The Taipei High Administrative Court rendered the 103-Su-581 Decision of August 27, 2014 (hereinafter, the "Decision"), holding that a written administrative act should be legally appropriate if its information is sufficient for the people to understand the reasons, facts and legal basis for sanctions, and it is not obligated that administrative agencies have to specify all reasons in exhaustive detail.
According to the facts underlying the Decision, Individual A is the representative of an engineering firm. Since he owed profit-seeking enterprise income taxes and business taxes (including overdue fees and interest) and penalties for business taxes to an extent that the representative of a profit-seeking enterprise may be restricted from leaving this country, the National Taxation Bureau of the Northern Area notified the National Immigration of the Ministry of the Interior to restrict Individual A from exiting the country. Individual A was subsequently restricted from exiting the country again due to general income taxes and penalties in arrears. Individual A later applied to lift the exit restriction, but the application was rejected. After unsuccessful administrative appeal filing, Individual A filed this administrative lawsuit.
Individual A asserted that the original administrative act merely indicated broadly that the application of lifting the exit restriction was not consistent with the requirements and failed to specify the reasons and necessity for security measures such as exit restriction. According to the Decision, however, although a written administrative act should specify the gist, facts, reasons and legal basis pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Law, still the purpose of such specification is to allow the citizens to understand consideration factors such as the legal basis, fact finding and discretion for administrative acts rendered by administrative agencies to determine if the administrative acts are legal and if there is any remedy opportunity when administrative remedies are sought. It is not obligated that administrative agencies have to specify all the reasons in exhaustive detail. To wit, if the information as specified is sufficient to allow the people to understand the reasons, facts and the legal basis for sanctions against them, such administrative acts would be legally appropriate. In this matter, the original administrative act is sufficient to allow Individual A to know the legal basis, fact finding and reasons for the sanction against him, and there is no violation of the Administrative Procedure Law. Therefore, it was held in the Decision that since Individual's arrears of confirmed taxes reached the monetary threshold for exit restriction with no reasons for lifting the exit restriction under tax laws, the act was not illegal.