论家庭养老背景下我国个人所得税课税单位选择的税收公平考量
发布时间：2018-09-07 18:05
【摘要】：收入分配与人们的利益密切相关,社会分配是否公平一直是社会关注的热点问题。从分配法则中“初次分配注重效率,再分配注重公平”到“初次分配和再分配都要处理好效率和公平的关系,再分配更加注重公平”中亦可见公平的重要性。税收作为公民收入的二次分配方式,其征税方式方法等是否公平一直备受关注。因此,在具体的税收制度设计时,也一直将税收公平原则放在重要的位置。 本文正是以税收公平原则为出发点,来对当前我国个人所得税的课税单位进行考量,看当前个人所得税的课税单位是否符合税收公平原则。同时,本文对美国以及欧洲国家的个人所得税课税单位进行了考察,研究其个人所得税课税单位制度设计的背景,并且努力从中找寻可为我国的个人所得税的课税单位能够借鉴的地方。 在本文的写作中,主要是通过五个部分来展开自己的论述。 首先是导论部分,在这一部分,作者对文章的研究背景,本文的研究拟达到的目的以及主要的研究方法进行了阐述。同时,对本文的逻辑结构进行了介绍。 第一部分,论述了税收公平原则的意蕴。由法律形式正义带来的困境开始,阐述了税收实质公平的理念。因为本文论述的是我国个人所得税课税单位选择的税收公平考量,并且,在税收制度的设计上,其是否公平也一直是社会关注的问题。因此,在第一部分,作者主要对税收公平原则进行阐述。对税收公平原则的阐述离不开对法律上公平理念的研究。作者在本文的论述中,对法律公平理念的发展脉络进项了梳理。对法律公平理念的阐释可追溯至古希腊时期,在这一时期,许多先贤们对公平的理念进项了解说。在19世纪的西方,法律形式公平的理念发展完善,法律形式主义者认为,法律本身是一个逻辑严密的体系,法律的判决结果应该只遵循其内部的体系,而不应该受外界所干扰。由于对法律形式主义主张,法官在适用法律时完全忽视了当事人主体之间经济地位的差异,以及法律规则本身固有的滞后性、不确定性等问题。由此,让主张公平正义的法律实质上变成了专门用来保护社会强者的工具,表面上的正义下掩盖着非正义的事实。最终法律形式主义因过分追求内部的逻辑和演绎而忽略了政治、经济、伦理、风俗习惯等对法律的影响,将法律至于一个完全密闭的空间内。这偏离了法律最终的价值目标。为了摆脱形式公平的困境,19世纪末开始,相应的法律制度开始出现了一系列的变化。学者们开始追求法律的实质公平理念,体现弱者的利益,实现真正的公平。正如罗尔斯在其《正义论》中所论述的那样,法律学者们对实质公平的追求亦是体现在政治领域平等自由的前提下,主张对社会中的弱势群体,给予经济利益和机会方面的倾斜性配置。这正是罗尔斯所论述的差别原则,差别原则体现了实质公平的内涵。现代税收法律制度作为调节社会分配,改善贫富差距的重要法律,其所体现的税收公平原则亦是实质上的公平。具体表现就是,纳税人的纳税能力与其税收负担相一致。 第二部分,对当前我国以个人为课税单位的所得税制度进行了研究,并对其是否符合税收实质公平原则做出了论证。当前我国的个人所得税课税单位是以个人为课税单位,其工薪所得费用扣除额主要考虑的是居民用于购买食品、接受医疗、文化投资、参与交通、居住成本以及生活日用品的全国人均费用,而未将纳税人实际家庭负担差异考虑在内。没有充分体现差别原则,忽略纳税人家庭收入构成的差别,与税收公平原则中,税负与其纳税能力的核心理念不相一致。同时,在这一部分中,论述了将家庭养老支出计算在纳税人的扣除标准中的必然性。我国已经进入老龄化社会,老龄化对现有的社会保障体系提出了新的挑战,给我国当前的养老金制度带来了极大的压力。当前,国家还没有足够的财政来为达到法定退休年龄的城乡居民承担养老金。另外,在兴办福利院、老年公寓方面,也无法满足老年人的需求。可见,在“以居家养老为主”的现实选择下,家庭在养老中承担着主要的经济责任,但我国现行个人所得税制度在个人所得税课税单位的选择上,是以个人为课税单位,其扣除额是以个人人均消费支出为计算标准的,并没有将养老支出充分计算在扣除标准范围内,不仅削弱了养老家庭的经济能力,也使个人所得税的实施效果更加有违税收公平。 第三部分,对个人所得税的课税单位进行了域外考察,观察美国、欧洲国家的所得税制度。并将所得税制度与养老保障制度相结合进行了研究。美国在以个人为课税单位向以家庭为课税单位转变的过程中,主要考虑的是家庭的负担。欧洲许多国家个人所得税课税单位虽经历了由家庭向个人的转变,但为了确保税收公平原则,多数选择以家庭为课税单位的国家也允许纳税人在个人和家庭纳税单位间自由选择。而且不论美国还是欧洲国家,其都有相对完善的社会养老保障制度。可见,课税单位的重新选择如果有利于实现税收公平,就应当进一步优化,重新设计。 第四部分,提出本文的观点,作者认为,在当前我国家庭承担主要养老责任的背景下,将家庭养老支出计算在纳税人个人所得税扣除标准的范围内,是更加符合税收实质公平的。这也是变革课税单位的要求。但是考虑到我国当前税收征管水平不高、家庭户数难以确定等原因,作者建议当前宜采取以个人为课税单位与以家庭为课税单位并存的税制,让纳税人自由选择。
[Abstract]:Income distribution is closely related to people's interests. Whether social distribution is fair or not has always been a hot issue of social concern. Necessity. Taxation as a way of secondary distribution of citizens'income, the fairness of taxation methods has always been concerned. Therefore, in the design of specific tax system, the principle of tax fairness has always been placed in an important position.
Based on the principle of tax fairness, this paper examines the taxation units of individual income tax in China to see whether the taxation units of individual income tax conform to the principle of tax fairness. The background of the system design, and strive to find out from it for our country's individual income tax taxation unit can draw lessons from.
In the writing of this article, mainly through five parts to start their own discussion.
The first part is the introduction. In this part, the author elaborates the research background, the purpose of the study and the main research methods. At the same time, the logical structure of this paper is introduced.
The first part discusses the implication of the principle of tax fairness.Beginning with the dilemma brought about by the legal form of justice,this paper expounds the concept of tax substantive fairness.Because this paper discusses the consideration of tax fairness in the choice of individual income tax levier in China,and whether it is fair or not has always been a social concern in the design of the tax system. Therefore, in the first part, the author mainly expounds the principle of tax fairness. The principle of tax fairness can not be separated from the study of the concept of legal fairness. In the 19th century, in the West, the concept of formal justice of law developed and perfected. Legal formalists believed that the law itself was a logical and rigorous system, and that the results of legal judgments should follow only its internal system, and should not be disturbed by the outside world. In applying the law, the judge completely neglects the differences of the economic status between the parties, and the inherent lag and uncertainty of the legal rules. Thus, the law that advocates fairness and justice becomes a tool specially used to protect the strong in society, and the superficial justice conceals the unjust facts. Legal formalism neglects the influence of politics, economy, ethics, customs and habits on law because of its excessive pursuit of internal logic and deduction, and puts law into a completely closed space. This deviates from the ultimate value goal of law. In order to get rid of the dilemma of formal justice, the corresponding legal system began to appear at the end of the 19th century. A series of changes. Scholars began to pursue the concept of substantive justice of law, embodying the interests of the weak, and realizing real justice. As Rawls stated in his Theory of Justice, the pursuit of substantive justice by legal scholars is also reflected in the premise of equality and freedom in the political field, advocating that the disadvantaged groups in society should be given. This is the principle of difference discussed by Rawls, which embodies the connotation of substantive fairness. As an important law to adjust social distribution and improve the gap between the rich and the poor, the modern tax law system embodies the principle of tax fairness. The ability to pay taxes is consistent with the tax burden.
The second part studies the current income tax system in which the individual is the taxpayer and demonstrates whether it conforms to the principle of substantial fairness of taxation. The difference of taxpayers'actual family burden is not taken into account. The principle of difference is not fully embodied, and the difference of taxpayers' family income is neglected. It is inconsistent with the core concept of tax burden and tax ability in the principle of tax equity. In this part, the inevitability of calculating the family pension expenditure in the taxpayer's deduction standard is discussed. Our country has entered the aging society, the aging has put forward the new challenge to the existing social security system, and has brought the enormous pressure to our present pension system. In addition, it can not meet the needs of the elderly in establishing welfare homes and apartments for the elderly. It can be seen that the family bears the main economic responsibility in providing for the aged, but the current personal income tax system in China is based on the individual income tax levies. As for the choice of the standard, the deduction is based on the individual's per capita consumption expenditure, and the old-age expenditure is not fully calculated within the deduction standard. This not only weakens the economic ability of the old-age families, but also makes the implementation effect of individual income tax more contrary to tax equity.
In the third part, the author makes an extraterritorial study of the taxation units of individual income tax, observes the income tax systems of the United States and European countries, and studies the combination of the income tax system and the old-age security system. Although many countries have experienced the transition from family to individual, most countries that choose the family as the taxation unit allow taxpayers to choose freely between individual and family taxation units in order to ensure the principle of tax equity. Obstacles system. It can be seen that if the re-selection of Taxation units is conducive to the realization of tax equity, it should be further optimized and redesigned.
In the fourth part, the author puts forward the viewpoint of this paper. Under the background that the family bears the main responsibility for providing for the aged in our country, it is more in line with the real fairness of Taxation to calculate the family pension expenditure within the scope of the tax deduction standard of the individual income tax of the taxpayer. This is also the requirement of reforming the taxation units. Because of the low level and the difficulty in determining the number of households, the author suggests that the current tax system should be based on the coexistence of individual taxation units and family taxation units, so that taxpayers can choose freely.
【学位授予单位】：西南财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：F812.42;D669.6
本文编号：2229016
[Abstract]:Income distribution is closely related to people's interests. Whether social distribution is fair or not has always been a hot issue of social concern. Necessity. Taxation as a way of secondary distribution of citizens'income, the fairness of taxation methods has always been concerned. Therefore, in the design of specific tax system, the principle of tax fairness has always been placed in an important position.
Based on the principle of tax fairness, this paper examines the taxation units of individual income tax in China to see whether the taxation units of individual income tax conform to the principle of tax fairness. The background of the system design, and strive to find out from it for our country's individual income tax taxation unit can draw lessons from.
In the writing of this article, mainly through five parts to start their own discussion.
The first part is the introduction. In this part, the author elaborates the research background, the purpose of the study and the main research methods. At the same time, the logical structure of this paper is introduced.
The first part discusses the implication of the principle of tax fairness.Beginning with the dilemma brought about by the legal form of justice,this paper expounds the concept of tax substantive fairness.Because this paper discusses the consideration of tax fairness in the choice of individual income tax levier in China,and whether it is fair or not has always been a social concern in the design of the tax system. Therefore, in the first part, the author mainly expounds the principle of tax fairness. The principle of tax fairness can not be separated from the study of the concept of legal fairness. In the 19th century, in the West, the concept of formal justice of law developed and perfected. Legal formalists believed that the law itself was a logical and rigorous system, and that the results of legal judgments should follow only its internal system, and should not be disturbed by the outside world. In applying the law, the judge completely neglects the differences of the economic status between the parties, and the inherent lag and uncertainty of the legal rules. Thus, the law that advocates fairness and justice becomes a tool specially used to protect the strong in society, and the superficial justice conceals the unjust facts. Legal formalism neglects the influence of politics, economy, ethics, customs and habits on law because of its excessive pursuit of internal logic and deduction, and puts law into a completely closed space. This deviates from the ultimate value goal of law. In order to get rid of the dilemma of formal justice, the corresponding legal system began to appear at the end of the 19th century. A series of changes. Scholars began to pursue the concept of substantive justice of law, embodying the interests of the weak, and realizing real justice. As Rawls stated in his Theory of Justice, the pursuit of substantive justice by legal scholars is also reflected in the premise of equality and freedom in the political field, advocating that the disadvantaged groups in society should be given. This is the principle of difference discussed by Rawls, which embodies the connotation of substantive fairness. As an important law to adjust social distribution and improve the gap between the rich and the poor, the modern tax law system embodies the principle of tax fairness. The ability to pay taxes is consistent with the tax burden.
The second part studies the current income tax system in which the individual is the taxpayer and demonstrates whether it conforms to the principle of substantial fairness of taxation. The difference of taxpayers'actual family burden is not taken into account. The principle of difference is not fully embodied, and the difference of taxpayers' family income is neglected. It is inconsistent with the core concept of tax burden and tax ability in the principle of tax equity. In this part, the inevitability of calculating the family pension expenditure in the taxpayer's deduction standard is discussed. Our country has entered the aging society, the aging has put forward the new challenge to the existing social security system, and has brought the enormous pressure to our present pension system. In addition, it can not meet the needs of the elderly in establishing welfare homes and apartments for the elderly. It can be seen that the family bears the main economic responsibility in providing for the aged, but the current personal income tax system in China is based on the individual income tax levies. As for the choice of the standard, the deduction is based on the individual's per capita consumption expenditure, and the old-age expenditure is not fully calculated within the deduction standard. This not only weakens the economic ability of the old-age families, but also makes the implementation effect of individual income tax more contrary to tax equity.
In the third part, the author makes an extraterritorial study of the taxation units of individual income tax, observes the income tax systems of the United States and European countries, and studies the combination of the income tax system and the old-age security system. Although many countries have experienced the transition from family to individual, most countries that choose the family as the taxation unit allow taxpayers to choose freely between individual and family taxation units in order to ensure the principle of tax equity. Obstacles system. It can be seen that if the re-selection of Taxation units is conducive to the realization of tax equity, it should be further optimized and redesigned.
In the fourth part, the author puts forward the viewpoint of this paper. Under the background that the family bears the main responsibility for providing for the aged in our country, it is more in line with the real fairness of Taxation to calculate the family pension expenditure within the scope of the tax deduction standard of the individual income tax of the taxpayer. This is also the requirement of reforming the taxation units. Because of the low level and the difficulty in determining the number of households, the author suggests that the current tax system should be based on the coexistence of individual taxation units and family taxation units, so that taxpayers can choose freely.
【学位授予单位】：西南财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：F812.42;D669.6
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 梅夏英,方春晖;优先权制度的理论和立法问题[J];法商研究;2004年03期
2 杨小强;论税法与私法的联系[J];法学评论;1999年06期
3 陈茂国;袁希;;我国个人所得税课税单位改革探究[J];法学评论;2013年01期
4 熊伟;王宗涛;;中国税收优先权制度的存废之辩[J];法学评论;2013年02期
5 杜鹏,翟振武,陈卫;中国人口老龄化百年发展趋势[J];人口研究;2005年06期
6 郑春荣;;个人所得税纳税单位选择:基于婚姻中性的视角[J];社会科学家;2008年02期
7 翟继光;;从“以人为本”看我国个人所得税制度的缺陷与完善[J];税务研究;2009年03期
8 马君;詹卉;;美国个人所得税课税单位的演变及其对我国的启示[J];税务研究;2010年01期
9 蔡宏标;;美国个人所得税税率结构演变对我国个税改革的启示[J];特区经济;2011年04期
10 彭海艳;;中美比较视域下个人所得税制演进逻辑与改革效应[J];税务与经济;2012年05期
，本文编号：2229016
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/guanlilunwen/shuishoucaizhenglunwen/2229016.html
