Value Added Tax (VAT) is a tax which is determined by objective laws to which they are levied. In the process of the collection, often based on a difference in the interpretation of legal provisions between the taxpayer and the tax authorities that led to a tax dispute. One example is the imposition of VAT on transaction receipts insurance discounts and sale of repossessed goods at a finance company. In the Tax Court decision and the Supreme Court have been settled from 2009 to 2013 related to two transactions, almost 100% decided to grant the request wholly taxpayer Appeal and furthermore rejected the Reconsideration filed by the Directorate General of Taxation. In this study, will be analyzed matters concerning the consideration of the judge in deciding the case of the VAT on the two matters, namely the receipts of insurance discounts and also the sale of repossessed goods. OJK’s Circular related insurance discounts and management of tax disputes that DGT would do also be analyzed to formulate effective treatment solutions to the recurring disputes. Receipts of insurance discounts in the context of consumer financing and sale of repossessed goods in the context of the leasing are subjected to VAT. OJK’s Circular had no effect on the tax correction for independent tax rules. Several articles in the VAT law and policy rules should also be revised due cause confusion and would need the establishment of new rules specifically for finance company’s intermediary services.