Evaluation of the Implementation of E-Invoicing in the Law Enforcement Process at the West Jakarta Regional Office of the Directorate General of Taxes

This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of e-Invoice implementation in minimizing the issuance of Tax Invoices Not Based on Actual Transactions (TBTS) and to analyze law enforcement by the West Jakarta Regional Office of the Directorate General of Taxes (DGT). This qualitative research with a case study approach uses primary data from in-depth interviews with four key informants and secondary data in the form of official DGT documents for the 2020-2024 period. The results show that e-Invoicing is effective in improving tax administration efficiency, but it is not effective in eliminating the practice of TBTS Tax Invoices because the system is only capable of validating administrative aspects without being able to verify the economic substance of transactions. Law enforcement is carried out in stages based on the ultimum remedium principle, but its effectiveness depends on the financial capacity of taxpayers to recover state losses. The main obstacles include gaps in identity verification, the use of figurehead directors, misuse of access credentials, and the post-audit nature of law enforcement. The study recommends strengthening biometric verification, integrating inter-agency systems, and developing early detection capabilities based on data analytic.

e-Invoice, TBTS Tax Invoice, Tax Law Enforcement, Policy Evaluation

1. Abimanyu, A. (2025). Konferensi pers APBN kita: Kinerja pendapatan negara tahun 2024 tumbuh positif. Kementerian Keuangan Republik Indonesia. https://www.kemenkeu.go.id/informasi-publik/publikasi/berita-utama/Pendapatan-Negara-Tahun-2024-Tumbuh-Positif [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Al-Firdaus, F. (2018). Studi eksploratif penanganan faktur pajak tidak berdasarkan transaksi sebenarnya. Jurnal Pajak Indonesia (Indonesian Tax Review), 1(2), 14–30. https://doi.org/10.31092/jpi.v1i2.194 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Antara News. (2024). DJP Jabar: Modus pelanggaran perpajakan terbesar berupa faktur TBTS. https://www.antaranews.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Denzin, N. K. (2012). Triangulation 2.0. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(2), 80–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689812437186 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Direktorat Jenderal Pajak. (2020). Peraturan Direktur Jenderal Pajak Nomor PER-04/PJ/2020 tentang petunjuk teknis pelaksanaan administrasi nomor pokok wajib pajak, sertifikat elektronik, dan pengukuhan pengusaha kena pajak. Direktorat Jenderal Pajak, Kementerian Keuangan Republik Indonesia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Direktorat Jenderal Pajak. (2024). Sehari Mengenal Pajak, Selamanya Bangga. Direktorat Jenderal Pajak. https://www.pajak.go.id/id/artikel/sehari-mengenal-pajak-selamanya-bangga [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Dye, T. R. (2013). Understanding public policy (14th ed.). Pearson Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Heeks, R. (2006). Implementing and managing eGovernment: An international text. SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Kurniawan, A., & Sari, D. (2016). Analisis faktor penyebab penyalahgunaan faktur pajak fiktif dan upaya pencegahannya. Jurnal Keuangan Negara, 8(3), 99–115. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Lestari, T., & Mahendra, H. (2020). Peran e-Faktur dalam mencegah penyalahgunaan faktur pajak di Indonesia. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan Islam, 5(1), 99–113. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Nugroho, R. (2023). Evaluasi penerapan sistem faktur pajak elektronik dan tantangannya di Indonesia. Jurnal Administrasi Pajak, 7(2), 56–73. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Pajak.com. (2024). Kanwil DJP Jakarta Barat serahkan tersangka pajak fiktif ke kejaksaan, kerugian negara Rp10,59 miliar. https://www.pajak.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Siswanto, D. (2024). Sri Mulyani Sebut Tax Ratio Indonesia 2023 Sebesar 10,21%. Kontan. https://nasional.kontan.co.id/news/sri-mulyani-sebut-tax-ratio-indonesia-2023-sebesar-1021 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Suci H. P. L., & Samanto, H. (2025). Analisis efektivitas dan efisiensi penggunaan aplikasi e-Faktur dalam prosedur pembuatan faktur pajak dan pelaporan SPT Masa PPN pada PT. XYZ. Jurnal Ilmiah Keuangan Akuntansi Bisnis, 4(2), 786–794. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Yulianto, B., & Hidayat, R. (2023). Analisis penerapan sanksi perpajakan dalam menekan praktik faktur pajak fiktif di Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum Pajak, 6(2), 89–104 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Indirect Effect of Liquidity and Activity on Company Value with Profitability as an Intervening Variable
• Effect of Financial Skills, Knowledge, and Attitude on The Financial Behaviour of Clergy
• A Decade of Review: Trends in Budget Execution and Financial Performance of Development Projects in Tanzania (2014/15-2023/24)
• The Influence of Pre-Project Planning on the Budget Absorption Rate of Public Funded Infrastructure Projects in Kenya a Comparative Case Study of Narok, Migori, and Kisii County Government Projects
• Assessment of Factors Influencing Digital Transformation in Hotels’ Facility Management in Abuja Metropolis, Nigeria