财政政策促进居民消费的作用机理与影响效应研究
|
摘要
目前对于正处在后经济危机时代的中国宏观经济而言,亟待解决的问题很多。一方面,外需锐减使得扩大内需比任何时候都更加彰显迫切。经济增长长期以来对高投资的过分依赖所积累的国内过剩产能,后经济危机时代只能更多的依靠国内居民消费来消除,因此,扩大居民消费,尤其是释放农村居民消费的巨大潜力是实现经济增长方式转型和平稳较快增长的强劲后盾。另一方面,国内控制通货膨胀的压力日益剧增。此时面对总需求不足、产能过剩与物价上涨迅猛等多重问题交织的复杂性,政府究竟需要什么样的财政政策,是采用逆经济周期抑或选择顺经济周期的财政调控政策,以及新一轮积极财政政策是就此淡出抑或继续这些都是需要格外慎重的问题?
我国居民消费“启而不动”有着极其复杂的原因,其中在很大程度上与居民消费领域中政府职能的“缺位”或“越位”有着密切关系。目前理论界针对财政政策扩大居民消费的作用机理和影响效应,存在凯恩斯主义与新古典主义两种不同流派的争论。依据新古典理论,政府增支或减税并不一定如凯恩斯主义预期增加居民消费,即财政政策对居民消费存在挤出抑或挤入效应之争。根据西方发达国家的经验发现,按照传统凯恩斯主义一味实施扩张性刺激政策并不总是有效,有时甚至会对居民消费产生紧缩效应,同时还可能造成不可持续的债务规模和巨额的财政赤字。然而在我国,由于长期缺乏从理论层面系统分析财政政策对居民消费的作用机制,同时就财政政策扩大居民消费的政策实际效果也未进行针对性的全面评价,从而理论界和实务界在扩大居民消费问题上,总是习惯性地认为应按照凯恩斯主义实行扩张性刺激政策,即增支或减税,或两者兼而进行。
本文在次贷危机致使我国外需锐减之际,从机制原理和政策实际效果两方面研究扩大居民消费需求的财政政策更显意义非凡。首先在理论层面上,本文的研究具有一定的前瞻性和研究价值：一是可以为政府根据经济运行态势实施针对性的财政调控政策提供理论依据和决策思路；二是丰富政府宏观调控理论体系,拓宽政府理论视野；三是完善财政理论与推动财税学科发展。另外在实践层面上,本文的研究对于指导我国财政政策实践具有重要意义,不仅可以用于全面评价与重新反思中国财政政策的以往实践,而且还可以为后经济危机时代政府的未来财政决策提供实际依据,进而有效解决我国内需不足问题,确保财政政策的稳健性。
本文在论文写作过程之中,以经济学为主线,将财政学与消费经济学、社会学、管理学、心理学等不同学科融合在一起进行学科交叉渗透研究。本文为了坚持实际观察和理论分析的客观性与全面性,运用了多种研究方法与手段。其中,除常用的研究方法之外,主要是用到了以下两种研究方法：一是定性分析和定量分析相结合。本文在研究政府支出、税收和收入分配对居民消费的作用机理与影响效应时,始终坚持定性分析与定量分析相结合的研究范式。首先,从理论层面解析政府支出、税收和收入分配对居民消费的作用机理；其次,通过建立相应的数理模型与运用最新的计量检验方法就其对居民消费的影响效应进行检验；最后,基于理论分析和实证检验的结果是一致抑或背离进行深入剖析以及提出针对性建议。二是注重比较分析法的应用。一方面,通过对我国居民消费变动趋势进行多维比较,从而深刻揭示我国居民消费需求不足的深层次原因。另一方面,论文在研究政府支出、税收和收入分配对居民消费的作用机理、影响效应以及政策设计时,始终立足于我国城乡二元社会的特殊国情,对城乡居民消费的比较贯穿全文,并就形成这种差异的原因进行深层次的挖掘,从而为财税体制城乡一体化和实现城乡和谐提供决策依据和政策参考。
本文除第一章导论之外,全文结构由七个部分构成。第一部分是财政政策促进居民消费需求的理论分析。该部分一方面理论阐述居民消费对经济增长的重要性；另一方面,分析居民消费外部性的内涵、形式和作用机理入手,从而认为政府利用财政政策促进居民消费需求不仅有利于实现经济又好又快发展,还可以解决居民消费领域中的市场失灵问题。随后本文不仅从理论层面诠释了政府投资性支出、消费性支出、转移性支出和税收与居民消费的关系；而且还利用修正的IS-LM模型,探讨了凯恩斯主义财政政策对居民消费需求的传导机制。
虽然在IS-LM模型分析中,财政政策对居民消费表现为凯恩斯效应,然而这一结论是建立在许多严格的假定条件基础之上,例如价格在财政调整过程保持不变,因而现实中一旦这些条件无法满足或部分满足,财政政策就有可能对居民消费产生非凯恩斯效应,即财政政策对居民消费存在非线性效应。本文第二部分首先从预期效应、财富效应和替代效应三个方面理论阐释了财政政策对居民消费产生非凯恩斯效应的作用机制,然后利用三种财政时期定义创造性的划分了除西藏之外30个省份在1978-2008年期间财政政策非线性效应的潜在时期,通过建立动态面板数据模型和采用GMM估计方法实际考察财政收入和支出政策对全国居民消费、城镇居民消费和农村居民消费的影响效应,发现我国财政政策在过去对居民消费产生了显著的非凯恩斯效应,这一结论将为我国财政政策的评价和实际操作提供全新的评价标准与实际依据。
虽然论文的第一和二部分从理论和实证两个层面考察了财政政策的作用机制和影响效应,但并没有深入探究各种支出、不同税种和收入分配对居民消费的机理与影响。因此,本文通过第三部分对我国居民消费现状、变动趋势和原因的考察,然后在第四、第五和第六部分依次考察政府支出、税收和收入分配对居民消费的作用机理和影响效应。本文之所以将收入分配纳入全文的写作范畴,是因为一方面收入分配能对居民消费产生重要的影响,同时收入分配职能又是现代公共财政的基本职能之一,因此,政府除了运用收入或支出政策直接作用于居民消费之外,还可以通过作用于收入分配进而间接影响居民消费。最后在本文的第七个部分,针对财政政策扩大居民消费提出相关政策建议。
本文的创新之处在于：一是理论分析了财政政策对居民消费非线性效应的产生机制,并在利用三种财政时期定义创造性的划分中国1978-2008年财政政策非线性效应的潜在时期基础上,通过建立动态面板数据模型以及采用GMM估计方法实证考察了财政政策对全国居民消费、城镇居民消费和农村居民消费的影响效应,估计结果发现财政收入政策和支出政策在不同程度上都对居民消费存在显著的非凯恩斯效应。二是利用税收经济效应原理全面解析了所得税、商品税和财产税对居民消费的作用机理,发现不同税种对居民消费的影响机制存在较大差异,并且税收并不总是抑制居民消费的增加。例如,开征财产税或存款利息所得税,此时由于替代效应的存在反而会促进居民消费的增加。三是从总量和结构两个层面系统分析了初次收入分配对居民消费的作用机理,并通过panel data形式的协整与误差修正模型,实证考察了初次分配影响下居民消费的长期均衡与短期波动,结果发现：一是长期中工资收入的长期消费弹性和平均边际消费倾向均高于利润收入,国内需求属于工资领导型；二是工资收入和利润收入的短期消费弹性都非常小,提高劳动者报酬占比在短期刺激居民消费的效果并不明显。
本文的不足之处主要有三点：一是虽然分析了财政政策对居民消费非线性效应的产生机制,但未实际考察我国财政政策非凯恩斯效应的产生究竟是因预期效应、财富效应抑或替代效应。另外,就财政政策对居民消费的影响在凯恩斯效应与非凯恩斯效应之间转换的边界条件及其转换拐点的识别都未做具体分析,因而本文对财政政策非线性效应的初步研究仅能为政府制定财政政策提供一种新的思路,缺乏较强的实际操作意义,这些也是本文后续研究的重点。二是虽然理论阐释了税收对居民消费的作用机理,但因数据缺失,无法针对性的考察所得税、商品税和财产税对居民消费的影响效应,因而未能很好地为政府制定税收政策提供有力的实际依据,从而未能为改变“税收与居民消费总是为负相关关系”的传统观点和思维定式提供支撑。三是虽然本文认为存在扩大居民消费的最优居民收入差距,并认为城乡居民的收入水平因各地经济发展程度的差异而各自存在最优的城乡居民收入差距,然后通过区分东部、中部和西部三大地区实证估计了现实收入差距对最优收入差距的偏离情况,由此而提出再分配政策的作用方向与重点。然而相对遗憾的是,本文并没有实际给出三大地区城乡居民最优收入差距的估计值,仅是从理论上认为最优收入差距是客观存在的,且随着经济发展而动态变化。
For current macro-economy in China after the economic crisis, a lot of problems will be urgently solved. On the one hand, expanding domestic demand is more urgent than before because of sharp drop in foreign demand. The domestic excess capacity is accumulated as economic growth has long been over-reliance on high investment, which is resolved by residents'consumption demand in post-crisis era. Expansion of residents'consumption demand, especially the release of the enormous potential of the rural residents'consumption, is the strong backing of transformation of economic growth pattern and steady growth. On the other hand, domestic inflation pressure is sharply increasing. Facing the complexity of insufficient aggregate demand, overcapacity and the rapidly increasing price intertwining, Government needs what kind of fiscal policy. He should use inverse-cyclical or shun-cyclical fiscal policy, and whether the new active fiscal policy should exit or continue. These problem need to be extra careful.
The insufficiency of residents' consumption in our country has tremendously complex reasons, which has a close relationship with "absence" or "offside" of government functions in the field of residents' consumption. At present, for theoretically using the fiscal policy to expand residents' consumption, there is the argument of Keynesian and neoclassical. According to neoclassical theory, that the government increases expenditures or reduces taxation does not necessarily increase residents' consumption like the Keynesian expectation. That is to say, there is the existence of battle about crowding-in or crowding-out effect of fiscal policy on residents' consumption. On the basis of the experience of the western developed countries, the implement of expansionary stimulus policy according to the traditional Keynesian is not always effective, which could sometimes produce deflationary effect on residents' consumption, and may cause unsustainable debt scale and large budget deficits. However, because of the long-term lack of theoretical analysis about the mechanism of fiscal policy on residents' consumption and the lack of overall evaluation of the effects about fiscal policy on residents' consumption in our country, thus the theory and practice always habitually think that we should execute expansionary policy according to the Keynesian, that is to say, we should increases expenditures or reduces taxation, or concurrently carry out.
When the sub-prime crisis led the demand of foreign countries to take sharp drop, this paper has studied fiscal policy to expand residents' consumption from the principle and the actual effect of fiscal policies which is even more significant. The study has certain forward-looking and research value at the theoretical level. First, the paper provided a theoretical basis and decision-making ideas for the government according to operation situation of the economy. Secondly, the article rich the theoretical system of government's macro-regulation, and widen the government theoretical horizons. Thirdly, the essay is to perfect the fiscal theory and promote Fiscal discipline to develop. In addition, this paper has the important meaning to guide our fiscal policy practice. The study can not only be used in comprehensive evaluation and re-think of fiscal policy practice in China, but also provide practical basis for the future fiscal decision of government in post-crisis era. Then, the study can effectively solve the problem of our domestic demand shortage, and ensure fiscal policy robustness.
During writing papers, this paper used economics as the main line, and conducted the inter-disciplinarity research by fusing public finance and consumption economics, sociology, psychology and so on in together. In order to adhere to objectivity of the actual observation and comprehensiveness of theory analysis, I have used a variety of research methods and means. Except the common research method, there are mainly the two methods to be used. The first is the combining with qualitative analysis and quantitative analysis. When the paper study the mechanism and effect of government spending, tax and income distribution on residents' consumption, I always adhered to the research paradigm combining with qualitative analysis and quantitative analysis. Firstly, the paper analyzed the mechanism of government expenditures, tax and income distribution on residents' consumption from the theoretical level. Secondly, the article established the corresponding mathematical model and used the latest test method to measure the effects about residents' consumption. Finally, according to whether empirical test results are consistent with or deviation from the theoretical analysis, the paper put forward countermeasures. The second is paying attention to the application of comparative analysis. On the other hand, when the paper studied the mechanism, the effects and policy design of government spending, taxation and income distribution on residents' consumption based on the special background of the dual social of urban-rural community, the comparison of urban and rural residents'consumption is throughout the text, then the article analyzed the reason for this discrepancy, and provided the basement for making decision and policy consideration so as to fiscal and taxation systems integration and harmonious between urban and rural areas.
Besides the first chapter introduction, full-text structure is consisted of seven parts. The first part is "theoretical analysis of fiscal policy to promote residents' consumption". Firstly, on the one hand, this part theoreticaly explained the importance of residents' consumption to economic growth. On the other hand, this part theoreticaly analyzed the the connotation, form and mechanism of the residents'consumption of externalities. Then, the paper thought that government using fiscal policy to promote residents' consumption demand was not only beneficial to ensure sound and rapid economic development, but also could solve the problems of market failure in the field of residents' consumption. And therefore, on the one hand, this paper theoretically interpreted the relations between government investment expenditures, government spending, transfer expenditures, taxes and residents' consumption. On the other hand, the article used modified IS-LM model to discuss the transmission mechanism fiscal policy on residents' consumption demand.
Although in IS-LM model analysis, the effects of fiscal policy on residents' consumption showed Keynes effect. However, this conclusion is based on many strict assumptions basis. For instance, price always remained unchanged in fiscal adjustment process. If these conditions cannot be met in reality, fiscal policy would be likely to produce no-Keynesian effect on residents' consumption. The paper analyzed the causes of the nonlinear effects of fiscal policy from the expected effect, wealth effect and substitution effect. This article used three kind definition of fiscal period to creatively differentiate the potential period of non-linear effect of fiscal policies in 30 provinces except Tibet during 1978-2008, then established the dynamic panel data model to test the effects of China's fiscal policy on residents'consumption by GMM estimates method. My researching has shown that fiscal policy produced significant non-Keynesian effects. The conclusion will provide a new evaluation criteria and the actual basis about the practice of fiscal policy.
Although the paper's first and second part inspected the mechanism and effects of fiscal policy on residents'consumption from theoretical and empirical aspects, but they did not further explore the mechanism and effects of various expenditure, different categories of tax, income distribution on residents' consumption. Therefore, on the base of investigating the status, change trend and the causes of residents'consumption in the third part of the article, the paper examined the mechanism and the influence of government expenditures, tax and income distribution on residents' consumption in the fourth, fifth and sixth part in turn. This paper writing included income distribution, because income distribution had not only important influence on residents' consumption, but also income distribution function is one of basic function of modern public finance. Therefore, the government does not use income or spending policy to directly influence on residents' consumption, but also can indirectly affects residents'consumption through the role of fiscal policy on income distribution. Finally, in the seventh part of the paper, the article put forward relevant policy suggestions about fiscal policy to expand residents' consumption.
The innovation of this paper lies in three aspects. First, the paper analyzed generation mechanism of the nonlinear effects of fiscal policy, then using three kind definition of fiscal period to creatively differentiate the potential period of non-linear effect of China's fiscal policies during 1978-2008, the article established the dynamic panel data model to test the effects of fiscal policy on nationwide, urban and rural residents'consumption by GMM estimates method. My researching has shown that fiscal revenue policies and spending policy produced significant non-Keynesian effects in different degrees. Secondly, the paper used tax economic effect principle to comprehensively analyze the mechanism of income tax, property tax and commodity tax on residents' consumption, and found that the mechanism of different tax categories had large differences, and tax did not always reduce residents' consumption. For example, imposing the property tax or deposit interest income tax will promote the consumption of the residents to increase due to the existence of substitution effect instead. Thirdly, the paper analyzed the mechanism of the first income distribution on residents' consumption from aggregate and structural levels, and empirically tested long-term equilibrium and short-term fluctuations of residents' consumption under the influence of the first income distribution through the co-integration and error correction model of panel data. My researching showed:the one is the long-term consumption elasticity of wage income and average marginal consumption propensity are higher than the profit income; the one is that short-term consumption elasticity of wage income and profit are very small, and the influence of improving the proportion of wage income on residents'consumption is not obvious in short-term.
The deficiency of this paper mainly has three points. First, although the paper analyzed generating mechanism of nonlinear effect about fiscal policy on residents' consumption, but the article did not actually review whether no-Keynes effect of fiscal policy took place because of expectation effect, wealth effect or substitution effect. In addition, transformation boundary conditions and switch inflexion point identification between Keynesian effects with no-Keynesian effects about the influence of fiscal policy on residents' consumption had been not analyzed. Preliminary study of no-linear effect of fiscal policy in this paper only offered a new idea for the government formulating fiscal policy, and lacked stronger practical significance. These problems are also the future key research of this paper. Secondly, although the paper theoretically explained the mechanism of taxes on residents' consumption, but because the data is missing, the article failed to targeted investigation of effects about income tax, property tax and commodity tax on residents'consumption. The study can not provide a powerful actual basis for the government to formulate tax policy, and did not change traditional view and thinking formulary about "the relationship between tax and private consumption is always negative correlation". Thirdly, although this paper thought the optimal income gap of resident'income about expanding residents'consumption existed, and that the income level of urban and rural residents changed according to the local economic development degree, and exist each optimal income gap. Then, through distinguish the eastern, central and western areas, the paper empirically tested deviation from real income disparity to the optimal income gap, and proposed redistribution policy direction and key. However, it is relatively unfortunate that this paper did not give the estimated value of optimal income gap between urban resident and rural resident in the eastern, central and western areas. The article only thought the optimal income gap objectively existed, and dynamicly changed with the economic development.
我国居民消费“启而不动”有着极其复杂的原因,其中在很大程度上与居民消费领域中政府职能的“缺位”或“越位”有着密切关系。目前理论界针对财政政策扩大居民消费的作用机理和影响效应,存在凯恩斯主义与新古典主义两种不同流派的争论。依据新古典理论,政府增支或减税并不一定如凯恩斯主义预期增加居民消费,即财政政策对居民消费存在挤出抑或挤入效应之争。根据西方发达国家的经验发现,按照传统凯恩斯主义一味实施扩张性刺激政策并不总是有效,有时甚至会对居民消费产生紧缩效应,同时还可能造成不可持续的债务规模和巨额的财政赤字。然而在我国,由于长期缺乏从理论层面系统分析财政政策对居民消费的作用机制,同时就财政政策扩大居民消费的政策实际效果也未进行针对性的全面评价,从而理论界和实务界在扩大居民消费问题上,总是习惯性地认为应按照凯恩斯主义实行扩张性刺激政策,即增支或减税,或两者兼而进行。
本文在次贷危机致使我国外需锐减之际,从机制原理和政策实际效果两方面研究扩大居民消费需求的财政政策更显意义非凡。首先在理论层面上,本文的研究具有一定的前瞻性和研究价值：一是可以为政府根据经济运行态势实施针对性的财政调控政策提供理论依据和决策思路；二是丰富政府宏观调控理论体系,拓宽政府理论视野；三是完善财政理论与推动财税学科发展。另外在实践层面上,本文的研究对于指导我国财政政策实践具有重要意义,不仅可以用于全面评价与重新反思中国财政政策的以往实践,而且还可以为后经济危机时代政府的未来财政决策提供实际依据,进而有效解决我国内需不足问题,确保财政政策的稳健性。
本文在论文写作过程之中,以经济学为主线,将财政学与消费经济学、社会学、管理学、心理学等不同学科融合在一起进行学科交叉渗透研究。本文为了坚持实际观察和理论分析的客观性与全面性,运用了多种研究方法与手段。其中,除常用的研究方法之外,主要是用到了以下两种研究方法：一是定性分析和定量分析相结合。本文在研究政府支出、税收和收入分配对居民消费的作用机理与影响效应时,始终坚持定性分析与定量分析相结合的研究范式。首先,从理论层面解析政府支出、税收和收入分配对居民消费的作用机理；其次,通过建立相应的数理模型与运用最新的计量检验方法就其对居民消费的影响效应进行检验；最后,基于理论分析和实证检验的结果是一致抑或背离进行深入剖析以及提出针对性建议。二是注重比较分析法的应用。一方面,通过对我国居民消费变动趋势进行多维比较,从而深刻揭示我国居民消费需求不足的深层次原因。另一方面,论文在研究政府支出、税收和收入分配对居民消费的作用机理、影响效应以及政策设计时,始终立足于我国城乡二元社会的特殊国情,对城乡居民消费的比较贯穿全文,并就形成这种差异的原因进行深层次的挖掘,从而为财税体制城乡一体化和实现城乡和谐提供决策依据和政策参考。
本文除第一章导论之外,全文结构由七个部分构成。第一部分是财政政策促进居民消费需求的理论分析。该部分一方面理论阐述居民消费对经济增长的重要性；另一方面,分析居民消费外部性的内涵、形式和作用机理入手,从而认为政府利用财政政策促进居民消费需求不仅有利于实现经济又好又快发展,还可以解决居民消费领域中的市场失灵问题。随后本文不仅从理论层面诠释了政府投资性支出、消费性支出、转移性支出和税收与居民消费的关系；而且还利用修正的IS-LM模型,探讨了凯恩斯主义财政政策对居民消费需求的传导机制。
虽然在IS-LM模型分析中,财政政策对居民消费表现为凯恩斯效应,然而这一结论是建立在许多严格的假定条件基础之上,例如价格在财政调整过程保持不变,因而现实中一旦这些条件无法满足或部分满足,财政政策就有可能对居民消费产生非凯恩斯效应,即财政政策对居民消费存在非线性效应。本文第二部分首先从预期效应、财富效应和替代效应三个方面理论阐释了财政政策对居民消费产生非凯恩斯效应的作用机制,然后利用三种财政时期定义创造性的划分了除西藏之外30个省份在1978-2008年期间财政政策非线性效应的潜在时期,通过建立动态面板数据模型和采用GMM估计方法实际考察财政收入和支出政策对全国居民消费、城镇居民消费和农村居民消费的影响效应,发现我国财政政策在过去对居民消费产生了显著的非凯恩斯效应,这一结论将为我国财政政策的评价和实际操作提供全新的评价标准与实际依据。
虽然论文的第一和二部分从理论和实证两个层面考察了财政政策的作用机制和影响效应,但并没有深入探究各种支出、不同税种和收入分配对居民消费的机理与影响。因此,本文通过第三部分对我国居民消费现状、变动趋势和原因的考察,然后在第四、第五和第六部分依次考察政府支出、税收和收入分配对居民消费的作用机理和影响效应。本文之所以将收入分配纳入全文的写作范畴,是因为一方面收入分配能对居民消费产生重要的影响,同时收入分配职能又是现代公共财政的基本职能之一,因此,政府除了运用收入或支出政策直接作用于居民消费之外,还可以通过作用于收入分配进而间接影响居民消费。最后在本文的第七个部分,针对财政政策扩大居民消费提出相关政策建议。
本文的创新之处在于：一是理论分析了财政政策对居民消费非线性效应的产生机制,并在利用三种财政时期定义创造性的划分中国1978-2008年财政政策非线性效应的潜在时期基础上,通过建立动态面板数据模型以及采用GMM估计方法实证考察了财政政策对全国居民消费、城镇居民消费和农村居民消费的影响效应,估计结果发现财政收入政策和支出政策在不同程度上都对居民消费存在显著的非凯恩斯效应。二是利用税收经济效应原理全面解析了所得税、商品税和财产税对居民消费的作用机理,发现不同税种对居民消费的影响机制存在较大差异,并且税收并不总是抑制居民消费的增加。例如,开征财产税或存款利息所得税,此时由于替代效应的存在反而会促进居民消费的增加。三是从总量和结构两个层面系统分析了初次收入分配对居民消费的作用机理,并通过panel data形式的协整与误差修正模型,实证考察了初次分配影响下居民消费的长期均衡与短期波动,结果发现：一是长期中工资收入的长期消费弹性和平均边际消费倾向均高于利润收入,国内需求属于工资领导型；二是工资收入和利润收入的短期消费弹性都非常小,提高劳动者报酬占比在短期刺激居民消费的效果并不明显。
本文的不足之处主要有三点：一是虽然分析了财政政策对居民消费非线性效应的产生机制,但未实际考察我国财政政策非凯恩斯效应的产生究竟是因预期效应、财富效应抑或替代效应。另外,就财政政策对居民消费的影响在凯恩斯效应与非凯恩斯效应之间转换的边界条件及其转换拐点的识别都未做具体分析,因而本文对财政政策非线性效应的初步研究仅能为政府制定财政政策提供一种新的思路,缺乏较强的实际操作意义,这些也是本文后续研究的重点。二是虽然理论阐释了税收对居民消费的作用机理,但因数据缺失,无法针对性的考察所得税、商品税和财产税对居民消费的影响效应,因而未能很好地为政府制定税收政策提供有力的实际依据,从而未能为改变“税收与居民消费总是为负相关关系”的传统观点和思维定式提供支撑。三是虽然本文认为存在扩大居民消费的最优居民收入差距,并认为城乡居民的收入水平因各地经济发展程度的差异而各自存在最优的城乡居民收入差距,然后通过区分东部、中部和西部三大地区实证估计了现实收入差距对最优收入差距的偏离情况,由此而提出再分配政策的作用方向与重点。然而相对遗憾的是,本文并没有实际给出三大地区城乡居民最优收入差距的估计值,仅是从理论上认为最优收入差距是客观存在的,且随着经济发展而动态变化。
For current macro-economy in China after the economic crisis, a lot of problems will be urgently solved. On the one hand, expanding domestic demand is more urgent than before because of sharp drop in foreign demand. The domestic excess capacity is accumulated as economic growth has long been over-reliance on high investment, which is resolved by residents'consumption demand in post-crisis era. Expansion of residents'consumption demand, especially the release of the enormous potential of the rural residents'consumption, is the strong backing of transformation of economic growth pattern and steady growth. On the other hand, domestic inflation pressure is sharply increasing. Facing the complexity of insufficient aggregate demand, overcapacity and the rapidly increasing price intertwining, Government needs what kind of fiscal policy. He should use inverse-cyclical or shun-cyclical fiscal policy, and whether the new active fiscal policy should exit or continue. These problem need to be extra careful.
The insufficiency of residents' consumption in our country has tremendously complex reasons, which has a close relationship with "absence" or "offside" of government functions in the field of residents' consumption. At present, for theoretically using the fiscal policy to expand residents' consumption, there is the argument of Keynesian and neoclassical. According to neoclassical theory, that the government increases expenditures or reduces taxation does not necessarily increase residents' consumption like the Keynesian expectation. That is to say, there is the existence of battle about crowding-in or crowding-out effect of fiscal policy on residents' consumption. On the basis of the experience of the western developed countries, the implement of expansionary stimulus policy according to the traditional Keynesian is not always effective, which could sometimes produce deflationary effect on residents' consumption, and may cause unsustainable debt scale and large budget deficits. However, because of the long-term lack of theoretical analysis about the mechanism of fiscal policy on residents' consumption and the lack of overall evaluation of the effects about fiscal policy on residents' consumption in our country, thus the theory and practice always habitually think that we should execute expansionary policy according to the Keynesian, that is to say, we should increases expenditures or reduces taxation, or concurrently carry out.
When the sub-prime crisis led the demand of foreign countries to take sharp drop, this paper has studied fiscal policy to expand residents' consumption from the principle and the actual effect of fiscal policies which is even more significant. The study has certain forward-looking and research value at the theoretical level. First, the paper provided a theoretical basis and decision-making ideas for the government according to operation situation of the economy. Secondly, the article rich the theoretical system of government's macro-regulation, and widen the government theoretical horizons. Thirdly, the essay is to perfect the fiscal theory and promote Fiscal discipline to develop. In addition, this paper has the important meaning to guide our fiscal policy practice. The study can not only be used in comprehensive evaluation and re-think of fiscal policy practice in China, but also provide practical basis for the future fiscal decision of government in post-crisis era. Then, the study can effectively solve the problem of our domestic demand shortage, and ensure fiscal policy robustness.
During writing papers, this paper used economics as the main line, and conducted the inter-disciplinarity research by fusing public finance and consumption economics, sociology, psychology and so on in together. In order to adhere to objectivity of the actual observation and comprehensiveness of theory analysis, I have used a variety of research methods and means. Except the common research method, there are mainly the two methods to be used. The first is the combining with qualitative analysis and quantitative analysis. When the paper study the mechanism and effect of government spending, tax and income distribution on residents' consumption, I always adhered to the research paradigm combining with qualitative analysis and quantitative analysis. Firstly, the paper analyzed the mechanism of government expenditures, tax and income distribution on residents' consumption from the theoretical level. Secondly, the article established the corresponding mathematical model and used the latest test method to measure the effects about residents' consumption. Finally, according to whether empirical test results are consistent with or deviation from the theoretical analysis, the paper put forward countermeasures. The second is paying attention to the application of comparative analysis. On the other hand, when the paper studied the mechanism, the effects and policy design of government spending, taxation and income distribution on residents' consumption based on the special background of the dual social of urban-rural community, the comparison of urban and rural residents'consumption is throughout the text, then the article analyzed the reason for this discrepancy, and provided the basement for making decision and policy consideration so as to fiscal and taxation systems integration and harmonious between urban and rural areas.
Besides the first chapter introduction, full-text structure is consisted of seven parts. The first part is "theoretical analysis of fiscal policy to promote residents' consumption". Firstly, on the one hand, this part theoreticaly explained the importance of residents' consumption to economic growth. On the other hand, this part theoreticaly analyzed the the connotation, form and mechanism of the residents'consumption of externalities. Then, the paper thought that government using fiscal policy to promote residents' consumption demand was not only beneficial to ensure sound and rapid economic development, but also could solve the problems of market failure in the field of residents' consumption. And therefore, on the one hand, this paper theoretically interpreted the relations between government investment expenditures, government spending, transfer expenditures, taxes and residents' consumption. On the other hand, the article used modified IS-LM model to discuss the transmission mechanism fiscal policy on residents' consumption demand.
Although in IS-LM model analysis, the effects of fiscal policy on residents' consumption showed Keynes effect. However, this conclusion is based on many strict assumptions basis. For instance, price always remained unchanged in fiscal adjustment process. If these conditions cannot be met in reality, fiscal policy would be likely to produce no-Keynesian effect on residents' consumption. The paper analyzed the causes of the nonlinear effects of fiscal policy from the expected effect, wealth effect and substitution effect. This article used three kind definition of fiscal period to creatively differentiate the potential period of non-linear effect of fiscal policies in 30 provinces except Tibet during 1978-2008, then established the dynamic panel data model to test the effects of China's fiscal policy on residents'consumption by GMM estimates method. My researching has shown that fiscal policy produced significant non-Keynesian effects. The conclusion will provide a new evaluation criteria and the actual basis about the practice of fiscal policy.
Although the paper's first and second part inspected the mechanism and effects of fiscal policy on residents'consumption from theoretical and empirical aspects, but they did not further explore the mechanism and effects of various expenditure, different categories of tax, income distribution on residents' consumption. Therefore, on the base of investigating the status, change trend and the causes of residents'consumption in the third part of the article, the paper examined the mechanism and the influence of government expenditures, tax and income distribution on residents' consumption in the fourth, fifth and sixth part in turn. This paper writing included income distribution, because income distribution had not only important influence on residents' consumption, but also income distribution function is one of basic function of modern public finance. Therefore, the government does not use income or spending policy to directly influence on residents' consumption, but also can indirectly affects residents'consumption through the role of fiscal policy on income distribution. Finally, in the seventh part of the paper, the article put forward relevant policy suggestions about fiscal policy to expand residents' consumption.
The innovation of this paper lies in three aspects. First, the paper analyzed generation mechanism of the nonlinear effects of fiscal policy, then using three kind definition of fiscal period to creatively differentiate the potential period of non-linear effect of China's fiscal policies during 1978-2008, the article established the dynamic panel data model to test the effects of fiscal policy on nationwide, urban and rural residents'consumption by GMM estimates method. My researching has shown that fiscal revenue policies and spending policy produced significant non-Keynesian effects in different degrees. Secondly, the paper used tax economic effect principle to comprehensively analyze the mechanism of income tax, property tax and commodity tax on residents' consumption, and found that the mechanism of different tax categories had large differences, and tax did not always reduce residents' consumption. For example, imposing the property tax or deposit interest income tax will promote the consumption of the residents to increase due to the existence of substitution effect instead. Thirdly, the paper analyzed the mechanism of the first income distribution on residents' consumption from aggregate and structural levels, and empirically tested long-term equilibrium and short-term fluctuations of residents' consumption under the influence of the first income distribution through the co-integration and error correction model of panel data. My researching showed:the one is the long-term consumption elasticity of wage income and average marginal consumption propensity are higher than the profit income; the one is that short-term consumption elasticity of wage income and profit are very small, and the influence of improving the proportion of wage income on residents'consumption is not obvious in short-term.
The deficiency of this paper mainly has three points. First, although the paper analyzed generating mechanism of nonlinear effect about fiscal policy on residents' consumption, but the article did not actually review whether no-Keynes effect of fiscal policy took place because of expectation effect, wealth effect or substitution effect. In addition, transformation boundary conditions and switch inflexion point identification between Keynesian effects with no-Keynesian effects about the influence of fiscal policy on residents' consumption had been not analyzed. Preliminary study of no-linear effect of fiscal policy in this paper only offered a new idea for the government formulating fiscal policy, and lacked stronger practical significance. These problems are also the future key research of this paper. Secondly, although the paper theoretically explained the mechanism of taxes on residents' consumption, but because the data is missing, the article failed to targeted investigation of effects about income tax, property tax and commodity tax on residents'consumption. The study can not provide a powerful actual basis for the government to formulate tax policy, and did not change traditional view and thinking formulary about "the relationship between tax and private consumption is always negative correlation". Thirdly, although this paper thought the optimal income gap of resident'income about expanding residents'consumption existed, and that the income level of urban and rural residents changed according to the local economic development degree, and exist each optimal income gap. Then, through distinguish the eastern, central and western areas, the paper empirically tested deviation from real income disparity to the optimal income gap, and proposed redistribution policy direction and key. However, it is relatively unfortunate that this paper did not give the estimated value of optimal income gap between urban resident and rural resident in the eastern, central and western areas. The article only thought the optimal income gap objectively existed, and dynamicly changed with the economic development.
引文
①iavazzi,F. and Pagano,M,1990. "Can Severe Fiscal Contractions be Expansionary?," MA, MIT Press, p95-122.
②iavazzi,F. and Pagano,M.,1996. "Non-Keynesian Effects of Fiscal Policy Changes:International Evidence and the Swedish Experience." Swedish Economic Policy Review,3(1):67-112.
③Alesina,A. and S. Ardagna.,1998. "Tale of Fiscal Contractions." Economic Policy,27(1):487-545.
④Gobbin,N. and van Aarle,B.,2001. "Fiscal Adjustments and Their Effects during the Transition to the EMU." Public Choice,109(1):269-299.
⑤Kristian jonsson,2007. "Fiscal Policy Regimes and Household Consumption." Journal of Public Policy, 27(3):183-214.
⑥McDermott, C. and R.Wescott,1996 "An Empirical Analysis of Fiscal Adjustments," IMF Staff Papers,vol.43, no(4):725-753.
⑦Hemming, R,S.Mahfouz and Schimmelpfenning,2002. "Fiscal policy and Economic Activity during Recessions in Advanced Economics." IMF Working Paper,87(2):373-386.
①ristian jonsson,2007. "Fiscal Policy Regimes and Household Consumption." Journal of Public Policy, 27(3):183-214.
②郭庆旺、贾俊雪.稳健财政政策的非凯恩斯效应及其可持续性[J].中国社会科学,2006(5)。
③王立勇、刘文革.财政政策非线性效应及其解释[J].经济研究,2009(7)。
④方红生、张军.中国财政政策非线性稳定效应[J].管理世界,2010(2)。
⑤储德银、黄文正.财政政策的非凯恩斯效应[J].经济学动态,2010(10)。
⑥Alesina A., Perotti R,1996."Fiscal Adjustments in OECD Countries:Composition and Macroeconomic Effects", NBER Working Paper, No.5730.
①谢建国、陈漓高.政府支出与居民消费[J].当代经济科学,2002(6)。
②石柱鲜等.我国政府支出对居民消费的挤出效应分析[J].学习与探索,2005(6)。
①黄赜琳.中国经济周期特征与财政政策效应[J].经济研究,2005(6)。
②王宏利.中国政府支出调控对居民消费的影响[J].世界经济,2006(10)。
③温娇秀.政府支出与居民消费：基于非线性有效消费函数的经验分析[J].山西财经大学学报,2007(2)。
④楚尔鸣、鲁旭.基于面板协整的地方政府支出与居民消费关系的实证检验[J].经济理论与经济管理,2008(6)。
⑤贺京同、那艺.调整政府支出结构提升居民消费意愿：一个财政政策视角的分析[J].南开学报(哲学社会科学版),2009(3)。
⑥李春琦、唐哲一.财政支出结构变动对私人消费影响的动态分析[J].财经研究,2010(6)。
①刘溶沧、马拴友.赤字、国债与经济增长关系的实证分析：兼评积极财政政策是否有挤出效应[J].经济研究,2001(2)。
②财政部办公厅课题组.财政支出与居民消费关系计量检验[J].经济研究参考,2001(17)。
①胡书东.中国财政支出和民间消费需求之间的关系[J].中国社会科学,2002(6)。
②陈翔.我国财政支出和居民消费需求的实证研究[J].福建论坛,2003(4)。
③李广众.政府支出与居民消费：替代还是互补[J].世界经济,2005(5)。
④李永友、丛树海.居民消费与中国财政政策的有效性：基于居民最优消费决策行为的经验分析[J].
世界经济,2006(5)。
⑤刘宛晨、袁闯.我国财政支出的消费传导效应分析[J].消费经济,2006(4)。
⑥张治觉、吴定玉.我国政府支出对居民消费产生引致还是挤出效应[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2007(5)。
①官永彬、张应良.转轨时期政府支出与居民消费关系的实证研究[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2008(12)。
②储德银、闫伟.地方政府支出与农村居民消费需求：基于1998-2007年省级面板数据的经验分析[J].统计研究，2009(8)。
③储德银、闫伟.财政支出的民生化进程与城乡居民消费：基于1995-2007年省级面板数据的经验分析[J].山西财经大学学报,2010(1)。
①张伦俊、刘新利.税收对居民消费的影响[J].税务研究,1999(10)。
②郭平、洪源.税收政策刺激我国消费需求有效增长的作用机理及对策研究[J].湖湘论坛，2009(6)。
①樊纲.扩大消费是要改变收入分配结构[N].商界(评论),2009-2-15。
①黎建新.消费的外部性分析[J].消费经济,2001(5)。
②俞海山、周亚越.消费外部性：一项探索性的系统研究[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2005年版。
①王军.中国转型期公共财政[M].北京：人民出版社,2006年版。
②储德银、经庭如.促进消费需求的公共财政政策探讨[J].消费经济,2007(1)。
①郭平、洪源.税收政策刺激我国消费需求有效增长的作用机理及对策研究[J].湖湘论坛,2009(6)。
①闫坤、程瑜.新形势下促进居民消费的财政政策研究[J].宏观经济研究,2009(5)。
①王立勇.我国财政政策效应的理论研究与实证检验[Dl.博士学位论文,吉林大学,2007年,P1-2。
②李永友.财政政策的凯恩斯效应与非凯恩斯效应[J].上海财经大学学报,2008(2)。
①祁京梅.我国消费需求趋势研究及实证分析探索[M].北京：中国经济出版社,2008年版,P7。
①祁京梅.我国消费需求趋势研究及实证分析探索[M].北京：中国经济出版社,2008年版,P8。
①李建伟.投资率和消费率演变特征的国际比较[J].中国金融,2007(8)。
①许永兵.消费行为与经济增长[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,2007年版,P166。
①祁京梅.我国消费需求趋势研究及实证分析探索[Ml.北京：中国经济出版社,2008年版，P77。
②范剑平.中国城乡居民消费结构的变化趋势[M].北京：人民出版社,2001年版,P354。
①江春泽.社会保障制度体系改革[M].北京：经济科学出版社,1999年版,P191。
①祁京梅.我国消费需求趋势研究及实证分析探索[M].北京：中国经济出版社,2008年版,P73。
①斯蒂格利茨(著)、姚开建(译).经济学[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,1997年版,P89-92。
①吴栋、周鹏.城乡二元结构下财政支出对居民消费率影响研究[J].当代经济研究,2010(6)。
②储德银、闫伟.地方政府支出与农村居民消费需求：基于1998-2007年省级面板数据的经验分析[J].统计研究,2009(8)。
①童光辉、姜明耀.我国税收制度是否有利于消费[N].中国财经报,2009-12-22。
②数据来源：由《中国财政年鉴-2009》整理得到。其中,2008年全国税收收入为54233.79亿元。
③李心源.有利于启动内需的税收制度[M].税务研究,2010(6)。
①李心源.有利于启动内需的税收制度[M].税务研究,2010(6)。
①许生.加快推进有利于扩大内需的税收制度改革[J].税务研究,2010(6)。
②闫坤、程瑜.促进我国收入分配关系调整的财税政策研究[J].税务研究,2010(3)。
③许生.加快推进有利于扩大内需的税收制度改革[J].税务研究,2010(6)。
④高廷民.根治高房价应开征累进个人房产税[J].中国发展观察,2010(7)。
①胡成.我国社会保障和居民消费关系研究[J]宏观经济管理,2010(2)。
②刘剑文.社会保险资金筹集方式的利弊比较[J].税务研究,2007(6)。
①安体富.我国社会保险“费改税”：紧迫性、必要性和可行性[J]山东经济,2007(6)。
②庞凤喜.论社会保险税的征收与深化社会保障制度改革的关系[J].税务研究,2007(6)。
①吴玉霞、周国富.经济增长由投资拉动转向消费拉动的现实选择--基于税收政策效应的实证分析[J].统计与信息论坛,2008(1)。
②张振卿.个人所得税、城镇居民收入与消费关系实证研究[J].税务与经济,2010(2)。
①樊纲.扩大消费是要改变收入分配结构[N].商界(评论),2009-2-15。
①储德银、经庭如.我国城乡居民消费影响因素的比较分析[J].中国软科学,2010(4)。
②杨天宇.中国的收入分配与总消费[J].北京：中国经济出版社,2009年版。
①蔡跃洲.转型社会中财政对收入分配的影响—基于我国不同发展阶段的理论实证[J].财经研究,2008(11)。
①马丁·布朗芬布伦特(方敏等译).收入分配理论[M].北京：华夏出版社,2009年版,pp24。
②黄乾、魏下海.中国劳动收入比重下降的宏观经济效应[J].财贸经济,2010(4).
③陈静怡.国民收入初次分配与消费需求的相关性分析[J].社会科学论坛,2010(12).
①张车伟、张士斌.中国初次收入分配格局的变动与问题[J].中国人口科学,2010(5).
①上海财经大学公共政策研究中心.2009中国财政发展报告[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社,2009年版。
①刘尚希.实现基本消费的平等化是民生问题的要义[J].学习月刊,2007(7)。
①刘尚希.消费公平、起点公平与社会公平[J].税务研究,2010(3)。
①马海涛、向飞丹晴.促进就业的财税政策探讨[J].税务研究,2009(5)。
②陈共.财政学(第六版)[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2006年版,pp156-157。
①上海财经大学公共政策研究中心.2009中国财政发展报告[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社,2009年。
②参见国发(2010)2号文件：《国务院发布关于试行社会保险基金预算的意见》,http://news. xinhuanet.com/fortune/2010-01/06/content12765682.htm。
③金淑彬.居民消费的持续增长,有待于社会保障体系的进一步完善[J].税务与经济,2009(5)。
④赵元笃.中国城镇居民消费状况研究--基于面板数据的实证分析[J].财政研究,2010(8)。
①王军.中国农村社会保障制度建设：成就与展望[J].财政研究,2010(8)。
②苑小丰、范辉.城乡收入差距对消费需求影响研究[J].财经问题研究,2010(6)。
①具体参见：《中华人民共和国农业法》。
①王军.中国农村社会保障制度建设：成就与展望[J].财政研究,010(8)。
①林义、郑军.完善农村社会保障、启动消费需求增长引擎[J].消费经济,2010(1)。
②乌兰、包慧敏.完善社会保障制度扩大农村消费需求[J].中国财政,2010(8)。
③林义、郑军.完善农村社会保障、启动消费需求增长引擎[J].消费经济,2010(1)。
①吴玉霞、侯文英.启动农村居民消费的税收政策选择[J].经济经纬,2009(6)。
②储德银、闫伟.地方政府支出与农村居民消费需求：基于1998-2007年省级面板数据的经验分析[J].统计研究，2009(8)。
①上海财经大学公共政策研究中心.2009中国财政发展报告[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社,2009年。
[1]安体富.我国社会保险“费改税”:紧迫性、必要性和可行性[J]山东经济,2007第6期.
[2]白仲林.面板数据的计量经济分析[M].南开大学出版社,2008年版,P63-73.
[3]蔡跃洲.转型社会中财政对收入分配的影响—基于我国不同发展阶段的理论实证[J].财经研究,2008(11).
[4]储德银、黄文正.财政政策的非凯恩斯效应[J].经济学动态,2010第10期.
[5]储德银、经庭如.促进消费需求的公共财政政策探讨[J].消费经济,2007年第1期.
[6]储德银、经庭如.我国城乡居民消费影响因素的比较分析[J].中国软科学,2010(4).
[7]储德银、闫伟.地方政府支出与农村居民消费需求：基于1998-2007年省级面板数据的经验分析[J].统计研究,2009年第8期.
[8]储德银、闫伟.财政支出的民生化进程与城乡居民消费：基于1995-2007年省级面板数据的经验分析[J].山西财经大学学报,2010年第1期.
[9]陈共.财政学(第六版)[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2008年版,P78-81.
[10]陈静怡.国民收入初次分配与消费需求的相关性分析[J].社会科学论坛,2010年第12期.
[11]楚尔鸣、鲁旭.基于面板协整的地方政府支出与居民消费关系的实证检验[J].经济理论与经济管理,2008年第6期.
[12]陈翔.我国财政支出和居民消费需求的实证研究[J].福建论坛,2003年第3期.
[13]蔡秀玲、邓春宁.福建省城乡居民消费现状及政策导向刍议[J].福建论坛,2010年第6期.
[14]财政部办公厅课题组.财政支出与居民消费关系计量检验[J].经济研究参考，,2001年第17期.
[15]童光辉等.我国税收制度是否有利于消费[N].中国财经报,2009-12-22.
[16]樊纲.扩大消费是要改变收入分配结构[N].商界(评论),2009-2-15。
[17]方红生、张军.国财政政策非线性稳定效应[J].管理世界,2010年第2期.
[18]范剑平.中国城乡居民消费结构的变化趋势[M].北京：人民出版社,2001年版,P354.
[19]郭庆旺、贾俊雪.稳健财政政策的非凯恩斯效应及其可持续性[J].中国社会科学,2006年第5期.
[20]郭平、洪源.税收政策刺激我国消费需求有效增长的作用机理及对策研究[J].湖湘论坛,2009年第6期.
[21]高廷民.根治高房价应开征累进个人房产税[J].中国发展观察,2010年第7期.
[22]高铁梅.计量经济分析方法与建模(第二版)[M].清华大学出版社,2009年版,P319-321。
[23]贺京同、那艺.调整政府支出结构提升居民消费意愿：一个财政政策视角的分析[J].南开学报(哲学社会科学版),2009年第3期.
[24]官永彬、张应良.转轨时期政府支出与居民消费关系的实证研究[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2008年第12期.
[25]胡成.我国社会保障和居民消费关系研究[J]宏观经济管理,2010年第2期.
[26]黄乾、魏下海.中国劳动收入比重下降的宏观经济效应[J].财贸经济,2010年第4期.
[27]胡书东.中国财政支出和民间消费需求之间的关系[J].中国社会科学,2002年第6期.
[28]江春泽.社会保障制度体系改革[M].北京：经济科学出版社,1999年版,P191.
[29]祁京梅.我国消费需求趋势研究及实证分析探索[M].北京：中国经济出版社,2008年版,P7-26.
[30]金淑彬.居民消费的持续增长,有待于社会保障体系的进一步完善[J].税务与经济,2009年第5期.
[31]黄赜琳.中国经济周期特征与财政政策效应[J].经济研究,2005年第6期.
[32]李春琦、唐哲一.财政支出结构变动对私人消费影响的动态分析[J].财经研究,2010年第6期.
[33]李广众.政府支出与居民消费：替代还是互补[J].世界经济,2005年第5期.
[34]黎建新.消费的外部性分析[J].消费经济,2001年第5期.
[35]李建伟.投资率和消费率演变特征的国际比较[J].中国金融,2007年第8期.
[36]刘剑文.社会保险资金筹集方式的利弊比较[J].税务研究,2007年第6期.
[37]李心源.有利于启动内需的税收制度[M].税务研究,2010年第8期.
[38]刘宛晨、袁闯.我国财政支出的消费传导效应分析[J].消费经济,2006年第5期.
[39]刘溶沧、马拴友.赤字、国债与经济增长关系的实证分析：兼评积极财政政策是否有挤出效应[J].经济研究,2001年第2期.
[40]李永友.财政政策凯恩斯效应与非凯恩斯效应[J].上海财经大学学报,2008年第2期.
[41]李永友、丛树海.居民消费与中国财政政策的有效性：基于居民最优消费决策行为的经验分析[J].世界经济,2006年第5期.
[42]刘尚希.实现基本消费的平等化是民生问题的要义[J].学习月刊,2007年第7期.
[43]刘尚希.消费公平、起点公平与社会公平[J].税务研究,2010年第3期.
[44]林义等.完善农村社会保障、启动消费需求增长引擎[J].消费经济,2010年第1期.
[45]马丁·布朗芬布伦特(方敏等译).收入分配理论[M].北京：华夏出版社,2009年版,P24.
[46]马海涛、向飞丹晴.促进就业的财税政策探讨[J].税务研究,2009年第3期.
[47]庞凤喜.论社会保险税的征收与深化社会保障制度改革的关系[J].税务研究,2007年第6期.
[48]上海财经大学公共政策研究中心.2009中国财政发展报告[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社,2009年版.
[49]石柱鲜、刘俊生、吴泰岳.我国政府支出对居民消费的挤出效应分析[J].学习与探索,2005年第6期.
[50]田晓晨.促进农村居民消费需求的财政政策研究[D].天津财经大学,2008年。
[51]唐朱昌.财政学(第二版)[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2005年版,P263-264.
[52]王军.中国转型期公共财政[M].北京：人民出版社,2006年版,P121-124.
[53]王军.中国农村社会保障制度建设：成就与展望[J].财政研究,2010年第8期.
[54]王立勇、刘文革.财政政策非线性效应及其解释[J].经济研究,2009第7期.
[55]王立勇.我国财政政策效应的理论研究与实证检验[D].博士学位论文,吉林大学,2007年,第1-2页。
[56]谢建国、陈漓高.政府支出与居民消费[J].当代经济科学,2002年第6期.
[57]吴栋、周鹏.城乡二元结构下财政支出对居民消费率影响研究[J].当代经济研究,2010年第6期.
[58]王宏利.中国政府支出调控对居民消费的影响[J].世界经济,2006年第10期.
[59]温娇秀.政府支出与居民消费：基于非线性有效消费函数的经验分析[J].山西财经大学学报,2007年第2期.
[60]乌兰、包慧敏.完善社会保障制度扩大农村消费需求[J].中国财政,2010年第8期.
[61]王为农.注重改进农业补贴政策[J].农村经营管理,2009年第10期.
[62]俞海山、周亚越.消费外部性：一项探索性的系统研究[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2005年版.
[63]吴玉霞、侯文英.启动农村居民消费的税收政策选择[J].经济经纬,2009年第6期.
[64]吴玉霞、周国富.经济增长由投资拉动转向消费拉动的现实选择--基于税收[65]政策 效应的实证分析[J].统计与信息论坛,2008年第1期.
[66]许生.加快推进有利于扩大内需的税收制度改革[J].税务研究,2010年第6期.
[67]许永兵.消费行为与经济增长[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,2007年版,P166.
[68]杨天宇、柳晓霞.满足消费最大化的最优居民收入差距研究[J].经济学家,2008年第1期.
[69]杨天宇.中国的收入分配与总消费[J].北京：中国经济出版社,2009年版,P56-60.
[70]闫坤、程瑜.新形势下促进居民消费的财政政策研究[J].宏观经济研究,2009年第5期.
[71]闫坤、程瑜.促进我国收入分配关系调整的财税政策研究[J].税务研究,2010年第3期.
[72]苑小丰、范辉.城乡收入差距对消费需求影响研究[J].财经问题研究,2010年第6期.
[73]张车伟、张士斌.中国初次收入分配格局的变动与问题[J].中国人口科学,2010年第5期.
[74]张伦俊、刘新利.税收对居民消费的影响[J].税务研究,1999年第10期.
[75]张明喜、高倚云.我国财政政策非线性效应的理论探讨与检验[J].财贸研究,2008年第5期.
[76]张振卿.个人所得税、城镇居民收入与消费关系实证研究[J].税务与经济,2010年第2期.
[77]张治觉、吴定玉.我国政府支出对居民消费产生引致还是挤出效应[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2007年第5期.
[78]赵元笃.中国城镇居民消费状况研究--基于面板数据的实证分析[J].财政研究,2010年第8期.
[79]Afonso,A.,2001."Non-Keynesian Effects of Fiscal Policy in the EU-15". ISEG/UTL Working Paper,07.
[80]Afonso,A.,2006. "Expansionary Fiscal Consolidations in Europe:New Evidence". ECB Working Paper,675.
[81]Alesina,A. and S. Ardagna.,1998. "Tale of Fiscal Contractions." Economic Policy,27 (1):487-545.
[82]Alesina,A. and Perotti,R.,1997. "Fiscal Adjustments in OECD Countries:Composition and Macroeconomic Effects." IMF staff Paper,44(2):210-248.
[83]Alfredo.Schclarek.,2007. "Fiscal policy and private consumption in industrial and developing countries." Journal of Macroeconomics,29(1):912-939.
[84]Arellano and Bond,1991. "Some tests of specification for panel data:Monte Calro Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations". Reviews of Economic Studies, Vol.58.
[85]Bertola,G. and Drazen,A.,1993. "Trigger Points and Budget Cuts:Explaining the Effects of Fiscal Austerity." American Economic Review,83(1):1170-1180.
[86]Blanchard,0,1990."Comment on Giavazzi and Pagano." NBER Macroeconomics Annual, MIT Press,5(2):111-115.
[87]Borooah and Sharpe,1986. "Aggregate consumption and the distribution of income in the United Kingdom:An economic analysis,"The Economic Joumal,vol.96(l):449-466.
[88]Cour, P.; Dubois, E.Mahfouz, S. and Pisani-Ferry, J.,1996. "The Costs of Fiscal Adjustment Revisited:How Strong is the Evidence." CEPII, Working Paper, No.68:7-28.
[89]Cutlerand Katz,1992. "Rising Inequality? Changes in the Distribution of Income and Consumption in the 1980s,"American Economic Review,vol.82(5):546-51.
[90]Feldstein, M.,1982. "Government Deficits and Aggregate Demand." Journal of Monetary Economics,9(1):1-20.
[91]George A. Akerlof and Janet L Yellen,1985. "A near-rational model of the business cycle with wage and price inertia". Querterly Journal of Economics, vol.100
[92]Giavazzi,F. and Pagano,M,1990. "Can Severe Fiscal Contractions be Expansionary?,' MA, MIT Press, p95-122.
[93]Giavazzi,F. and Pagano,M.,1996. "Non-Keynesian Effects of Fiscal Policy Changes: International Evidence and the Swedish Experience." Swedish Economic Policy Review,3(1):67-112.
[94]Gobbin,N. and van Aarle,B.,2001. "Fiscal Adjustments and Their Effects during the Transition to the EMU." Public Choice,109(1):269-299.
[95]Hemming, R, S.Mahfouz and Schimmelpfenning,2002. "Fiscal policy and Economic Activity during Recessions in Advanced Economics." IMF Working Paper, 87(2):373-386.
[96]Kristian jonsson,2007. "Fiscal Policy Regimes and Household Consumption." Journal of Public Policy,27(3):183-214.
[97]Laubach, T. and J.C.Williams,2001. "Measuring the Natural Rate of Interest." Review of Economics and Statistics,85(4):1-26.
[98]McDermott, C. and R.Wescott,1996 "An Empirical Analysis of Fiscal Adjustments,' IMF Staff Papers,vol.43,no(4):725-753
[99]Miller, S.M. and F.S.Russek,2003. "The Relationship between Large Fiscal Adjustments and Short-Term Output Growth under Alternative Fiscal Policy Regimes,"Contemporary Economic Policy,vol.21,no.1,p.41-58.
[100]Perotti, R.,1999. "Fiscal Policy in Good Times and Bad", Quarterly Jounal of Economics,114:1399-1436.
[101]Perotti,R.,2005. "Estimating the effcts of Fiscal Policy in OECD Countries".CEPR Discussion Paper Series 4842, January.
[102]Pratrice Muller and Robert W.,1984. "Structural Budget Deficit and Fiscal Stance.' OECD Economics and Statistics Department Working Paper, (15):1-87.
[103]Rzonca and Cizkowicz,2005. "Non-Keynesian efffects of fiscal contraction in new member states,"European Central Bank working paper series,NO.519,p1-20.
[104]Robert B.,2004. "The General Government Structural Budget Balance." Economic Review,46(1):5-33.
[105]Sargan,J.D,1988. "Testing for Misspecification after Estimating Using Instrumental Variables", Contributions to Econometrics:John Denis Sargan,1988,Vol.1.
[106]Sutherland,1997. "Fiscal crises and aggregate demand:can high public debt reverse the effects of fiscal policy," Journal of Public Economics,65(1):147-162.
[107]van Aarle, B. and H.Garretsen,2003. "Keynesian, Non-Keynesian or No Effects of Fiscal Policy Changes? The EMU Case".Journal of Macroeconomics,25:213-240.
[108]von Hagen, J., A.Hughes-Hallet and R.Strauch,2001. "Budgetary Consolidation in EMU".European Comission Economic Papers 148.
[109]Weyerstrass, K., J.Jaenicke, R.Neck, G.Haber, B. van Aarle, K.Schoors, N.Gobbin and P.Claeys,2006. "Economic Spil lover and Policy Coordination in the Euro Area".European Comission Economic Papers 246, March.
[110]Zaghini, A,2001. "Fiscal Adjustmets and Economic Performing:A Comparative Study".Applied Economics,33:613-624.
②iavazzi,F. and Pagano,M.,1996. "Non-Keynesian Effects of Fiscal Policy Changes:International Evidence and the Swedish Experience." Swedish Economic Policy Review,3(1):67-112.
③Alesina,A. and S. Ardagna.,1998. "Tale of Fiscal Contractions." Economic Policy,27(1):487-545.
④Gobbin,N. and van Aarle,B.,2001. "Fiscal Adjustments and Their Effects during the Transition to the EMU." Public Choice,109(1):269-299.
⑤Kristian jonsson,2007. "Fiscal Policy Regimes and Household Consumption." Journal of Public Policy, 27(3):183-214.
⑥McDermott, C. and R.Wescott,1996 "An Empirical Analysis of Fiscal Adjustments," IMF Staff Papers,vol.43, no(4):725-753.
⑦Hemming, R,S.Mahfouz and Schimmelpfenning,2002. "Fiscal policy and Economic Activity during Recessions in Advanced Economics." IMF Working Paper,87(2):373-386.
①ristian jonsson,2007. "Fiscal Policy Regimes and Household Consumption." Journal of Public Policy, 27(3):183-214.
②郭庆旺、贾俊雪.稳健财政政策的非凯恩斯效应及其可持续性[J].中国社会科学,2006(5)。
③王立勇、刘文革.财政政策非线性效应及其解释[J].经济研究,2009(7)。
④方红生、张军.中国财政政策非线性稳定效应[J].管理世界,2010(2)。
⑤储德银、黄文正.财政政策的非凯恩斯效应[J].经济学动态,2010(10)。
⑥Alesina A., Perotti R,1996."Fiscal Adjustments in OECD Countries:Composition and Macroeconomic Effects", NBER Working Paper, No.5730.
①谢建国、陈漓高.政府支出与居民消费[J].当代经济科学,2002(6)。
②石柱鲜等.我国政府支出对居民消费的挤出效应分析[J].学习与探索,2005(6)。
①黄赜琳.中国经济周期特征与财政政策效应[J].经济研究,2005(6)。
②王宏利.中国政府支出调控对居民消费的影响[J].世界经济,2006(10)。
③温娇秀.政府支出与居民消费：基于非线性有效消费函数的经验分析[J].山西财经大学学报,2007(2)。
④楚尔鸣、鲁旭.基于面板协整的地方政府支出与居民消费关系的实证检验[J].经济理论与经济管理,2008(6)。
⑤贺京同、那艺.调整政府支出结构提升居民消费意愿：一个财政政策视角的分析[J].南开学报(哲学社会科学版),2009(3)。
⑥李春琦、唐哲一.财政支出结构变动对私人消费影响的动态分析[J].财经研究,2010(6)。
①刘溶沧、马拴友.赤字、国债与经济增长关系的实证分析：兼评积极财政政策是否有挤出效应[J].经济研究,2001(2)。
②财政部办公厅课题组.财政支出与居民消费关系计量检验[J].经济研究参考,2001(17)。
①胡书东.中国财政支出和民间消费需求之间的关系[J].中国社会科学,2002(6)。
②陈翔.我国财政支出和居民消费需求的实证研究[J].福建论坛,2003(4)。
③李广众.政府支出与居民消费：替代还是互补[J].世界经济,2005(5)。
④李永友、丛树海.居民消费与中国财政政策的有效性：基于居民最优消费决策行为的经验分析[J].
世界经济,2006(5)。
⑤刘宛晨、袁闯.我国财政支出的消费传导效应分析[J].消费经济,2006(4)。
⑥张治觉、吴定玉.我国政府支出对居民消费产生引致还是挤出效应[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2007(5)。
①官永彬、张应良.转轨时期政府支出与居民消费关系的实证研究[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2008(12)。
②储德银、闫伟.地方政府支出与农村居民消费需求：基于1998-2007年省级面板数据的经验分析[J].统计研究，2009(8)。
③储德银、闫伟.财政支出的民生化进程与城乡居民消费：基于1995-2007年省级面板数据的经验分析[J].山西财经大学学报,2010(1)。
①张伦俊、刘新利.税收对居民消费的影响[J].税务研究,1999(10)。
②郭平、洪源.税收政策刺激我国消费需求有效增长的作用机理及对策研究[J].湖湘论坛，2009(6)。
①樊纲.扩大消费是要改变收入分配结构[N].商界(评论),2009-2-15。
①黎建新.消费的外部性分析[J].消费经济,2001(5)。
②俞海山、周亚越.消费外部性：一项探索性的系统研究[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2005年版。
①王军.中国转型期公共财政[M].北京：人民出版社,2006年版。
②储德银、经庭如.促进消费需求的公共财政政策探讨[J].消费经济,2007(1)。
①郭平、洪源.税收政策刺激我国消费需求有效增长的作用机理及对策研究[J].湖湘论坛,2009(6)。
①闫坤、程瑜.新形势下促进居民消费的财政政策研究[J].宏观经济研究,2009(5)。
①王立勇.我国财政政策效应的理论研究与实证检验[Dl.博士学位论文,吉林大学,2007年,P1-2。
②李永友.财政政策的凯恩斯效应与非凯恩斯效应[J].上海财经大学学报,2008(2)。
①祁京梅.我国消费需求趋势研究及实证分析探索[M].北京：中国经济出版社,2008年版,P7。
①祁京梅.我国消费需求趋势研究及实证分析探索[M].北京：中国经济出版社,2008年版,P8。
①李建伟.投资率和消费率演变特征的国际比较[J].中国金融,2007(8)。
①许永兵.消费行为与经济增长[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,2007年版,P166。
①祁京梅.我国消费需求趋势研究及实证分析探索[Ml.北京：中国经济出版社,2008年版，P77。
②范剑平.中国城乡居民消费结构的变化趋势[M].北京：人民出版社,2001年版,P354。
①江春泽.社会保障制度体系改革[M].北京：经济科学出版社,1999年版,P191。
①祁京梅.我国消费需求趋势研究及实证分析探索[M].北京：中国经济出版社,2008年版,P73。
①斯蒂格利茨(著)、姚开建(译).经济学[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,1997年版,P89-92。
①吴栋、周鹏.城乡二元结构下财政支出对居民消费率影响研究[J].当代经济研究,2010(6)。
②储德银、闫伟.地方政府支出与农村居民消费需求：基于1998-2007年省级面板数据的经验分析[J].统计研究,2009(8)。
①童光辉、姜明耀.我国税收制度是否有利于消费[N].中国财经报,2009-12-22。
②数据来源：由《中国财政年鉴-2009》整理得到。其中,2008年全国税收收入为54233.79亿元。
③李心源.有利于启动内需的税收制度[M].税务研究,2010(6)。
①李心源.有利于启动内需的税收制度[M].税务研究,2010(6)。
①许生.加快推进有利于扩大内需的税收制度改革[J].税务研究,2010(6)。
②闫坤、程瑜.促进我国收入分配关系调整的财税政策研究[J].税务研究,2010(3)。
③许生.加快推进有利于扩大内需的税收制度改革[J].税务研究,2010(6)。
④高廷民.根治高房价应开征累进个人房产税[J].中国发展观察,2010(7)。
①胡成.我国社会保障和居民消费关系研究[J]宏观经济管理,2010(2)。
②刘剑文.社会保险资金筹集方式的利弊比较[J].税务研究,2007(6)。
①安体富.我国社会保险“费改税”：紧迫性、必要性和可行性[J]山东经济,2007(6)。
②庞凤喜.论社会保险税的征收与深化社会保障制度改革的关系[J].税务研究,2007(6)。
①吴玉霞、周国富.经济增长由投资拉动转向消费拉动的现实选择--基于税收政策效应的实证分析[J].统计与信息论坛,2008(1)。
②张振卿.个人所得税、城镇居民收入与消费关系实证研究[J].税务与经济,2010(2)。
①樊纲.扩大消费是要改变收入分配结构[N].商界(评论),2009-2-15。
①储德银、经庭如.我国城乡居民消费影响因素的比较分析[J].中国软科学,2010(4)。
②杨天宇.中国的收入分配与总消费[J].北京：中国经济出版社,2009年版。
①蔡跃洲.转型社会中财政对收入分配的影响—基于我国不同发展阶段的理论实证[J].财经研究,2008(11)。
①马丁·布朗芬布伦特(方敏等译).收入分配理论[M].北京：华夏出版社,2009年版,pp24。
②黄乾、魏下海.中国劳动收入比重下降的宏观经济效应[J].财贸经济,2010(4).
③陈静怡.国民收入初次分配与消费需求的相关性分析[J].社会科学论坛,2010(12).
①张车伟、张士斌.中国初次收入分配格局的变动与问题[J].中国人口科学,2010(5).
①上海财经大学公共政策研究中心.2009中国财政发展报告[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社,2009年版。
①刘尚希.实现基本消费的平等化是民生问题的要义[J].学习月刊,2007(7)。
①刘尚希.消费公平、起点公平与社会公平[J].税务研究,2010(3)。
①马海涛、向飞丹晴.促进就业的财税政策探讨[J].税务研究,2009(5)。
②陈共.财政学(第六版)[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2006年版,pp156-157。
①上海财经大学公共政策研究中心.2009中国财政发展报告[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社,2009年。
②参见国发(2010)2号文件：《国务院发布关于试行社会保险基金预算的意见》,http://news. xinhuanet.com/fortune/2010-01/06/content12765682.htm。
③金淑彬.居民消费的持续增长,有待于社会保障体系的进一步完善[J].税务与经济,2009(5)。
④赵元笃.中国城镇居民消费状况研究--基于面板数据的实证分析[J].财政研究,2010(8)。
①王军.中国农村社会保障制度建设：成就与展望[J].财政研究,2010(8)。
②苑小丰、范辉.城乡收入差距对消费需求影响研究[J].财经问题研究,2010(6)。
①具体参见：《中华人民共和国农业法》。
①王军.中国农村社会保障制度建设：成就与展望[J].财政研究,010(8)。
①林义、郑军.完善农村社会保障、启动消费需求增长引擎[J].消费经济,2010(1)。
②乌兰、包慧敏.完善社会保障制度扩大农村消费需求[J].中国财政,2010(8)。
③林义、郑军.完善农村社会保障、启动消费需求增长引擎[J].消费经济,2010(1)。
①吴玉霞、侯文英.启动农村居民消费的税收政策选择[J].经济经纬,2009(6)。
②储德银、闫伟.地方政府支出与农村居民消费需求：基于1998-2007年省级面板数据的经验分析[J].统计研究，2009(8)。
①上海财经大学公共政策研究中心.2009中国财政发展报告[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社,2009年。
[1]安体富.我国社会保险“费改税”:紧迫性、必要性和可行性[J]山东经济,2007第6期.
[2]白仲林.面板数据的计量经济分析[M].南开大学出版社,2008年版,P63-73.
[3]蔡跃洲.转型社会中财政对收入分配的影响—基于我国不同发展阶段的理论实证[J].财经研究,2008(11).
[4]储德银、黄文正.财政政策的非凯恩斯效应[J].经济学动态,2010第10期.
[5]储德银、经庭如.促进消费需求的公共财政政策探讨[J].消费经济,2007年第1期.
[6]储德银、经庭如.我国城乡居民消费影响因素的比较分析[J].中国软科学,2010(4).
[7]储德银、闫伟.地方政府支出与农村居民消费需求：基于1998-2007年省级面板数据的经验分析[J].统计研究,2009年第8期.
[8]储德银、闫伟.财政支出的民生化进程与城乡居民消费：基于1995-2007年省级面板数据的经验分析[J].山西财经大学学报,2010年第1期.
[9]陈共.财政学(第六版)[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2008年版,P78-81.
[10]陈静怡.国民收入初次分配与消费需求的相关性分析[J].社会科学论坛,2010年第12期.
[11]楚尔鸣、鲁旭.基于面板协整的地方政府支出与居民消费关系的实证检验[J].经济理论与经济管理,2008年第6期.
[12]陈翔.我国财政支出和居民消费需求的实证研究[J].福建论坛,2003年第3期.
[13]蔡秀玲、邓春宁.福建省城乡居民消费现状及政策导向刍议[J].福建论坛,2010年第6期.
[14]财政部办公厅课题组.财政支出与居民消费关系计量检验[J].经济研究参考，,2001年第17期.
[15]童光辉等.我国税收制度是否有利于消费[N].中国财经报,2009-12-22.
[16]樊纲.扩大消费是要改变收入分配结构[N].商界(评论),2009-2-15。
[17]方红生、张军.国财政政策非线性稳定效应[J].管理世界,2010年第2期.
[18]范剑平.中国城乡居民消费结构的变化趋势[M].北京：人民出版社,2001年版,P354.
[19]郭庆旺、贾俊雪.稳健财政政策的非凯恩斯效应及其可持续性[J].中国社会科学,2006年第5期.
[20]郭平、洪源.税收政策刺激我国消费需求有效增长的作用机理及对策研究[J].湖湘论坛,2009年第6期.
[21]高廷民.根治高房价应开征累进个人房产税[J].中国发展观察,2010年第7期.
[22]高铁梅.计量经济分析方法与建模(第二版)[M].清华大学出版社,2009年版,P319-321。
[23]贺京同、那艺.调整政府支出结构提升居民消费意愿：一个财政政策视角的分析[J].南开学报(哲学社会科学版),2009年第3期.
[24]官永彬、张应良.转轨时期政府支出与居民消费关系的实证研究[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2008年第12期.
[25]胡成.我国社会保障和居民消费关系研究[J]宏观经济管理,2010年第2期.
[26]黄乾、魏下海.中国劳动收入比重下降的宏观经济效应[J].财贸经济,2010年第4期.
[27]胡书东.中国财政支出和民间消费需求之间的关系[J].中国社会科学,2002年第6期.
[28]江春泽.社会保障制度体系改革[M].北京：经济科学出版社,1999年版,P191.
[29]祁京梅.我国消费需求趋势研究及实证分析探索[M].北京：中国经济出版社,2008年版,P7-26.
[30]金淑彬.居民消费的持续增长,有待于社会保障体系的进一步完善[J].税务与经济,2009年第5期.
[31]黄赜琳.中国经济周期特征与财政政策效应[J].经济研究,2005年第6期.
[32]李春琦、唐哲一.财政支出结构变动对私人消费影响的动态分析[J].财经研究,2010年第6期.
[33]李广众.政府支出与居民消费：替代还是互补[J].世界经济,2005年第5期.
[34]黎建新.消费的外部性分析[J].消费经济,2001年第5期.
[35]李建伟.投资率和消费率演变特征的国际比较[J].中国金融,2007年第8期.
[36]刘剑文.社会保险资金筹集方式的利弊比较[J].税务研究,2007年第6期.
[37]李心源.有利于启动内需的税收制度[M].税务研究,2010年第8期.
[38]刘宛晨、袁闯.我国财政支出的消费传导效应分析[J].消费经济,2006年第5期.
[39]刘溶沧、马拴友.赤字、国债与经济增长关系的实证分析：兼评积极财政政策是否有挤出效应[J].经济研究,2001年第2期.
[40]李永友.财政政策凯恩斯效应与非凯恩斯效应[J].上海财经大学学报,2008年第2期.
[41]李永友、丛树海.居民消费与中国财政政策的有效性：基于居民最优消费决策行为的经验分析[J].世界经济,2006年第5期.
[42]刘尚希.实现基本消费的平等化是民生问题的要义[J].学习月刊,2007年第7期.
[43]刘尚希.消费公平、起点公平与社会公平[J].税务研究,2010年第3期.
[44]林义等.完善农村社会保障、启动消费需求增长引擎[J].消费经济,2010年第1期.
[45]马丁·布朗芬布伦特(方敏等译).收入分配理论[M].北京：华夏出版社,2009年版,P24.
[46]马海涛、向飞丹晴.促进就业的财税政策探讨[J].税务研究,2009年第3期.
[47]庞凤喜.论社会保险税的征收与深化社会保障制度改革的关系[J].税务研究,2007年第6期.
[48]上海财经大学公共政策研究中心.2009中国财政发展报告[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社,2009年版.
[49]石柱鲜、刘俊生、吴泰岳.我国政府支出对居民消费的挤出效应分析[J].学习与探索,2005年第6期.
[50]田晓晨.促进农村居民消费需求的财政政策研究[D].天津财经大学,2008年。
[51]唐朱昌.财政学(第二版)[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2005年版,P263-264.
[52]王军.中国转型期公共财政[M].北京：人民出版社,2006年版,P121-124.
[53]王军.中国农村社会保障制度建设：成就与展望[J].财政研究,2010年第8期.
[54]王立勇、刘文革.财政政策非线性效应及其解释[J].经济研究,2009第7期.
[55]王立勇.我国财政政策效应的理论研究与实证检验[D].博士学位论文,吉林大学,2007年,第1-2页。
[56]谢建国、陈漓高.政府支出与居民消费[J].当代经济科学,2002年第6期.
[57]吴栋、周鹏.城乡二元结构下财政支出对居民消费率影响研究[J].当代经济研究,2010年第6期.
[58]王宏利.中国政府支出调控对居民消费的影响[J].世界经济,2006年第10期.
[59]温娇秀.政府支出与居民消费：基于非线性有效消费函数的经验分析[J].山西财经大学学报,2007年第2期.
[60]乌兰、包慧敏.完善社会保障制度扩大农村消费需求[J].中国财政,2010年第8期.
[61]王为农.注重改进农业补贴政策[J].农村经营管理,2009年第10期.
[62]俞海山、周亚越.消费外部性：一项探索性的系统研究[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2005年版.
[63]吴玉霞、侯文英.启动农村居民消费的税收政策选择[J].经济经纬,2009年第6期.
[64]吴玉霞、周国富.经济增长由投资拉动转向消费拉动的现实选择--基于税收[65]政策 效应的实证分析[J].统计与信息论坛,2008年第1期.
[66]许生.加快推进有利于扩大内需的税收制度改革[J].税务研究,2010年第6期.
[67]许永兵.消费行为与经济增长[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,2007年版,P166.
[68]杨天宇、柳晓霞.满足消费最大化的最优居民收入差距研究[J].经济学家,2008年第1期.
[69]杨天宇.中国的收入分配与总消费[J].北京：中国经济出版社,2009年版,P56-60.
[70]闫坤、程瑜.新形势下促进居民消费的财政政策研究[J].宏观经济研究,2009年第5期.
[71]闫坤、程瑜.促进我国收入分配关系调整的财税政策研究[J].税务研究,2010年第3期.
[72]苑小丰、范辉.城乡收入差距对消费需求影响研究[J].财经问题研究,2010年第6期.
[73]张车伟、张士斌.中国初次收入分配格局的变动与问题[J].中国人口科学,2010年第5期.
[74]张伦俊、刘新利.税收对居民消费的影响[J].税务研究,1999年第10期.
[75]张明喜、高倚云.我国财政政策非线性效应的理论探讨与检验[J].财贸研究,2008年第5期.
[76]张振卿.个人所得税、城镇居民收入与消费关系实证研究[J].税务与经济,2010年第2期.
[77]张治觉、吴定玉.我国政府支出对居民消费产生引致还是挤出效应[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2007年第5期.
[78]赵元笃.中国城镇居民消费状况研究--基于面板数据的实证分析[J].财政研究,2010年第8期.
[79]Afonso,A.,2001."Non-Keynesian Effects of Fiscal Policy in the EU-15". ISEG/UTL Working Paper,07.
[80]Afonso,A.,2006. "Expansionary Fiscal Consolidations in Europe:New Evidence". ECB Working Paper,675.
[81]Alesina,A. and S. Ardagna.,1998. "Tale of Fiscal Contractions." Economic Policy,27 (1):487-545.
[82]Alesina,A. and Perotti,R.,1997. "Fiscal Adjustments in OECD Countries:Composition and Macroeconomic Effects." IMF staff Paper,44(2):210-248.
[83]Alfredo.Schclarek.,2007. "Fiscal policy and private consumption in industrial and developing countries." Journal of Macroeconomics,29(1):912-939.
[84]Arellano and Bond,1991. "Some tests of specification for panel data:Monte Calro Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations". Reviews of Economic Studies, Vol.58.
[85]Bertola,G. and Drazen,A.,1993. "Trigger Points and Budget Cuts:Explaining the Effects of Fiscal Austerity." American Economic Review,83(1):1170-1180.
[86]Blanchard,0,1990."Comment on Giavazzi and Pagano." NBER Macroeconomics Annual, MIT Press,5(2):111-115.
[87]Borooah and Sharpe,1986. "Aggregate consumption and the distribution of income in the United Kingdom:An economic analysis,"The Economic Joumal,vol.96(l):449-466.
[88]Cour, P.; Dubois, E.Mahfouz, S. and Pisani-Ferry, J.,1996. "The Costs of Fiscal Adjustment Revisited:How Strong is the Evidence." CEPII, Working Paper, No.68:7-28.
[89]Cutlerand Katz,1992. "Rising Inequality? Changes in the Distribution of Income and Consumption in the 1980s,"American Economic Review,vol.82(5):546-51.
[90]Feldstein, M.,1982. "Government Deficits and Aggregate Demand." Journal of Monetary Economics,9(1):1-20.
[91]George A. Akerlof and Janet L Yellen,1985. "A near-rational model of the business cycle with wage and price inertia". Querterly Journal of Economics, vol.100
[92]Giavazzi,F. and Pagano,M,1990. "Can Severe Fiscal Contractions be Expansionary?,' MA, MIT Press, p95-122.
[93]Giavazzi,F. and Pagano,M.,1996. "Non-Keynesian Effects of Fiscal Policy Changes: International Evidence and the Swedish Experience." Swedish Economic Policy Review,3(1):67-112.
[94]Gobbin,N. and van Aarle,B.,2001. "Fiscal Adjustments and Their Effects during the Transition to the EMU." Public Choice,109(1):269-299.
[95]Hemming, R, S.Mahfouz and Schimmelpfenning,2002. "Fiscal policy and Economic Activity during Recessions in Advanced Economics." IMF Working Paper, 87(2):373-386.
[96]Kristian jonsson,2007. "Fiscal Policy Regimes and Household Consumption." Journal of Public Policy,27(3):183-214.
[97]Laubach, T. and J.C.Williams,2001. "Measuring the Natural Rate of Interest." Review of Economics and Statistics,85(4):1-26.
[98]McDermott, C. and R.Wescott,1996 "An Empirical Analysis of Fiscal Adjustments,' IMF Staff Papers,vol.43,no(4):725-753
[99]Miller, S.M. and F.S.Russek,2003. "The Relationship between Large Fiscal Adjustments and Short-Term Output Growth under Alternative Fiscal Policy Regimes,"Contemporary Economic Policy,vol.21,no.1,p.41-58.
[100]Perotti, R.,1999. "Fiscal Policy in Good Times and Bad", Quarterly Jounal of Economics,114:1399-1436.
[101]Perotti,R.,2005. "Estimating the effcts of Fiscal Policy in OECD Countries".CEPR Discussion Paper Series 4842, January.
[102]Pratrice Muller and Robert W.,1984. "Structural Budget Deficit and Fiscal Stance.' OECD Economics and Statistics Department Working Paper, (15):1-87.
[103]Rzonca and Cizkowicz,2005. "Non-Keynesian efffects of fiscal contraction in new member states,"European Central Bank working paper series,NO.519,p1-20.
[104]Robert B.,2004. "The General Government Structural Budget Balance." Economic Review,46(1):5-33.
[105]Sargan,J.D,1988. "Testing for Misspecification after Estimating Using Instrumental Variables", Contributions to Econometrics:John Denis Sargan,1988,Vol.1.
[106]Sutherland,1997. "Fiscal crises and aggregate demand:can high public debt reverse the effects of fiscal policy," Journal of Public Economics,65(1):147-162.
[107]van Aarle, B. and H.Garretsen,2003. "Keynesian, Non-Keynesian or No Effects of Fiscal Policy Changes? The EMU Case".Journal of Macroeconomics,25:213-240.
[108]von Hagen, J., A.Hughes-Hallet and R.Strauch,2001. "Budgetary Consolidation in EMU".European Comission Economic Papers 148.
[109]Weyerstrass, K., J.Jaenicke, R.Neck, G.Haber, B. van Aarle, K.Schoors, N.Gobbin and P.Claeys,2006. "Economic Spil lover and Policy Coordination in the Euro Area".European Comission Economic Papers 246, March.
[110]Zaghini, A,2001. "Fiscal Adjustmets and Economic Performing:A Comparative Study".Applied Economics,33:613-624.