule) principle, as contained in the Limited Liability Company Law. This study uses a qualitative research method with a statutory approach. The purpose of this study is to understand the criteria for state finances in SOEs and the legal consequences of financial losses and supervision of SOEs. The results of the study stated that the implementation of BJR on the Board of Directors of SOEs could be carried out after fulfilling the terms and conditions of the enactment of BJR. BJR can be implemented because a legal entity is actually subject to the Limited Liability Company law. Keywords: Supervision of SOEs ion; Business Judgment Rules; State Finance   Intisari: Kekayaan negara yang berbentuk saham dari badan usaha bukan merupakan kekayaan negara, tetapi telah bertransformasi menjadi kekayaan badan usaha. Demikian terhadap pejabat pemerintah yang menjadi Direksi/Komisaris dan pemegang saham lainnya memiliki kedudukan yang setara dengan pemegang saham swasta. Direksi dalam menjalankan tugas dan wewenang memiliki kewenangan dan perlindungan dalam setiap pengambilan keputusan bisnis, namun ini tak luput dari pengawasan melalui prinsip BJR (Business Judgment Rule), sebagaimana termuat dalam Undang-Undang Perseroan Terbatas. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian kualitatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan. Tujuan penelitian untuk dapat memahami kriteria keuangan negara pada BUMN dan akibat hukum kerugian keuangan dan pengawasan pada BUMN. Hasil penelitian menyatakan bahwa implementasi BJR terhadap Direksi BUMN dapat dilakukan setelah memenuhi syarat dan ketentuan berlakunya BJR. BJR dapat diimplementasikan karena badan usaha berbadan hukum sejatinya tunduk pada undang-undang Perseroan Terbatas. Kata Kunci: Pengawasan BUMN; Business Judgment Rule; Kuangan Negara

This research focused on the language being used in Regulation Number 40 year 2007 regarding limited liability company in Indonesia and the data is taken from Regulation Number 40 year 2007 regarding limited liability company in Indonesia that is collected randomly so the technique that will be used in this research is the sampling technique, because the data was chosen randomly and the method that will be used to analyze the data is descriptive method because the data will be described descriptively. It will describe the reason why the translator use that kind of equivalence to translate Indonesian into the English language.

ABSTRACT Tax debt is the basis for collection actions that arise because of the laws that regulate and bind taxpayers. In the bankruptcy process that occurs in Limited Liability Company (PT) corporate taxpayers, the act of collecting tax debts has many challenges. The position of the tax payable in the bankruptcy process should have prior rights as the preferred creditor. The main problem that forms the basis of this research is the act of collecting taxes by the tax bailiff against the corporate taxpayer of PT Bankruptcy. The main issues will be analyzed using regulations and literature related to the bankruptcy process. The purpose of this study was to determine the process of billing corporate taxpayers of PT Bankruptcy in KPP Besar Satu Taxpayers, the obstacles that occur, and the position of the tax debt in the bankruptcy process. The methods used in the research are literature review, interviews, and case studies. In this study there are also suggestions that are expected to be implemented and have an impact on billing actions against corporate taxpayers who experience bankruptcy. Keywords: Tax Payable, Limited Liability Company, Bankruptcy, Tax Collection. ABSTRAK Utang pajak merupakan dasar tindakan penagihan yang timbul karena adanya undang-undang yang mengatur dan mengikat wajib pajak. Pada proses pailit yang terjadi pada wajib pajak badan Perseroan Terbatas (PT), tindakan penagihan terhadap utang pajak memiliki banyak tantangan. Posisi utang pajak dalam proses kepailitan seharusnya memiliki hak mendahulu sebagai kreditur preferen. Pokok permasalahan yang menjadi dasar penelitian ini adalah tindakan penagihan pajak yang dilakukan jurusita pajak terhadap wajib pajak badan PT pailit. Pokok permasalahan akan dianalisa menggunakan peraturan-peraturan dan literatur yang berkaitan dengan proses pailit. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui proses tindakan penagihan wajib pajak badan PT pailit di KPP Wajib Pajak Besar Satu, hambatan yang terjadi, dan posisi utang pajak dalam proses pailit. Metode yang dilakukan dalam penelitian adalah tinjauan pustaka, wawancara, dan studi kasus. Dalam penelitian ini terdapat pula saran-saran yang diharapkan dapat terlaksana dan memberikan dampak pada tindakan penagihan terhadap wajib pajak badan PT yang mengalami pailit. Kata kunci: Utang Pajak, Perseroan Terbatas, Kepailitan, Penagihan Pajak.

The purpose of this study is to determine the legal protection model for the majority and minority shareholders in public limited companies. This research method is normative research. To investigate the ineffectiveness of laws and regulations, in particular, Law No. 40 of 2007 on limited liability companies in providing shareholder protection, researchers have studied the laws and regulations and considered the views of experts on legal concepts related to legal protection for shareholders, particularly, minority shareholders. The results showed that the law did not provide maximum legal protection for minority shareholders, creating an imbalance between the rights of the minority and majority shareholders. For this reason, 1) reform or progressive changes in laws and regulations are needed, for instance, in PT Law No. 40 of 2007. These changes should be fundamental to philosophical aspects (values and perspectives) in providing shareholder protection; 2) the review of shareholders’ protection methods should be based on the aspects of fairness

<em>One of the sectors being developed by the Indonesian government is economic growth, which impact on increasing Limited Liability Companies. Provisions that contain procedures for managing a Limited Liability Company are regulated in Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies (UU PT), one of which is the procedure for dismissing members of the Board of Directors. Article 105 of the Company Law stipulates that the dismissal of a member of the Board of Directors is taken after the person concerned is given the opportunity to defend himself. Furthermore, regarding legal protection for the dismissal of members of the Board of Directors who violate the provisions of the Company Law. The Law on Judicial Power regulates the absolute competence of each judiciary. With absolute competence, each judicial body has different jurisdiction to judge. The method used in this study is normative juridical. The results and conclusions of this study are that the dismissal of members of the Board of Directors without any prior self-defense in the GMS is invalid if the members of the Board of Directors object to his dismissal. Legal protection for members of the Board of Directors who are dismissed not in accordance with the provisions of the Company Law is to file a lawsuit to the District Court.<br /><br /></em><strong>BAHASA INDONESIA ABSTRACT:</strong><p>Salah satu sektor yang sedang dikembangkan oleh pemerintah Indonesia adalah pertumbuhan ekonomi, yang berdampak pada meningkatnya Perseroan Terbatas. Ketentuan yang memuat tata cara pengurusan Perseroan Terbatas diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas (UU PT), salah satunya adalah tata cara pemberhentian anggota Direksi. Dalam Pasal 105 UU PT diatur bahwa keputusan pemberhentian anggota Direksi diambil setelah yang bersangkutan diberi kesempatan untuk membela diri. Selanjutnya mengenai perlindungan hukum atas pemberhentian anggota Direksi yang melanggar ketentuan UU PT. Undang-Undang Kekuasaan Kehakiman mengatur mengenai kompetensi absolut setiap peradilan. Dengan adanya kompetensi absolut, maka setiap badan peradilan mempunyai yurisdiksi mengadili yang berbeda-beda. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah yuridis normatif. Hasil dan kesimpulan dari penelitian ini adalah pemberhentian anggota Direksi dengan tanpa didahului adanya pembelaan diri dalam RUPS adalah tidak sah jika anggota Direksi keberatan atas pemberhentian dirinya. Perlindungan hukum bagi anggota Direksi yang diberhentikan tidak sesuai dengan ketentuan UUPT adalah mengajukan gugatan ke Pengadilan Negeri.</p>

<p>The transfer of shares in a limited liability company (LLC) is conducted in several ways based on article 57 UU PT, one of which is through inheritance. According to article 57 ayat (2) UU PT, the devolution process does not have to meet requirements contained in article 57 ayat (1) UU PT. In regards to that, this research analyzes the transfer of shares based on the right of inheritance in limited liability companies, considerations and the decisions of judges in the settlement of the Disctrict Court No. 146/PDT/2018/PT BTN regarding the process of the transfer of shares and examines the legal certainty of the heirs who do not receive a portion of the share inheritance. The research method used is normative judical research. This research is analytical juridical. Data collection techniques are carried out through library research conducted with document studies. The data obtained are qualitatively analyzed and concluded deductively. Based on the juridical analysis of the transfer of shares that did not get of the other heirs in the Decision of the District Court No. 146/PDT/ 2018/PT BTN, the panel of judges contended that in the case, the process of transferring share has contained unlawful acts which may result in disadvantage to other heirs, in this case the Notary should provide a good legal counseling to the appearers and pay close attention to the required documents so that will not result in losses to other people in the futures.</p><p><strong>BAHASA INDONESIA ABSTRACT:</strong></p><p>Pengalihan saham pada perseroan terbatas dilakukan dengan beberapa cara dalam Pasal 57 Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas (UU PT), salah satunya adalah melalui pewarisan. Sesuai dengan pasal 57 ayat (2) UU PT, proses pewarisan tidaklah harus memenuhi syarat yang ada pada pasal 57 ayat (1) UU PT. Sehubungan dengan hal tersebut, penelitian ini menganalisis mengenai pengalihan saham berdasarkan hak waris pada perseroan terbatas, pertimbangan dan putusan hakim dalam Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Nomor 146/PDT/2018/PT BTN berkenaan dengan bagaimana proses pengalihan saham tersebut serta membahas mengenai kepastian hukum terhadap para ahli waris yang tidak mendapatkan bagian terhadap harta warisan berupa saham. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian yuridis normatif. Penelitian ini bersifat yuridis analitis. Teknik pengumpulan data dilakukan melalui <em>library research</em> yang dilakukan dengan studi dokumen. Data yang diperoleh dianalisis secara kualitatif dan ditarik kesimpulan secara deduktif. Berdasarkan analisis yuridis pengalihan saham yang tidak mendapatkan persetujuan para ahli waris lainnya dalam Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Nomor 146/PDT/2018/PT BTN, Majelis Hakim berpendapat bahwa proses pengalihan saham yang ada pada kasus ini mengandung perbuatan melawan hukum yang mengakibatkan kerugian terhadap ahli waris lainnya, seharusnya Notaris pada kasus ini haruslah memberikan penyuluhan hukum yang baik terhadap para penghadap dan memperhatikan dokumen yang diperlukan secara teliti agar tidak menimbulkan kerugian kepada orang lain di kemudian hari.</p>