试论合理税负
摘要
时下税负是轻是重?是否该减税?就这个问题，理论界看法不一。财政部科学研究所贾康，与中国人民大学安体富，他们的观点就截然相反。判断合理税负和最优税率的依据是什么?应该采取怎样的税收政策?研究这些问题，有较强的理论和实践意义。
从古至今，很多经济学者家对税收原则，都研究颇深。从大处讲，税收原则可以分为：效率和公平。这两大目标并不完全一致，孰轻孰重，就看当时的经济环境了。当前的国情决定了效率优先，兼顾公平。这个效率，说的就是经济增长。税收和经济增长间的关系，有个变化过程。起初，政府通过税收，增加基础设施，改善投资环境，能促进经济增长；但随着政府投资的增多，其投资收益递减，对经济的拉动作用减弱，而对私人经济的挤出效应增大，过高的税率，会阻碍经济增长。这个度的把握，正是本文所要研究的。
拉弗曲线的确存在，是本文的第一个论点。笔者采用了例证法，先对企业所得税进行分析研究。以企业所得税税率为自变量，以企业所得税收入为应变量，建立函数关系，并做出函数曲线——这是一个开口向下，有顶点和极值的抛物线。即单就企业所得税而言，拉弗曲线成立。然后，对个人所得税、增值税进行逐一分析，论证了这些税种也符合拉弗曲线。将这些主体税种的曲线，用加权平均法叠加，模拟出宏观税负曲线。它的走向，也和拉弗曲线基本一致。
最大不相容定理指出，税收的最大化和经济总量的最大，并不一致。由此，笔者以税率为自变量，模拟出经济增长率曲线、GDP曲线、税收收入曲线。三条曲线的三个顶点，将税率分成了四个区间：合理区、代价区、非正
常区、禁区。在合理区，经济增长率、GDP、税收收入都增加；在代价区，
税收收入的增加，是以经济增长率的下降为代价的；在非正常区，税收增加，
而GDP下降，这时的税收政策，是一种政治工具，而非经济手段，其目的是
敛财；在税率禁区，税率上升反而使税收收入减少，这是各国政府所力避的。
本文以肯尼迪、里根、80年代的日本政府及当今世界各国的税收政策为例，
进一步论证了这四个税率区间。作为一种经济手段，使经济增长率最大、投
资最多的税率，才是最优税率。所以，税制改革就是要将税率调到合理区一
一当前各国的做法，也证明了这一点。
通过分析计算，从我国的宏观税率，处于代价区。当前的经济形势为：
虽说我国经济总量很大，但用人口数一除，人均量就不容乐观了，因而，经
济增长任重道远；同时，资本、劳动力都大量过剩，经济增长潜力很大。但
内需不足，使潜在的增长，难以转化为现实的增长。为拉动内需，政府发行
了6600亿的国债，但此举治标不治本，并非长久之计。剩下的惟有一招——
扩大民间消费。要扩大民间消费，关键是拉动民间投资，提高投资利润率。
我国企业的赢利率不高，通过减税来提高企业留利，拉动投资需求，促进就
业，解决资本过剩问题，从而拉动经济增长，不失为一良策。此外，就当前
的减税争议，笔者提出了自己的看法。根据以上的分析论证，最后，本问提
出了降低企业所得税税率、调低宏观税率、建立并完善公共财政的政策主张。
Is the tax burden in China too heavy at present? Should we alleviate it? Economists have different answers to these questions. JiaKang, a professor of Ministry of Finance PRC, and An Tifu, a professor in Ren Min University of China, hold opposite opinions against each other. How can we tell whether the tax burden is reasonable? What kind of tax policy should we take? It is of great importance to study these issues.
Previous economists who have done research on tax principles emphasized two most important principles-efficiency and equity that are not always consistent with each other. Which one is more important depends on the economy situation. The current situation in China gives priority to efficiency, which means economic growth is crucial. The relationship between the economy growth and the tax is not invariable. The government uses the tax revenue to build infrastructure and to improve the investment environment, but with the government's investment increasing, its return will decline and some private investment will be crowded out. So it is concluded that the economic growth will be retarded if the tax rate is too high. How to control the scale is going to be researched in this dissertation.
In this paper, the first opinion is that Laffur curve exists actually. Take the example of income tax on enterprise , this dissertation analyzes the connection between the tax rate and the tax revenue. In plane rectangular coordinates, the tax rate is an independent variable and the tax revenue is a dependent variable. Draw a parabola then we can find that it bears analogy with the Laffur curve. By analyzing the value-added tax and the personal income tax, we can get the curve of the national tax burden, which also shows a resemblance with the Laffur curve.
The government's goal is not the same as that of the society. As a result, the maximum tax revenue and the largest GDP will not appear at the same time. We can draw three parabolas of the economy growth rate, GDP and the government revenue. In my opinion, the peaks of these curves divide the tax rate into four ranges: reasonable range, sacrificing range, abnormal range and prohibitive range. As the tax rate gets higher, in reasonable range, the economy growth rate, GDP and the government revenue will increase; in the sacrifice range, the economy growth rate becomes lower when the tax revenue increases; in the abnormal range, the tax policy is for politics but not for the economy; in the prohibitive range, the economy growth, GDP and the government revenue will decline which no governments want to face. After studying the tax policies of President Kennedy and President Reagan and the policies taken by Japan in 1980's, we can get the actual instances of the four tax rate range. As an economic means, tax policy
should be designed to maximize these potentially favorable growth effects. Accordingly, the tax rate should stay in the reasonable range.
On basis of the research on the current tax rate of China, we can find it in the sacrifice range. Though GDP in our country is great, the population is too large and the capital and labor are excessive which make the task of keeping high economy growth much harder. The only way solving the problem is to expand the domestic demands and consumption. We have issued 6600 billion Yuan government bonds, but it will not solve the problem ultimately. So the best way is to fuel the private investment. In order to improve the rate of return on capital, we should cut tax, which can consequently affect productive capacity, aggregate supply, and long-term economic growth. In the last part, I set forth three pieces of advice: to reduce the income tax rate on enterprise, to alleviate the national tax burden and to make the public finance perfect.
从古至今，很多经济学者家对税收原则，都研究颇深。从大处讲，税收原则可以分为：效率和公平。这两大目标并不完全一致，孰轻孰重，就看当时的经济环境了。当前的国情决定了效率优先，兼顾公平。这个效率，说的就是经济增长。税收和经济增长间的关系，有个变化过程。起初，政府通过税收，增加基础设施，改善投资环境，能促进经济增长；但随着政府投资的增多，其投资收益递减，对经济的拉动作用减弱，而对私人经济的挤出效应增大，过高的税率，会阻碍经济增长。这个度的把握，正是本文所要研究的。
拉弗曲线的确存在，是本文的第一个论点。笔者采用了例证法，先对企业所得税进行分析研究。以企业所得税税率为自变量，以企业所得税收入为应变量，建立函数关系，并做出函数曲线——这是一个开口向下，有顶点和极值的抛物线。即单就企业所得税而言，拉弗曲线成立。然后，对个人所得税、增值税进行逐一分析，论证了这些税种也符合拉弗曲线。将这些主体税种的曲线，用加权平均法叠加，模拟出宏观税负曲线。它的走向，也和拉弗曲线基本一致。
最大不相容定理指出，税收的最大化和经济总量的最大，并不一致。由此，笔者以税率为自变量，模拟出经济增长率曲线、GDP曲线、税收收入曲线。三条曲线的三个顶点，将税率分成了四个区间：合理区、代价区、非正
常区、禁区。在合理区，经济增长率、GDP、税收收入都增加；在代价区，
税收收入的增加，是以经济增长率的下降为代价的；在非正常区，税收增加，
而GDP下降，这时的税收政策，是一种政治工具，而非经济手段，其目的是
敛财；在税率禁区，税率上升反而使税收收入减少，这是各国政府所力避的。
本文以肯尼迪、里根、80年代的日本政府及当今世界各国的税收政策为例，
进一步论证了这四个税率区间。作为一种经济手段，使经济增长率最大、投
资最多的税率，才是最优税率。所以，税制改革就是要将税率调到合理区一
一当前各国的做法，也证明了这一点。
通过分析计算，从我国的宏观税率，处于代价区。当前的经济形势为：
虽说我国经济总量很大，但用人口数一除，人均量就不容乐观了，因而，经
济增长任重道远；同时，资本、劳动力都大量过剩，经济增长潜力很大。但
内需不足，使潜在的增长，难以转化为现实的增长。为拉动内需，政府发行
了6600亿的国债，但此举治标不治本，并非长久之计。剩下的惟有一招——
扩大民间消费。要扩大民间消费，关键是拉动民间投资，提高投资利润率。
我国企业的赢利率不高，通过减税来提高企业留利，拉动投资需求，促进就
业，解决资本过剩问题，从而拉动经济增长，不失为一良策。此外，就当前
的减税争议，笔者提出了自己的看法。根据以上的分析论证，最后，本问提
出了降低企业所得税税率、调低宏观税率、建立并完善公共财政的政策主张。
Is the tax burden in China too heavy at present? Should we alleviate it? Economists have different answers to these questions. JiaKang, a professor of Ministry of Finance PRC, and An Tifu, a professor in Ren Min University of China, hold opposite opinions against each other. How can we tell whether the tax burden is reasonable? What kind of tax policy should we take? It is of great importance to study these issues.
Previous economists who have done research on tax principles emphasized two most important principles-efficiency and equity that are not always consistent with each other. Which one is more important depends on the economy situation. The current situation in China gives priority to efficiency, which means economic growth is crucial. The relationship between the economy growth and the tax is not invariable. The government uses the tax revenue to build infrastructure and to improve the investment environment, but with the government's investment increasing, its return will decline and some private investment will be crowded out. So it is concluded that the economic growth will be retarded if the tax rate is too high. How to control the scale is going to be researched in this dissertation.
In this paper, the first opinion is that Laffur curve exists actually. Take the example of income tax on enterprise , this dissertation analyzes the connection between the tax rate and the tax revenue. In plane rectangular coordinates, the tax rate is an independent variable and the tax revenue is a dependent variable. Draw a parabola then we can find that it bears analogy with the Laffur curve. By analyzing the value-added tax and the personal income tax, we can get the curve of the national tax burden, which also shows a resemblance with the Laffur curve.
The government's goal is not the same as that of the society. As a result, the maximum tax revenue and the largest GDP will not appear at the same time. We can draw three parabolas of the economy growth rate, GDP and the government revenue. In my opinion, the peaks of these curves divide the tax rate into four ranges: reasonable range, sacrificing range, abnormal range and prohibitive range. As the tax rate gets higher, in reasonable range, the economy growth rate, GDP and the government revenue will increase; in the sacrifice range, the economy growth rate becomes lower when the tax revenue increases; in the abnormal range, the tax policy is for politics but not for the economy; in the prohibitive range, the economy growth, GDP and the government revenue will decline which no governments want to face. After studying the tax policies of President Kennedy and President Reagan and the policies taken by Japan in 1980's, we can get the actual instances of the four tax rate range. As an economic means, tax policy
should be designed to maximize these potentially favorable growth effects. Accordingly, the tax rate should stay in the reasonable range.
On basis of the research on the current tax rate of China, we can find it in the sacrifice range. Though GDP in our country is great, the population is too large and the capital and labor are excessive which make the task of keeping high economy growth much harder. The only way solving the problem is to expand the domestic demands and consumption. We have issued 6600 billion Yuan government bonds, but it will not solve the problem ultimately. So the best way is to fuel the private investment. In order to improve the rate of return on capital, we should cut tax, which can consequently affect productive capacity, aggregate supply, and long-term economic growth. In the last part, I set forth three pieces of advice: to reduce the income tax rate on enterprise, to alleviate the national tax burden and to make the public finance perfect.
引文
1、安体富等，2001，《当前中国税收政策研究》，中国财政经济出版社。
2、王雍君，1995，《税收优化原理》，中国财政经济出版社。
3、马海涛，2001，《中国税制》，中国人民大学出版社。
4、曾国祥等，1999，《中国税制》，经济科学出版社。
5、沈玉平，1999，《所得税调节作用与政策选择》，中国税务出版社。
6、高鸿业，1996，《西方经济学》，中国经济出版社。
7、保罗·萨缪尔森(美)，1999，《经济学》，华夏出版社。
8、安体富，《当前经济形势与税收政策的取向》，《经济研究》2002年3月刊。
9、张馨等，2000，《当代财政与财政学主流》，东北财经大学出版社。
10、郭庆旺等，1994，《当代西方税收学》，东北财经大学出版社。
11、杨斌，1999，《治税的效率与公平》，经济科学出版社。
12、曾国祥，1999，《中国所得税》，经济科学出版社。
13、郝如玉，2002，《税收理论研究》，经济科学出版社。
14、宋玉华《美国新经济研究》，人民出版社。
15、贾康，2000，《税费改革研究文集》，经济科学出版社。
16、梁朋，1999，《财税体制改革，国家理财的再次创新》，广东经济出版社。
17、陈志楣，2000，《税收制度国际比较研究》，经济科学出版社。
18、高培勇，1993，《西方税收——理论与实践》，中国财政经济出版社。
19、亚当·斯密，1981，《国民财富的性质及原因研究》，商务印书馆。
20、邓力平，《对我国税制改革与借鉴西方水手理论关系的再思考》，《财经问题研究》，1996年第7期。
21、高培勇，《减税：分析与抉择》，《经济理论与经济管理》2002年11期。
22、家计委宏观经济形势分析课题组，《国民经济开局良好扩大内需任重道远》，《中国经济快讯周刊》2002年14期。
23、黄海昀，《不减税企业很难创新》，《国际金融报》1月30日
24、林毅夫，《我国经济最大问题仍是生产能力过剩》，《中华工商时报》，2001年5月29日。
2、王雍君，1995，《税收优化原理》，中国财政经济出版社。
3、马海涛，2001，《中国税制》，中国人民大学出版社。
4、曾国祥等，1999，《中国税制》，经济科学出版社。
5、沈玉平，1999，《所得税调节作用与政策选择》，中国税务出版社。
6、高鸿业，1996，《西方经济学》，中国经济出版社。
7、保罗·萨缪尔森(美)，1999，《经济学》，华夏出版社。
8、安体富，《当前经济形势与税收政策的取向》，《经济研究》2002年3月刊。
9、张馨等，2000，《当代财政与财政学主流》，东北财经大学出版社。
10、郭庆旺等，1994，《当代西方税收学》，东北财经大学出版社。
11、杨斌，1999，《治税的效率与公平》，经济科学出版社。
12、曾国祥，1999，《中国所得税》，经济科学出版社。
13、郝如玉，2002，《税收理论研究》，经济科学出版社。
14、宋玉华《美国新经济研究》，人民出版社。
15、贾康，2000，《税费改革研究文集》，经济科学出版社。
16、梁朋，1999，《财税体制改革，国家理财的再次创新》，广东经济出版社。
17、陈志楣，2000，《税收制度国际比较研究》，经济科学出版社。
18、高培勇，1993，《西方税收——理论与实践》，中国财政经济出版社。
19、亚当·斯密，1981，《国民财富的性质及原因研究》，商务印书馆。
20、邓力平，《对我国税制改革与借鉴西方水手理论关系的再思考》，《财经问题研究》，1996年第7期。
21、高培勇，《减税：分析与抉择》，《经济理论与经济管理》2002年11期。
22、家计委宏观经济形势分析课题组，《国民经济开局良好扩大内需任重道远》，《中国经济快讯周刊》2002年14期。
23、黄海昀，《不减税企业很难创新》，《国际金融报》1月30日
24、林毅夫，《我国经济最大问题仍是生产能力过剩》，《中华工商时报》，2001年5月29日。