The Annual Corporate Income Tax Return filing relief announced by the Directorate General of Taxes (DGT) toward the end of April 2026 was welcomed as good news for many corporate taxpayers.
After struggling to meet the deadline amid various technical constraints, the additional time at least provided some space to breathe before completing the filing process more properly.
Through DGT Decision Number KEP-71/PJ/2026, the DGT granted additional time and waived certain administrative sanctions for taxpayers experiencing difficulties in the filing process. On the one hand, this policy appears to be an appropriate response. Filing the Annual Corporate Income Tax Return by 30 April was not an easy task, especially when the system used frequently experienced disruptions.
On the other hand, people can’t help but wonder: why did this relief only come at the eleventh hour? Previously, the DGT had granted relief to individual taxpayers well before their filing deadline.
This different approach created the impression that the policy for Corporate Income Tax Returns was reactive, as if it was decided only after observing the conditions developed on the ground. In fact, compared with individual taxpayers, the preparation of Corporate Income Tax Returns is far more complex and requires earlier certainty so that companies can plan more properly.
The First Year with Coretax
The situation became even more challenging because 2026 marked the first year of Annual Tax Return filing through Coretax. As with most first-time implementation processes, the adaptation was not simple.
Taxpayers were not only required to understand a new workflow, but also had to adjust to changes in filing mechanisms and data requirements that differed from the previous system. Many tax practitioners ultimately had to relearn processes that had been firmly established over years of practice.
In practice, the process did not always run smoothly. Many taxpayers complained about slow system access, time-consuming validation processes, and issues when uploading data. As deadlines approached, these disruptions became more pronounced because taxpayers were accessing the system at nearly the same time.
Pressure on the system increased further because on 30 April, Coretax was not accessed only by corporate taxpayers. Individual taxpayers who had previously received filing relief were also still within their reporting period. In addition, the Periodic VAT Return for March was due on the same date.
All these reporting flows converged at one time and into one system. Therefore, the surge in access was not unexpected. On the contrary, it was a pattern that could have been anticipated from the outset.
As a result, when system disruptions occurred at a highly predictable moment, questions arose over the readiness of the existing infrastructure. Had the system truly been prepared to handle the heavy annual filing load, or was it still undergoing a lengthy adjustment process?
Relief and Uncertainty
The timing of the relief announcement makes the issue most apparent to many companies. Relief announced at the edge of the deadline was certainly helpful, but it also created the impression that the decision was made abruptly and had not been fully planned from the beginning.
From the taxpayer’s perspective, this situation created uncertainty. Companies were left waiting: would relief be granted as it had been for individual taxpayers, or would they still be required to proceed with the filing process despite the system issues?
In reality, the challenge for companies was not only about adapting to Coretax, but also about the complexity of preparing the Corporate Income Tax Return itself. The process involves data reconciliation, fiscal correction analysis, and cross-functional coordination, none of which can be completed in a short period of time. For companies whose financial statements were still undergoing an audit, the situation became even more complex.
In many cases, financial statements are only finalized close to the end of April. This means that the effective time available for companies to finalize their tax returns is often much shorter than it appears on paper.
Therefore, when the system experiences disruptions during a critical period, the impact cannot be considered minor. Time that should have been used for finalization is instead consumed by dealing with technical issues, repeatedly trying to log in, or waiting for the system to stabilize.
In the context of compliance, certainty over timing and procedures is not merely supplementary. Both are essential foundations that allow taxpayers to plan and fulfill their obligations properly.
Addressing Public Skepticism
In public discourse, it is common to assume that late filing occurs because taxpayers delay the process, despite having been given four months to complete it. At first glance, this assumption may sound reasonable. In practice, however, the reality of Corporate Income Tax Return filing is far more complex than a matter of time discipline.
Corporate Income Tax Return filing involves a long and gradual process. It includes data reconciliation, tax analysis, and adjustments based on audit results, which are often completed only close to the filing deadline. When this process takes place alongside system changes and technical constraints, the four-month period that appears long on paper may not be fully effective in practice.
This is where the idea that “four months are enough” needs to be viewed more proportionately. The issue is not merely how much time is provided, but whether that time can actually be used optimally.
Despite these notes, the relief granted by the DGT should still be appreciated as a response to conditions on the ground. At the same time, this episode serves as a reminder that compliance is not determined solely by taxpayers, but also by the readiness of the system that supports it.
Going forward, the challenge is not only to ensure that deadlines are met, but also to ensure that the available infrastructure can truly support compliance on a consistent basis. Without a reliable system and adequate certainty, relief risks continue to appear merely as a short-term solution to the same recurring problem year after year. (ASP)
Disclaimer! This article is a personal opinion and does not reflect the policies of the institution where the author works.
