The Ministry of Finance Administrative Letter Tai Cai Shui Zi No. 820570901, issued on December 16, 1993, explicitly states: “For odd-shaped lots not independently eligible for construction application and lands not suitable as building sites without rearrangement, Article 22, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 4 of the Land Tax Act concerning the levy of agricultural tax does not apply.” Point 4 of the Operation Principles on the Delineation of Construction Limitations or Restrictions under Article 22 of the Equalization of Land Rights Act, issued by Ministry of the Interior Administrative Order Tai Nei Di Zi No. 0930069450 of April 12, 2004, provides: “Since odd-shaped lots can be agreed to merge with a construction, restriction cannot be placed on it as building sites and such odd lot can be used as building sites by law.”　The abovementioned administrative orders created additional requirements not provided under the statute concerning the application of agricultural land tax levy to urban odd-shaped lands that cannot be used as building sites by law for construction, but are still used for agricultural purpose contravenes the principle of taxation by law under Article 19 of the Constitution.　To the extent that they are inconsistent with this Interpretation, these administrative orders shall no longer be applied as of the issuance date of this Interpretation.

　　Article 19 of the Constitution states that the people shall have the duty to pay taxes in accordance with law.　It means that the State must impose tax duty or provide preferential tax deduction or exemption treatment to its people based on laws or regulations having clear authorization of a given law, taken into consideration such conditions as the subject, subject matter, tax base or tax rates.　The related statutory interpretations by the competent authority shall abide by the principles of the Constitution and the meanings and purpose of the relevant statutes, and comply with the general rules of legislative interpretation.　Any interpretation that exceeds the boundary of the law that creates levy duties not provided under the statute is not permitted by the principle of taxation by law under Article 19 of the Constitution (see J.Y. Interpretation Nos. 620, 622 and 625).

　　Article 14 of the Land Tax Act states: “Except for lands subject to agricultural land tax levy under Article 22, lands whose value has been determined shall be subject to land value (real property) tax.”　Pursuant to Article 22, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 4 of the Land Tax Act and Article 22, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 4 of the Equalization of Land Rights Act, non-urban lands designated by law for agricultural purpose or its value has not been determined are subject to agricultural land tax levy, so are urban lands which “cannot be building sites by law, but are still being used for agricultural purpose.”　In general, the agricultural land tax levy under the Land Tax Act is less burdensome than land value tax (see Chapters 2 and 3 of the Land Tax Act; whereas in practice the agricultural land tax levy was halted as of the second period of 1987, see Executive Yuan Directive Tai (76) Cai Zi No. 19365 (August 20, 1987).　While the levy of urban lands whose values have been determined should have been switched and subjected to land value tax, yet for the urban lands that cannot be used as building sites by law but still being used for agricultural purpose, due to their limited incomes, agricultural land tax levy is nevertheless levied upon farmers to release their burdens (see the Legislative Yuan Gazette: vol. 65, No. 71, pages 8, 11, 18; vol. 65, No. 95, page 28; vol. 66, No. 44, pages 6, 26; vol. 66, No. 51, pages 19-20; vol. 75, No. 45, page 39).

　　The so-called “cannot be used as building sites by law” is not clearly defined in the Land Tax Act and the Equalization of Land Rights Act, and the competent authority is not explicitly authorized to promulgate supplemental regulations.　Yet Article 44 of Building Act stipulates: “The special municipality or county (city) (bureau) government shall regulate, based on the actual condition of the locality, the width and depth of minimum square measurement for the construction foundation.　For odd-shaped or narrow square measurement not in compliance with the regulations, there shall be no construction unless the width and depth of the minimum square measurement is met with negotiated adjustment of landscape or combination of usage with the adjacent land(s).”　Thus, for lands that have odd-shaped or narrow square measurement not in compliance with the regulations (i.e., “odd-shaped lots”) to reach the minimum width and depth square measurement for construction, they must be in negotiations for combined usage with the adjacent lands to reach that minimum requirement.　Thus, before this combined usage is to take place, given that no independent construction can be made under the Building Act, the [odd-shaped] lot should be qualified as “cannot be used as building sites by law” under Article 22, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 4 of the Land Tax Act and Article 22, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 4 of the Equalization of Land Rights Act.　As to the odd-shaped lot still being used for agricultural purpose, before the combined usage with the adjacent land is to take place, since it cannot be constructed for higher profits, based on the legislative purpose of the above-mentioned provisions under the Land Tax Act and the Equalization of Land Rights Act, it shall naturally be subject to the levy of agricultural land tax.

　　The Ministry of Finance Administrative Letter Tai Cai Shui Zi No. 820570901, issued on December 16, 1993, explicitly states: “For odd-shaped lots not independently eligible for construction application and lands not suitable for construction without rearrangement, Article 22, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 4 of the Land Tax Act concerning the levy of agricultural tax does not apply.” Point 4 of the Operation Principles on the Delineation of Construction Limitations or Restrictions under Article 22 of the Equalization of Land Rights Act, issued by the Ministry of the Interior Administrative Order Tai Nei Di Zi No. 0930069450 on April 12, 2004, provides that odd-shaped lots subject to negotiated combined-construction may not be considered as limited or restrictive construction lands under the statute. “Since odd-shaped lots can be agreed to merge with a construction, restriction cannot be placed on it as building sites and such odd lot can be used as building sites by law.”　Although these two administrative orders were issued by the competent authority based on statutory authorization, yet by precluding the odd-shaped urban lands still being used for agricultural purpose from applying the　agricultural land tax levy under Article 22, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 4 of the Land Tax Act and Article 22, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 4 of the Equalization of Land Rights Act has exceeded the scope of statutory interpretation, created additional requirements not provided under the statute, and contravenes the principle of taxation by law under Article 19 of the Constitution.　To the extent that they are inconsistent with this Interpretation, these administrative orders shall no longer be applied as of the issuance date of this Interpretation.

　　On the Petitioner’s claim that the Ministry of Finance’s Administrative Letter Tai Cai Shui Zi No. 37278 of October 30, 1976 (mistakenly identified as No. 37378 in the petition) also violates the Constitution, given that the Petitioner did not specify how his right protected under the Constitution was infringed, it does not meet the requirement under Article 5, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 2 of the Constitutional Interpretation Procedure Act and shall be dismissed under Subparagraph 3 of the same provision.