中外房产政策制定权的比较研究

发布时间：2018-06-28 16:37

本文选题：房地产业政策 + 制定权　；参考：《福州大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：当今中国,随着房地产业的繁荣,在为经济发展做出重要贡献的同时,也带来了很多负效应问题,如房价不断上涨,且上涨的幅度远远高于其他物价上涨的幅度,中低收入人群买房难的问题越来越突出,房地产业资金紧缺,资金链有断裂的危险等等,房地产业的危机趋势也显露出来,对此,政府运用货币政策、财税政策、产业政策等对房地产市场展开了一系列的宏观调控。许多学者在论及导致“住房难”、“购房难”等问题的时候,基本上都将原因归结于投资过热、房地产金融体系结构和功能不完整、房地产方面的法律制度不健全、中央政府和地方政府在利益上存着着冲突、地方政府与房地产开发商之间的利益关联等等,但是他们都忽略了作为房地产业政策的源头——房地产业政策制定权在房地产业发展中的作用。房地产业政策作为一种调控型工具,它不仅可以在宏观方面为房地产市场的发展方向作出引导,还可以适当的调节由于“市场失灵”现象造成的房地产市场方面的问题。那么究竟谁才是房地产业政策制定权的主体,在大多数涉及房地产业内容的文章中并没有明确的指出。事实上,房地产业政策制定权的一系列问题恰恰是造成房地产市场问题的主要根源。房地产业政策制定权的一系列问题,包括政策制定的主体问题、政策制定权的执行与监督问题等等。文本运用文献研究、比较分析、列举以及量化等方法,对房地产业的三大政策——货币政策、财税政策、产业政策进行中外对比研究,结合各国国情、政治权力划分等分析上述政策的制定权归属问题,强调法律的明确授权,明确指出各个房地产业政策的制定主体、实施主体、监督主体,特别是各国中央政府在宏观上制定政策,地方政府在宏观政策的范围内以及法律法规的授权范畴内,结合各地的实际情况,制定出适合本地区发展的房地产业政策的权限。在这些分析基础上,结合我国国情,提出我国房地产业政策制定权的“主体应然性”,并针对房地产业的货币政策、财税政策和产业政策在中国语境下的制定权提出完善相关法律制度的建议。
[Abstract]:In today's China, with the prosperity of the real estate industry, while making important contributions to the economic development, it has also brought many negative effects, such as rising house prices, and the rate of increase is far higher than that of other price increases. The problem of low and middle income people's difficulty in buying a house is becoming more and more prominent, the real estate industry is in short supply of funds, the capital chain is in danger of breaking, and the crisis trend of the real estate industry has also been revealed. In view of this, the government has applied monetary policy, fiscal and tax policy, etc. Industrial policies and other real estate market launched a series of macro-control. When many scholars talk about the problems of "housing difficulty" and "housing purchase difficulty", they basically attribute the reasons to overinvestment, incomplete structure and function of real estate financial system, imperfect legal system in real estate, etc. There are conflicts of interest between the central government and the local government, the relationship between the interests of the local government and the real estate developers, and so on. But they all ignore the real estate policy as the source-real estate policy making right in the development of real estate. As a kind of adjusting and controlling tool, the real estate policy can not only guide the development direction of the real estate market in macroscopic aspect, but also adjust the problems of the real estate market caused by the phenomenon of "market failure". So who is the main body of the real estate policy-making right is not clearly pointed out in most articles concerning the real estate industry. In fact, a series of problems of real estate policy-making power are the main source of real estate market problems. A series of problems of real estate policy-making power, including the subject of policy-making, the implementation and supervision of policy-making power and so on. By using the methods of literature research, comparative analysis, enumeration and quantification, the paper makes a comparative study of the three major policies of real estate industry: monetary policy, fiscal policy and industrial policy, combining with the national conditions of various countries. The division of political power, etc., analyzes the ownership of the policy making power, emphasizes the clear authorization of the law, and points out clearly the main body of the formulation, implementation and supervision of each real estate policy. In particular, the central government of various countries formulates the policy on the macro level, and the local government, within the scope of the macro policy and the authorization of laws and regulations, combines the actual situation in various places to formulate the authority of the real estate policy suitable for the development of the region. On the basis of these analyses, combining with the situation of our country, this paper puts forward the "subject ought to be" of the right of policy making of real estate industry in our country, and aims at the monetary policy of real estate industry. The formulation of fiscal policy and industrial policy in Chinese context puts forward some suggestions to perfect the relevant legal system.
【学位授予单位】：福州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D912.3;D913

【相似文献】