The tax regulation becoming complicated and altered by the time creates the difficulty for the taxpayers to follow the tax law development, which causes the tax consultant service is increase by the tax payers. Article 32 paragraph (3) of the Law No. 6/1983 on General Provisions and Procedures of Taxation (UU KUP) allows taxpayers to appoint an attorney (Kuasa)—who masters taxation matters—representing them in exercising their rights and fulfilling duties on taxation. However, Art. 32 paragraph (3a) of the Law No. 28/2007 delegates to the Minister of Finance to further regulate the requirements and the enforcement of rights and obligations by an attorney ( PMK No. 22/PMK.03/2008 as amended by PMK No. 229/PMK.03/2014). Accordingly, the Constitutional Court in Its Verdict No. 63/PUU-XV/2017 has decided that the delegation of authority by the Law to the Minister of Finance to regulate further "the exercise of the rights and obligations of the attorney" as referred to in Article 32 paragraph (3a) of Law no. 28/2007 is conditional contradictory to the 1945 Constitution and has no binding legal force insofar as it is not meant only about matters of a technical-administrative nature and not the limitation and/or expansion of the rights and obligations of citizens. Hence, this study examines the position of tax consultant profession in the current Indonesian legal system, and the direction of its regulation going forward after the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia (MK RI) ruled its verdict Number: 63/PUU-XV/2017.