司法院釋字第703號解釋涉及下列問題：⑴公益團體稅捐優惠之憲法上正當 性；⑵受優惠之公益團體，其活動若有加入市場競爭行為（如營利行為）者，是 否仍須負擔與非公益團體相同之稅捐；⑶如已受優惠之公益團體於納稅時可否仍 享有成本、費用、虧損及折舊之扣除問題；⑷關於函釋違憲，大法官可否宣告定 期失效；（5)宣告法令違憲定期失效之原因案件聲請人，釋字725號解釋已明示：再 審時法院不得以該法令於期限内仍屬有效為理由驳回，須俟新法令公布生效後依 新法令為裁判。但法令若僅因違反租稅法律主義而宣告違憲，原命令違憲之時， 尚無法律做為依據；假設新法依原命令之相同内容為立法，聲請人將更不易得到 救濟。此種涉及追求社會正義之社會法治國家重大憲法問題，有必要予以正視。 我國稅法之違憲審查基準，多基於租稅法律主義，本號解釋亦然；此種形式審 查，不僅喪失對財稅憲法意義之闡明機會，對納稅人權益亦無法得實質保障。宜 從基本權保障予以審查，更符實質憲政國家之基本精神。

The Constitutional Court Interpretation No.703 involves several constitutional issues below^ 〇.) The constitutional legitimacy of the charity tax privileges^ 〇 Whether the tax burden of tax-privileged charities' market engagements (ex. profit-seeking behavior) shall be similar to that of non-charities; (3) Whether privileged charities enjoy deduction of cost, expense, deficit and depreciation in tax return; (4) Whether the Constitutional Courts can declare administrative interpretations unconstitutional yet to be invalidated at a fixed date later? (5) The Constitutional Court Interpretation No.703 has declared that Courts cannot dismiss such requests for re-trial or extraordinary appeal on the ground that the statute or regulation remained valid during the prescribed period of time. However, in case of regulations being unconstitutional for the reason of violating the principle of taxation by law, while there are no statutory basis for the regulations, the Congress (Legislative Yuan) may enact the same content as the regulations declared unconstitutional, making remedies even more difficult. We shall thus take more seriousness with such possibility and its significance while pursuing social justice in the Constitutional State.