法定最高利率與特定營業稅負擔轉嫁予借款人：超額利益與借款契約條款之無效Maximum Statutory Interest and the Passing of Specific Business Tax to Borrowers: Excessive Benefits and the Invalidity of Loan Provisions
- 1 day ago
- 5 min read
· 《民商法》第654條之法定最高利率
· 將特定營業稅轉嫁予借款人
· 佛曆2475年《高利貸禁止法》第3條所稱之「其他利益」
· 超額利益條款之無效性
· 已付金額抵充本金及抵押權塗銷
最高法院第4988/2568號判決反映了有關法定借貸利率上限及貸款人取得額外利益之重要法律原則。本案中，原告向被告（一家以類似商業銀行方式經營之貸款公司）借款280,000泰銖，並以土地設定抵押作為擔保。雙方約定年利率為15%，即法律所允許之最高利率。此外，雙方並約定由借款人負擔貸款人應繳納之特定營業稅（按每月利息之3.3%計算），以及於借款人遲延履行時支付違約金。
最高法院認為，依《稅法》規定，特定營業稅應由貸款人負擔，惟契約約定由借款人負擔該稅負，構成貸款人因借貸關係所取得之額外利益。該利益應視為利息之一部分，與約定之年利率15%合併計算後，已超過法律所允許之最高利率。法院進一步指出，即使稅額不高，仍屬佛曆2475年《高利貸禁止法》第3條所稱利息以外之「其他利益」。因此，該約定違反《民商法》第654條及佛曆2475年《高利貸禁止法》第3條，有關利息及稅負轉嫁之契約條款均屬無效。
由於相關契約條款無效，借款人就利息、特定營業稅及相關費用所支付之一切款項，均應抵充借款本金。法院認定，借款人已支付449,938泰銖，超過本金280,000泰銖，因此債務已全部清償，不再負有任何未清償之債務。貸款人應塗銷抵押權，返還權狀予借款人。
l 將稅負轉嫁予借款人，可能構成利息之一部分：借款人負擔貸款人之特定營業稅，屬貸款人因借貸關係所取得之其他利益，應與約定利息合併計算。
l 是否構成超額利息，應以貸款人取得之全部經濟利益判斷：是否符合最高法定利率限制，應以貸款人因借貸關係取得之全部經濟利益為判斷基礎，而非僅以契約約定利率為準。
l 違反法定利率限制之契約條款無效：凡約定借款人提供超過法律允許範圍之利益者，該約定不生法律效力。
l 依無效條款所支付之款項，得抵充本金：借款人已支付之利息、稅款及其他相關費用，得抵充尚未清償之本金。
l 本金全部清償後，債務即告消滅，借款人有權請求塗銷抵押權：本金清償完畢後，貸款人應塗銷抵押權，並返還權狀予借款人。
l 法定最高利率不得使貸款人取得其他直接或間接利益：貸款人因借貸關係取得之任何直接或間接利益，均可能視為利息之一部分，並應納入法定利率之計算。
· Maximum statutory interest under Section 654 of the Civil and Commercial Code
· Passing of Specific Business Tax to borrowers
· “Other benefits” under the Interest Rate Restriction Act B.E. 2475 Section 3
· Invalidity of loan provisions involving excessive benefits
· Application of payments to principal and the right of mortgage redemption
Supreme Court Judgment No. 4988/2568 reflects important legal principles concerning the statutory limit on loan interest and the treatment of additional benefits received by lenders. The plaintiff borrowed 280,000 Baht from the defendant, a lending company operating in a manner similar to a commercial bank, and secured the loan by mortgaging land. The parties agreed on an interest rate of 15 percent per annum, which is the statutory maximum. They further agreed that the borrower would bear the lender's Specific Business Tax at the rate of 3.3 percent of the monthly interest and would also be liable for penalties in the event of default.
The Supreme Court held that although the lender is legally required to pay Specific Business Tax under the Revenue Code, an agreement requiring the borrower to bear such tax constitutes an additional benefit received by the lender in connection with the loan. Such benefit must be treated as part of the interest. When combined with the contractual interest rate of 15 percent per annum, the total benefit received exceeds the statutory limit. The Court further held that, even though the amount of tax was relatively small, it nevertheless constituted "other benefits" beyond interest under Section 3 of the Interest Rate Restriction Act B.E. 2475. Accordingly, the agreement contravened Section 654 of the Civil and Commercial Code and Section 3 of the Interest Rate Restriction Act B.E. 2475, rendering the contractual provisions relating to interest and the passing of the tax burden void.
As the relevant contractual provisions were void, all payments made by the borrower in respect of interest, Specific Business Tax, and related charges were required to be applied toward repayment of the principal. The Court found that the borrower had already paid a total of 449,938 Baht, exceeding the principal amount of 280,000 Baht. Accordingly, the debt had been fully discharged, leaving no outstanding obligation. The lender was therefore required to release the mortgage and return the title deed to the borrower.
l The maximum statutory interest rate does not permit lenders to receive additional hidden or indirect benefits: Any benefit obtained by the lender in connection with the loan, whether direct or indirect, may be treated as part of the interest for the purpose of determining compliance with the statutory interest limit.
l Tax burdens shifted to borrowers may constitute part of the interest: Where a borrower is required to bear the lender's Specific Business Tax, such tax may be regarded as an additional benefit received by the lender and included in the calculation of interest.
l The determination of excessive interest requires consideration of the total benefits received: Compliance with the statutory interest limit is assessed based on the aggregate economic benefits obtained by the lender, rather than the contractual interest rate alone.
l Loan provisions violating statutory interest limits are void: Any contractual provision requiring the borrower to provide benefits exceeding the statutory limit is unenforceable.
l Payments made under void provisions may be applied toward repayment of the principal: Amounts paid as unlawful interest, taxes, or other charges may be credited against the outstanding principal.
l Full repayment of the principal extinguishes the debt and entitles the borrower to release of the mortgage: Once the principal has been fully repaid, the lender must release the mortgage and return the title deed.
Comments