巖川國際法律事務所 Celsum Law Firm

18/02/2026

馬承佑律師於《全國律師》月刊發表專文
Attorney Cheng-Yu (Paul) Ma Publishes in the Taiwan Bar Journal

本所 馬承佑律師 於《全國律師》月刊2026年2月號發表文章：

🔹 〈逃漏稅捐罪與洗錢罪之交織：從國際潮流到我國實務與未來挑戰〉

本文聚焦近年《洗錢防制法》修法趨勢，整理臺灣法院關於逃漏稅捐衍生洗錢行為之裁判見解，並結合國際立法發展，分析未來可能出現之爭議與制度挑戰，提出具體解釋方向與實務建議。

Celsum Law Firm is pleased to share that Attorney Cheng-Yu (Paul) Ma has published an article in the February 2026 issue of the Taiwan Bar Journal, titled:

🔹 “The Intersection of Tax Evasion and Money Laundering: From International Trends to Taiwan’s Practice and Future Challenges.”

The article analyzes recent AML reforms in Taiwan, reviews court decisions on tax-related money laundering cases, and discusses emerging legal challenges with proposed interpretative approaches.

📖 文章全文已刊登於全國律師聯合會官方網站
🔗 連結請見留言區

#巖川國際法律事務所

#馬承佑律師
#全國律師
#洗錢防制
#逃漏稅捐


#白領犯罪
#法學研究

27/10/2025

律師聲明

巖川國際法律事務所受當事人哲翰投資股份有限公司委託，聲明如下：

哲翰投資股份有限公司（下均稱「哲翰公司」）從未對外以任何形式或理由進行招攬、吸收或鼓勵任何人進行投資之行為。若有不肖份子以哲翰公司之名義表示進行可以任何投資行為，甚或要求交付金錢者，一概與哲翰公司無任何關係，請社會大眾切勿受騙，並應立即聯絡當地執法單位獲得協助。

巖川國際法律事務所
馬承佑律師

22/10/2025

[Celsum Law Firm – Legal Update]

Delayed USPTO Priority Certificate – TIPO Clarification

TIPO announced that if a USPTO delay causes applicants to miss the deadline for submitting a priority certificate under Article 8(2) of the Trademark Act or Article 17(2) of the Patent Act, they may request reinstatement of rights. Applicants must prove the delay was beyond their control and submit evidence—such as official USPTO notices or emails stating the reason for delay and the priority application number. Approval remains at TIPO’s discretion.

For assistance with priority restoration, international trademark filings, or patent matters, please contact Celsum Law Firm.

----

[巖川快訊]

TIPO針對USPTO延遲發出優先權證明之說明

智慧財產局指出，如因美國USPTO延遲發出優先權證明，導致逾期未送件，申請人可依商標法第8條第2項或專利法第17條第2項申請回復原狀，並須提出可證明延誤為非可歸責於己的證據，例如USPTO之官方信函或電郵。是否准予，將由智慧財產局個案裁量。

如需優先權補救、商標或專利相關協助，請聯絡巖川國際法律事務所。

22/10/2025

[Celsum Law Firm – Legal Update]

Tax Risk for Enterprises Mis-reporting Salary Expenses

The M*F highlights a compliance alert for corporate entities: if a business reports salary expenses for non-existent employees (or uses personal data of others to inflate salary expenses), this can lead to corporate income tax adjustments and penalties under Article 110 of the Income Tax Act.

In one case, an individual discovered that Company A had falsely reported his salary of NT$450,000 despite him not being employed there. After verification, the tax authority cancelled the fictitious salary reporting, reassessed the company’s tax liability and imposed a fine.

Key take-aways for businesses:

- Ensure that all salary expenses claimed correspond to actual employees and correct employment relationships.

- Avoid using personal identification or labour insurance records of individuals who are not legitimately your employees for the purpose of claiming salary deductions.

- Maintain clear documentation of employment, payroll and insurance records to support salary expense claims in case of audit or investigation.

- Individuals should not provide personal data to organizations in a way that allows those organizations to falsely report salary expenses in their name.

If your enterprise handles payroll, employment records or expense reporting, this alert underscores elevated scrutiny by tax authorities and growing risks of reassessment and penalties for improper reporting.

(Source: M*F press release – https://www.mof.gov.tw/singlehtml/384fb3077bb349ea973e7fc6f13b6974?cntId=4e94a3bcbcd04afdba4605e951431e64
)

'); printPage.document.close(); $('.tool-by-h2').show(); } 營利事業如經查獲虛報薪資費用，將遭補稅裁罰 財政部中區國稅局表示，營利事業如虛報薪資費用，逃漏營利事業所得稅，一經查獲將依法補稅並按所得稅法第110條規定處罰。 該局.....

22/10/2025

Celsum Law Firm – Legal Update

Reminder on Trademark Declaration for Export Goods

The Kaohsiung Customs has reminded exporters that all goods leaving Taiwan must include accurate trademark declarations in their export filings. Exporters are required to state the trademark appearing on the goods, packaging, or containers; if none exists, the declaration must specify “no trademark.”

Failure to comply may violate Article 17(3) of the Foreign Trade Act, leading to penalties under Article 28, including warnings, fines, or suspension of import/export rights. Moreover, exporters must ensure they are lawfully entitled to use the declared trademark. Using or exporting goods bearing counterfeit or unauthorized marks can trigger investigation and potential referral to judicial authorities under the Trademark Act.

The Customs further emphasizes that correct declaration protects both trade integrity and intellectual-property rights. Exporters should review their export procedures, confirm trademark ownership or authorization, and maintain relevant proof in case of customs inspection.

For assistance with trademark compliance, customs declaration, or tariff matters, please contact Celsum Law Firm. Our team advises on IP protection, export documentation, and cross-border trade compliance to help clients minimize regulatory risk.

'); printPage.document.close(); $('.tool-by-h2').show(); } 出口貨物之商標，無論是否在我國註冊，務必依規定申報以免受罰 高雄關表示，無論是否在我國註冊之商標，出口貨物本身或其內外包裝或容器有商標標示者，出口人應於出口報單正...