Indonesia’s Ministry of Finance has entered another period of uncertainty.
A sweeping rotation of senior officials, controversy over appointments within the Directorate General of Taxes and Customs and Excise, and the sudden dismissal of Finance Minister Purbaya Yudhi Sadewa have created a dramatic sequence of events at one of Indonesia’s most strategically important institutions.
The turbulence has inevitably raised a larger question: **What will happen to Coretax, Indonesia’s enormously expensive tax-administration modernization project?**
The concern is understandable. Coretax is not simply another government website. It is the technological backbone expected to support taxpayer registration, tax-return filing, payments, audits, collection, and compliance supervision across the country. The platform is intended to modernize Indonesia’s tax administration and integrate previously fragmented processes into a single digital ecosystem. [1](https://www.pajak.go.id/id/reformdjp/coretax)
After years of development and more than Rp1 trillion in reported expenditure, the possibility of disrupted leadership has revived public anxiety that the project could lose direction, remain permanently unfinished, or become another costly digital system that fails to deliver its original promise.
But is Coretax genuinely at risk of becoming an abandoned megaproject?
The short answer is: **not yet**.
The longer answer is more complicated.
## **A Controversial Rotation Before the Minister’s Dismissal**
The latest controversy began with a large-scale restructuring at the Ministry of Finance.
On September 10, 2026, then-Finance Minister Purbaya Yudhi Sadewa reorganized hundreds of positions across the ministry. The reshuffle included approximately 50 echelon-II officials and 350 echelon-III officials, affecting strategic units such as the Directorate General of Taxes, the Directorate General of Customs and Excise, public-service agencies, and state-owned special-purpose financial entities. [2](https://www.cnnindonesia.com/ekonomi/20260915142243-532-1404188/purbaya-respons-soal-alasan-dipecat-gegara-rombak-pejabat-kemenkeu)
Only four days later, on September 14, 2026, President Prabowo Subianto replaced Purbaya with Suahasil Nazara as finance minister. Purbaya subsequently acknowledged that the controversy surrounding the personnel rotation was partly connected to his dismissal, although he emphasized that the appointment and removal of ministers remained the president’s prerogative. [3](https://infobanknews.com/purbaya-ungkap-alasan-dicopot-ada-soal-rombak-pegawai-kemenkeu)[2](https://www.cnnindonesia.com/ekonomi/20260915142243-532-1404188/purbaya-respons-soal-alasan-dipecat-gegara-rombak-pejabat-kemenkeu)
The episode became more controversial after Director General of Taxes Bimo Wijayanto reportedly questioned several names included in the rotation. According to him, certain officials had apparently not completed the established assessment and talent-management procedures.
Bimo and the leadership of Customs and Excise consequently requested that the disputed appointments be postponed or cancelled. Officials who had not passed through the required process were expected to be returned temporarily to their previous positions, while appointments that followed the proper procedure could continue. [4](https://surabaya.tribunnews.com/news/1949932/nasib-sejumlah-pejabat-kemenkeu-usai-purbaya-dicopot-rotasi-ditunda-gara-gara-ada-nama-ajaib)[5](https://money.kompas.com/read/2026/09/17/092200526/minta-rotasi-pejabat-era-purbaya-dibatalkan-dirjen-pajak–sinyalnya-enggak)
This distinction matters. The tax director general himself was not necessarily removed from office. Rather, the dispute concerned appointments and rotations affecting numerous officials within the ministry, particularly the tax and customs administrations.
It is therefore more accurate to describe the situation as a **major personnel-rotation dispute inside the Finance Ministry**, followed by a ministerial replacement, rather than simply saying that “the tax boss was rotated.”
Nevertheless, accuracy does not make the situation any less serious.
## **Why the Turmoil Matters for Coretax**
Major digital-transformation projects depend on more than software.
They require stable leadership, clear accountability, institutional memory, disciplined procurement, reliable data governance, user training, change management, cybersecurity, and consistent coordination between technical teams and policymakers.
When hundreds of officials are moved, appointments are challenged, and the minister in charge is suddenly replaced, the immediate concern is not necessarily that the system will be shut down. The greater risk is that decision-making becomes fragmented.
Who has authority to approve modifications? Who is responsible for unresolved defects? Will the new leadership preserve the previous implementation roadmap? Are vendors still bound by the same delivery obligations? Will civil servants responsible for the project remain in their positions long enough to retain institutional knowledge?
These are critical questions because Coretax is closely connected to Indonesia’s fiscal capacity. A disruption in tax administration can affect taxpayer services, reporting, invoicing, payments, refunds, audits, enforcement, data accuracy, and ultimately state revenue.
Political and bureaucratic continuity is therefore not a cosmetic issue. It is one of the fundamental conditions for making a national-scale digital tax platform work.
## **Indonesia Has Already Spent Rp1.26 Trillion**
The financial scale of Coretax makes the stakes even higher.
According to figures drawn from the Directorate General of Taxes’ performance reports, approximately Rp1.26 trillion was spent on Coretax between 2021 and 2025. Reported annual spending included Rp223.83 billion in 2021, Rp407.36 billion in 2022, Rp34.34 billion in 2023, Rp467.31 billion in 2024, and Rp136.85 billion in 2025. [6](https://www.cnbcindonesia.com/news/20260420110539-4-728128/5-tahun-coretax-sudah-habiskan-anggaran-rp126-t-ini-hasilnya)[7](https://nasional.kontan.co.id/news/proyek-coretax-serap-anggaran-rp-126-triliun-dari-2021-2025-begini-rinciannya)
The development stages were spread across several years. Initial planning and design covered 20 Coretax business processes in 2021. Module development followed in 2022, while subsequent stages included testing, data migration, initial deployment, user support, knowledge transfer, warranty activities, and preparation of a project-closure report. [6](https://www.cnbcindonesia.com/news/20260420110539-4-728128/5-tahun-coretax-sudah-habiskan-anggaran-rp126-t-ini-hasilnya)
However, the financial process did not end neatly in 2025. Part of the multiyear contract budget was reportedly shifted into 2026 following an adjustment to the project’s funding composition. [7](https://nasional.kontan.co.id/news/proyek-coretax-serap-anggaran-rp-126-triliun-dari-2021-2025-begini-rinciannya)
This means the public debate should not focus only on how much money has already been spent. It should also examine whether the remaining contractual obligations, corrective work, infrastructure development, and operational support are being completed transparently.
A project may be described as “completed” from a procurement perspective while still requiring substantial technical improvements. In large-scale information systems, project closure does not necessarily mean the end of software maintenance, defect resolution, security updates, capacity improvements, or business-process refinement.
## **Coretax Has Experienced Technical Problems**
Public anxiety surrounding Coretax did not begin with the ministerial drama.
The Directorate General of Taxes acknowledged that bugs and process-related difficulties were identified during the system’s early implementation. Taxpayers also needed time to adapt to new workflows and learn how to operate the platform. In response, the tax authority said it had undertaken bug-fixing activities and expanded education and communication for taxpayers. [6](https://www.cnbcindonesia.com/news/20260420110539-4-728128/5-tahun-coretax-sudah-habiskan-anggaran-rp126-t-ini-hasilnya)[7](https://nasional.kontan.co.id/news/proyek-coretax-serap-anggaran-rp-126-triliun-dari-2021-2025-begini-rinciannya)
These challenges are not unusual for a digital system of this size. Integrating millions of taxpayer records, multiple business processes, legacy databases, authorization mechanisms, tax documents, payment information, and compliance functions is an extraordinarily complex undertaking.
But complexity cannot become a permanent excuse.
Taxpayers do not evaluate a system by the number of modules completed or procurement milestones achieved. They evaluate it by whether they can register, issue documents, submit tax returns, make payments, receive confirmations, correct data, and obtain assistance without unnecessary disruption.
Every recurring error carries a cost. Companies may need additional staff or consultants. Accountants may spend more time reconciling transactions. Small businesses may struggle to understand new procedures. Tax officials may be forced to create temporary workarounds. Trust can deteriorate even when the underlying technology is gradually improving.
The greatest danger, therefore, is not necessarily total abandonment. It is a system that remains operational but never becomes fully reliable, intuitive, and trusted.
## **Is Coretax Actually Being Abandoned?**
Current evidence does not support the conclusion that Coretax has been abandoned.
The official Coretax portal remained accessible in October 2026, complete with taxpayer login functions and online security guidance. [8](http://coretaxdjp.pajak.go.id/)[9](https://coretaxdjp.pajak.go.id/identityproviderportal/Account/Login)
The Directorate General of Taxes also continues to describe Coretax as the central administration platform integrating registration, tax-return filing, payments, audits, and collection. Official guidance, manuals, templates, activation instructions, and tutorials continue to be published through the tax authority’s website. [1](https://www.pajak.go.id/id/reformdjp/coretax)
Furthermore, the government previously delayed parts of the Directorate General of Taxes’ organizational restructuring until December 31, 2026, specifically to maintain stability during Coretax implementation. The policy recognized that simultaneous technological and organizational transitions could create additional operational risk. [10](https://mediaindonesia.com/ekonomi/846872/reorganisasi-ditjen-pajak-resmi-diundur-ke-akhir-2026-agar-fokus-kawal-coretax)
These facts suggest that Coretax remains an active national system.
That does not mean the project is safe from failure. It means failure would probably take a subtler form than an empty construction site or an offline website.
A digital-government project can “fail” while technically continuing to operate. It may become excessively expensive, dependent on emergency fixes, burdened by poor user experience, weakened by inconsistent data, or unable to achieve the efficiency gains promised at the beginning.
Coretax should therefore be judged by outcomes, not merely by whether its login page remains online.
## **Three Scenarios for the Future of Coretax**
### **1. Managed Continuity**
Under the most optimistic scenario, the new finance minister maintains the strategic direction of the project while strengthening technical governance.
Disputed personnel decisions are reviewed transparently, qualified project officials remain in key positions, vendors are held accountable, and unresolved bugs are prioritized according to their impact on taxpayers. The government publishes measurable service indicators such as uptime, transaction success rates, incident-resolution times, complaint volumes, and data-correction performance.
In this scenario, the ministerial transition becomes a governance reset rather than a project-ending crisis.
### **2. Operational Survival Without Real Transformation**
In the second scenario, Coretax continues to operate, but improvements become slow and fragmented.
The platform remains mandatory, yet users face recurring complications. Government agencies continue issuing patches and procedural adjustments, while businesses rely increasingly on consultants, manual reconciliation, and unofficial workarounds.
This would not technically qualify as abandonment. However, it would represent a failure to achieve the project’s central promise: a simpler, integrated, accurate, and efficient tax-administration system.
### **3. Institutional Fragmentation**
The most dangerous scenario would involve repeated leadership changes, unclear responsibility, loss of experienced personnel, procurement disputes, and disagreement over the platform’s future architecture.
If the project loses a single accountable owner, different units may introduce competing priorities. Technical teams could focus on short-term fixes, senior officials could pursue organizational restructuring, and policymakers could announce new initiatives without resolving the weaknesses of the existing system.
Coretax might then become a costly legacy platform before it has fully matured.
## **What the New Leadership Must Do**
To prevent that outcome, the new Finance Ministry leadership should take several immediate steps.
First, it should publicly confirm that Coretax remains a national priority and provide an updated implementation roadmap.
Second, the ministry should conduct an independent technical and governance review covering system architecture, cybersecurity, data integrity, vendor performance, procurement obligations, disaster recovery, and user experience.
Third, personnel decisions affecting Coretax should be based on competence and documented assessment. Maintaining institutional knowledge is essential during a high-risk transition.
Fourth, the government should publish performance metrics that ordinary taxpayers and businesses can understand. Claims that a system has been “improved” are less convincing than transparent evidence showing higher availability, fewer failed transactions, faster response times, and declining complaint numbers.
Finally, taxpayers need a clear escalation mechanism when Coretax problems prevent them from fulfilling legal obligations. No citizen or company should face automatic penalties because of a verified disruption in a government-operated platform.
## **Conclusion: Not Abandoned, but Still Vulnerable**
Coretax has not reached the point where it can fairly be described as an abandoned megaproject. The system remains operational, official guidance continues to be issued, and the tax authority still treats the platform as the foundation of Indonesia’s modern tax administration. [1](https://www.pajak.go.id/id/reformdjp/coretax)[9](https://coretaxdjp.pajak.go.id/identityproviderportal/Account/Login)
However, the Finance Ministry’s leadership turmoil has increased the risk surrounding the project.
The rotation dispute, questions over talent-management procedures, and the replacement of the finance minister demonstrate how organizational instability can threaten even the most sophisticated technology. Software alone cannot reform tax administration. It needs credible leadership, qualified personnel, transparent governance, strong security, and the trust of taxpayers.
The most important question is therefore no longer whether Indonesia can build an advanced tax system.
It is whether the government can manage that system consistently across changes of ministers, officials, vendors, and political priorities.
Coretax may not be mangkrak, or abandoned, today. But without clear accountability and measurable improvements, it could remain trapped in an equally damaging condition: **a megaproject that is permanently running, permanently repaired, and never fully finished.**