During today's growing business competition, every company will try to keep up with the existing changes both in technology, marketing and so on as well as increasingly diverse market demands so that companies compete to get a good image and perception from each stakeholder. The increasingly tight competition is expected to be able to pay attention to good corporate governance so that the company can survive or compete in this very tight competition. The implementation of good corporate governance will have an impact on improving the quality of work, company performance, company value, better balance sheets, protecting shareholder rights and attracting greater investment as in public companies (Tbk). The success or success achieved by a company is largely determined by how the company carries out the strategies that have been planned and the existing management processes in the company. These strategies include the implementation of a good corporate governance system which includes the size of the board of commissioners, managerial ownership, institutional ownership, public ownership and foreign ownership. Yuniarti [1] concludes that the size of the board of commissioners, managerial ownership, institutional ownership, public ownership and foreign ownership partially have a positive effect on firm performance and value. Suhartanti and Asyik [2] also conclude that corporate governance as proxied by managerial ownership, institutional ownership and the board of commissioners has an effect on firm value.

Another interesting factor to analyze regarding the value of the company is the tax amnesty that has been carried out by the government, especially the ministry of finance. Tax amnesty or tax amnesty is an amnesty program provided by the Government to taxpayers including the abolition of taxes that should be owed, the abolition of tax administration sanctions, as well as the abolition of criminal sanctions in the field of taxation on assets acquired in 2015 and previously that have not been reported in the SPT, with how to pay off all tax arrears and pay the ransom. Tax amnesty which aims to accelerate economic growth and restructuring through the transfer of assets, which among other things will have an impact on increasing domestic liquidity, improving the Rupiah exchange rate, decreasing interest rates and increasing investment   (Law   number   11   of  2016   concerning  Tax Amnesty). With the company's participation in the tax amnesty program, the mechanism for disclosure of assets shows that the acquisition of assets in the balance sheet is an existing asset from debt, owner contributions or company performance. This is an indication or reflection that the company is "absent" in its financial statements, so that corporate taxpayers or companies that carry out tax amnesty on assets and liabilities that have not been reported make progress in terms of company transparency and accountability. The more transparent and accountable the company is, the greater the level of public or investor confidence in the company's financial statements so that more people and investors will invest their funds for the company and are expected to be able to improve the performance and value of the company. According to Palmi [3], he concluded that the 27 sample companies that were sampled, there were nineteen companies that experienced a decrease in their company value with an average decrease of 14.53% and eight companies that experienced an increase in their company value with an average increase of 12 ,75%. In other words, companies that participate in tax amnesty experience a significant decrease in company value. 

The companies studied in this study were property and real estate sector companies that were listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange from 2014-2016 because these companies had a more impact due to the tax amnesty because the government program would have a positive impact indirectly through investment instruments related to the property sector, such as the real estate investment fund (DIRE), whose tax has been cut by the government from 5 percent to 0.5 percent. Property and real estate companies have also been affected by the recovery from domestic property sales, resulting in new demand. in the property and real estate sector so that the tax amnesty policy has a positive impact on the property and real estate sector. The increase in demand can also have an impact on increasing the performance and value of the company which shows the prosperity of shareholders so that shareholders will invest their capital in the company. Therefore, good corporate governance is needed to optimize the existing situation and conditions.

Literature Review and Hypotheses

Good Corporate Governance: Corporate governance occurs due to the interests of the company to ensure to the funders (principals or shareholders) that the funds invested are used appropriately and efficiently. Based on the Decree of the Minister of State-Owned Enterprises KEP-117/M-MBU/2002, good corporate governance is a process of structure used by BUMN organs to improve business success and corporate accountability to realize shareholder value in the long term while taking into account the interests of stakeholders. others based on laws and regulations and ethics. According to the Forum for Corporate Governance in Indonesia (FCGI), the implementation of good corporate governance is expected to provide benefits, namely improving company performance through the creation of a better decision-making process, making it easier to obtain cheaper financing funds so that it can further increase corporate value and restore investor confidence to invest. invest in Indonesia and shareholders will be satisfied with the company's performance because at the same time it will increase shareholder value and dividends. Good corporate governance indicators examined in this study are the size of the board of commissioners, managerial ownership, institutional ownership, public ownership and foreign ownership.

Tax Amnesty

Tax amnesty or tax amnesty is an amnesty program provided by the Government to taxpayers including the abolition of taxes that should be owed, the abolition of tax administration sanctions, as well as the abolition of criminal sanctions in the field of taxation on assets acquired in 2015 and previously that have not been reported in the SPT, with how to pay off all tax arrears and pay the ransom.

The Value of the Company

Fidhayatin and Dewi [4] stated that the value of the company is the selling value of a company in the capital market. A high company value is the desire and hope of the owners of the company because the high value indicates the prosperity of the shareholders is also high so that the shareholders will invest their capital in the company. The prosperity of shareholders increases when the price of the shares owned increases.

Board Size of Commissioners and Firm Value

Yuniarti [1] stated that when the number of members of the board of commissioners becomes too many, coordination will become increasingly difficult and problematic, especially in making decisions. A large board size can provide both advantages and disadvantages for the company. The advantage of a large board size in a company is that it can manage its resources better. The Board of Commissioners is tasked with supervising and providing instructions and directions to company managers or management. FCGI [5] states that the existence of a board of commissioners in a company can increase or decrease company performance and company value.

Appiah [6] states that there is a significant and positive effect between the size of the board of commissioners and the company's performance because it is in accordance with agency theory that the purpose of a large board size of commissioner will increase supervision and improve company performance. Yuniarti [1] revealed that the size of the Board of Commissioners affects  the  performance  and  value  of  the  company. Setyani [7] also concludes that the size of the board of commissioners has an effect on financial performance.

• H₁: The size of the board of commissioners has a positive influence on firm value

Managerial Ownership and Firm Value

Yuniarti [1] states that with management ownership, management will actively participate in decision making. They will benefit directly from the decisions they make but will also bear direct risks if the decisions are wrong.

Basyith et al. [8] conclude that managerial ownership has a negative effect on company performance because higher managerial ownership at certain points can harm the performance of Indonesian companies. Suhartanti and Asyik [2] also conclude that managerial ownership has a positive effect on firm value. Hermiyetti and Katlanis [9] also conclude that managerial ownership has a positive and significant effect on company performance. This is because managerial ownership is quite effective in making corporate decisions which can improve the company's financial performance.

• H₂: Managerial ownership has a positive effect on firm value

Institutional Ownership and Firm Value

The greater the institutional ownership, the higher the company's performance and value because institutional ownership can act as a company supervisor and the greater the power in influencing company decisions or strategies to be taken so as to improve or optimize company performance and value.

Pirzada et al. [10] conclude that institutional ownership has a significant influence on company performance with its proxies, namely earnings per share and price earnings. Suhartanti and Asyik [2] conclude that institutional ownership has an effect on firm value with a positive coefficient direction. Rachman [11] and Hermiyetti and Katlanis [9] also conclude that institutional ownership shows a significant influence on the company's financial performance.

• H₃: Institutional ownership has a positive effect on firm value

Public Ownership and Firm Value

To increase the company's performance and value, substantial funding is required either from internal or external sources. External parties in this case are investors or the public who invest their funds in the company. Nur'aeni [12] states that the presence of shares by the public reflects the expectation from the community that the company's management will manage these shares as well as possible and as evidenced by the level of profit and good company performance.

Yuniarti [1] concludes that public ownership has a significant positive effect on firm performance and value. Eforis [13] concludes that public ownership has a significant effect on the financial performance of SOEs. This is due to the high proportion of public ownership held in companies in Indonesia. Arbi [14] also concludes that public ownership has a significant influence on firm value.

• H₄: Public ownership has a positive effect on firm value

Foreign Ownership and Firm Value

Yuniarti [1] states that foreign ownership is the number of shares owned by foreign parties (overseas) both individually and institutionally to the shares of companies in Indonesia. Companies with foreign shareholdings will be encouraged to report or disclose their information voluntarily and more broadly so that the information can be used as material for accelerating or increasing the company's performance and value.

Gurbuz and Aybars [15] conclude that foreign ownership improves the financial performance of firms in Turkey to a certain degree, beyond that additional foreign ownership does not increase firm profitability. Hermiyetti and Katlanis [9] and Djuitaningsih and Ristiawati [16] concluded that foreign ownership has a positive and significant effect on the company's financial performance.

• H₅: Foreign ownership has a positive effect on firm value

Tax Amnesty and Firm Value

The existence of this government program will have an indirect positive impact through investment instruments related to the property sector such as the real estate investment fund (DIRE), whose tax has been cut by the government from 5 percent to 0.5 percent. the recovery of domestic property sales resulting in new demand or demand in the property and real estate sectors so that the tax amnesty policy has a positive impact on the property and real estate sectors.

Rinaldi [17] concluded that the firm value as a result of the tax amnesty was also affected before the tax amnesty was carried out, namely it decreased after the tax amnesty was carried out. Nugeraha et al. [18] conclude that there is a significant difference in Return on Equity as a proxy for financial performance between before and after the implementation of the first tax amnesty period for property and real estate companies listed on the IDX.

• H₆: Tax amnesty has a positive effect on firm value

Population and Sample

The population in this study were 48 property and real estate sector companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX). Property and real estate companies are the sectors most positively affected by the tax amnesty and are also the target for investors to invest. The sample selection was carried out using a purposive sampling method that considered the availability of information needed by researchers in the 2014-2016 annual reports of each company on the Indonesia Stock Exchange, so that the sample in this study was 38 companies.

The type of data in this study is secondary data collected from the company's annual financial report data from 2014-2016 which was obtained from the Indonesia Stock Exchange website, namely www.idx.co.id. The data collection method in this study was the documentation method.

Variable Operational Definition

The dependent and independent variables and the proxies used in this study (Table 1).

Table 1: Variable Measurement

Data Analysis

In this study, the researcher used four stages, namely the classical assumption test (normality  test,  autocorrelation test, multicollinearity test and heteroscedasticity test), multiple linear regression analysis, hypothesis testing and determinant coefficient testing (R² or R-Square). The regression line equation used is as follows:

TQ = α+β₁BOC+β₂MOWN+β₃IOWN+β₄PUB+β₅FOR+β₆TAM+e

Keterangan:

α            =  Constant

β₁-β₆    =  Coefficient of regression

e          =  Error Term 

Descriptive Analysis

The   variables   in   this   study   consisted   of    the dependent  variable,  namely  firm  value  and independent  variables,  namely  the  size  of  the  board of commissioners, managerial ownership, institutional ownership, public ownership, foreign ownership and tax amnesty. Table 2 is descriptive statistical data based on data testing.

Table 2: Descriptive Statistics

Source: Data processed

Based on the results of the descriptive statistics above, it shows that the number of data or observations in this study is 114. For the independent variable, namely the size of the board of commissioners, the maximum value or the largest number of the board of commissioners is 22 people, while the minimum value or the lowest number is 2 people in one company. The maximum value of managerial ownership is 0.5053 or 50.53% while the lowest value is 0.0000 or 0% managerial ownership. The largest number of share ownership by institutional is 0.1371 or 13.71% and the lowest is 0.000 or 0%. The maximum value of share ownership by the public or the public is 0.8081 or 80.81% and the lowest is 0.0457 or 4.57%. The maximum value of share ownership by foreign parties is 0.9518 or 95.18% and the lowest is 0.0000 or 0%. Tax amnesty uses a dummy variable with 0 before being the minimum value and 1 after the tax amnesty program being the maximum value. The dependent variable, namely the value of the company with Tobin's Q proxy, has a maximum value of 4.2556 and a minimum value of 0.1228.

Hypothesis Test Result

After   processing   the   data    using    the    SPSS  version 2.1 program, the results of the hypothesis test were obtained as in Table 3.

Table 3: Hypotheses Test Result

Source: Data processed

The results of the tests that have been carried out show that the size of the board of commissioners has an effect on firm value with a significance value of 0.0000<alpha (5%). This shows that the greater the number of commissioners in the company, the greater the supervision of management so that it can improve company performance and also have an impact on increasing company value. The results of this study are in line with the results of other studies such as those from Appiah [6], Setyani [7] and Yuniarti [1] concluding that the size of the board of commissioners affects the performance and value of the company.

For managerial ownership variables, it is concluded that it has a negative effect on firm value with a significance value of 0.003<alpha (5%). This shows that a large percentage of share ownership by managers will reduce the value of the company because managers will be active and dominate in decision making in the company without considering input from other parties so that it can harm the company. Research conducted by Basyith et al. [8] supports the results of this study which concludes that managerial ownership has a negative effect on company performance. Suhartanti and Asyik [2] and Hermiyetti and Katlanis [9] also conclude that managerial ownership has a significant and significant effect on company performance.

Institutional ownership has no effect on firm value. This shows that the percentage of share ownership owned by institutional will not affect the value of the company and the greater the institutional ownership will decrease the value of the company because the institution does not know the actual condition of the company if in making company decisions that will have an impact on the value of the company. The results of this study are in line with research conducted by Nurfaza et al. [19] which concluded that institutional ownership has no significant effect on firm value but does not support the results of research conducted by Hermiyetti and Katlanis [9] and Pirzada et al. [10] and Rachman [11], concluded that institutional ownership shows a significant influence on the company's financial performance.

Public ownership and foreign ownership have a negative effect on firm value. This shows that a large percentage of public or foreign share ownership will reduce the value of the company because public ownership is less than 5% individually so that the total public ownership will continue to contribute funds to the company so it must be managed properly by the company but the public cannot be active. in making individual company decisions, while large foreign ownership of shares will have an impact on company decision making but foreign parties do not know the situation and conditions that exist within the company or in Indonesia. Yuniarti [1], Arbi [14] and Eforis (2017) conclude that public ownership has a significant effect on firm performance and value. The results of the three studies support the results of this study related to public ownership, while Gurbuz and Aybars [15], Yuniarti [1], Hermiyetti and Katlanis [9] and Djuitaningsih and Ristiawati [16] support the results of this study which concludes that foreign ownership has a positive and negative effect. significant to the company's performance and value.

The results of the last independent variable in this study, namely the tax amnesty, concluded that it had no effect on firm value. This shows that the company follows the tax amnesty because of the legal provisions that apply in Indonesia in Law number 11 of 2016 and if there is a tax debt to the state, it is obliged to pay it so that it will reduce the funds owned by the company and have an impact on the company's operations so that the company's performance and value can be improved. decrease. The results of this study are in line with research conducted by Palmi [3], Nugeraha et al. [18] and Rinaldi [17] which concluded that there were differences between before and after the tax amnesty was carried out, namely a decrease in company performance and value.

This study aims to determine the effect of good corporate governance as proxied through the size of the board of commissioners, managerial ownership, institutional ownership, public ownership and foreign ownership as well as tax amnesty on the value of property and real estate sector companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2014-2016. The results of this study indicate that the size of the board of commissioners has a positive effect on firm value, while managerial ownership, public ownership and foreign ownership have a negative effect on firm value. Institutional ownership and tax amnesty have no effect on firm value. From the results of this study, it means that the company must optimize the part of good corporate governance that has an effect on improving performance so that it has an impact on company value and participation in the tax amnesty is only limited to compliance with applicable laws in Indonesia.

1. Yuniarti, C. Pengaruh Good Corporate Governance terhadap Kinerja dan Nilai Perusahaan pada Perusahaan High Profile yang Terdaftar di BEI Tahun 2010-2013. Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, 2014.

2. Suhartanti, T. and N.F. Asyik. “Pengaruh Corporate Governance terhadap Nilai Perusahaan dengan Kinerja Keuangan sebagai Variabel Moderating.” Jurnal Ilmu & Riset Akuntansi, STIESIA Surabaya, 2015.

3. Palmi, R. Analisis Perbandingan Nilai Perusahaan Sebelum dan Sesudah Kebijakan Tax Amnesty (Studi Empiris pada Perusahaan Property di BEI Tahun 2015-2016). Universitas Lampung, 2017.

4. Fidhayatin, S.K., and N.H.U. Dewi. “Analisis Nilai Perusahaan, Kinerja Perusahaan, dan Kesempatan Bertumbuh terhadap Return Saham pada Perusahaan Manufaktur yang Listing di BEI.” Jurnal Akuntansi, STIE Perbanas Surabaya, 2012.

5. FCGI. Peranan Dewan Komisaris dan Komite Audit dalam Pelaksanaan. Seri Tata Kelola Perusahaan (Corporate Governance), Jilid II, Jakarta, 2001.

6. Appiah, K.O. “The Impact of Corporate Board Size on Firm Performance: Evidence from Ghana and Nigeria.” Journal of Research in Business and Management, 2017.

7. Setyani, A.I. “Pengaruh Ukuran Dewan Komisaris dan Dewan Direksi serta Ukuran Perusahaan terhadap Kinerja Keuangan Perusahaan (Studi Empiris pada Perusahaan Sektor Food and Beverage Tahun 2010-2013).” Jurnal, 2015.

8. Basyith, A. et al. “The Impact of Board Structure and Ownership Structure on Firm Performance: An Evidence from Blue Chip Firms Listed in Indonesian Stock Exchange.” Journal of Corporate Ownership & Control, vol. 12, no. 4, 2015.

9. Hermiyetti and E. Katlanis. “Analisis Pengaruh Kepemilikan Manajerial, Kepemilikan Institusional, Kepemilikan Asing, dan Komite Audit terhadap Kinerja Keuangan Perusahaan.” Jurnal, 2016.

10. Pirzada, K. et al. “Firm Performance, Institutional Ownership and Capital Structure: A Case of Malaysia.” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of Malaya, 2015.

11. Rachman, R.A. “Pengaruh Kepemilikan Manajerial dan Kepemilikan Institusional terhadap Kinerja Keuangan pada Perusahaan Manufaktur yang Terdaftar di BEI.” Artikel Ilmiah, STIE Perbanas, 2014.

12. Nur’aeni, D. Pengaruh Struktur Kepemilikan Saham terhadap Kinerja Perusahaan (Studi Kasus pada Perusahaan Manufaktur yang Listing di Bursa Efek Indonesia). Universitas Diponegoro, 2010.

13. Eforis, C. “Pengaruh Kepemilikan Negara dan Kepemilikan Publik terhadap Kinerja Keuangan BUMN (Studi pada Perusahaan BUMN yang Go Public pada Tahun 2012-2015).” Jurnal Ultima Accounting, vol. 9, no. 1, June 2017.

14. Arbi, F.H. Pengaruh Kepemilikan Institusional dan Kepemilikan Publik terhadap Nilai Perusahaan (Studi pada Perusahaan yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia). Universitas Sebelas Maret, 2010.

15. Gurbuz, A.O. and A. Aybars. “The Impact of Foreign Ownership on Firm Performance: Evidence from an Emerging Market, Turkey.” American Journal of Economics and Business Administration, Marmara University, 2010.

16. Djuitaningsih, T. and E.E. Ristiawati. “Pengaruh Kinerja Lingkungan dan Kepemilikan Asing terhadap Kinerja Finansial Perusahaan.” Jurnal Akuntansi Universitas Jember, 2011.

17. Rinaldi. “Dampak Tax Amnesty terhadap Laporan Keuangan dan Pengaruhnya kepada Nilai Perusahaan.” Jurnal Adhum, vol. 7, no. 1, 2017.

18. Nugeraha, A. et al. “Analisis Perbandingan Kinerja Keuangan Sebelum dan Sesudah Diberlakukannya Tax Amnesty Periode Pertama pada Perusahaan Sub Sektor Property dan Real Estate yang Terdaftar di BEI.” Jurnal Ilmu Manajemen dan Bisnis, 2016.

19. Nurfaza, B.D. et al. “Pengaruh Good Corporate Governance terhadap Nilai Perusahaan (Studi pada Sektor Perbankan yang Terdaftar di BEI Tahun 2011-2015).” E-Proceeding of Management, Universitas Telkom, 2017.