PERBANDINGAN PENGATURAN PERLINDUNGAN HAK NEGARA ATAS PIUTANG NEGARA DAN UTANG PAJAK DALAM PERKARA KEPAILITAN
This article tries to define the status of State Receivables that managed by Committee of State Receivables Management (PUPN) which its debtor in bankruptcy settlement condition and its comparison with tax debt. The background of Article are the existences of some contradictive verdicts on tax debt cases and Article 161 Ministry of Finance Rule No. 240 Year 2016 (PMK 240/2016) which rules that State Receivables should managed under bankruptcy law regime when it has decided by the Court. This Article is normative legal research which used statutory and case approach. The first research results are PMK 240/2016 distinguished the treatment of State Receivables into two stage, before and after Court decision. When it has decided by Court. State Receivables treated under bankruptcy legal regime which PUPN positioned as concurrent creditor contrast with tax debt position on bankruptcy settlement. Secondly, PUPN should doing paradigm shift from the passive to active participation on bankruptcy settlement through Attorney authority, which is its member, to issuing bankruptcy petition to the Court.
Key Words: State Receivables, Committee of State Receivables Management (PUPN), tax debt, bankruptcy.