逃漏稅捐罪是以「納稅義務人以詐術或其他不正當之方法逃漏稅捐」為其法定構成要件。納稅義務人依照各別稅法規定，並非僅限於自然人，尚包括公司。依稅捐稽徵法第47條規定，關於納稅義務人應處刑罰之規定，可轉嫁適用於公司負責人。大法官釋字第687號對此闡釋，公司負責人係因自己之刑事違法且有責之行為，承擔刑事責任。筆者認為所謂的轉嫁，應只是身分上的轉嫁，而非把刑責移轉到未從事不法行為之人。
本號解釋理由書中進一步地認為，公司負責人如故意指示、參與實施或未防止逃漏稅捐之行為，應受刑事處罰。然而，為何這些行為符合逃漏稅捐的構成要件，大法官並未說明，而有必要從刑法釋義學的角度加以補充，並有行政罰法相關規定的討論價值。最後，筆者認為逃漏稅捐罪應改為一般犯，以免發生評價上不合理的漏洞，且造成諸多釋義學上的困擾。

In accordance with J.Y. Interpretation No. 687, based on the constitutional principle of nulla poena sine culpa (no culpability carries no penalty), a person shall be subject to criminal penalty only for criminal violations and culpable acts. That Interpretation said that in accordance with Article 47, Item 1 of the Tax Collection Act, if the responsible person of a company should intentionally instruct, participate in the implementation or fail to prevent the act of tax evasion, he shall be subject to criminal penalty. However, why these acts are met by Elements of evasion of taxes, the justices did not say, but it is necessary to add the reasons from the perspective of criminal law theory.