税务稽查中的税收执法差异问题研究
|
摘要
税收是国家组织财政收入的主要形式和工具,在保证和实现财政收入方面起着重要的作用,也是国家调控经济的重要杠杆之一。税务稽查工作在税收工作当中又具有举足轻重的作用和地位。税务稽查不仅是对纳税人依法纳税的监督和指导,也是对税收工作其他环节的补充和完善。随着税务稽查职能的强化,其综合性也越显突出,涉及到税务工作的方方面面。从某种意义上看,税务稽查具有一定浓缩性和代表性,其地位和重要性是不言而喻的。
税务机关是典型的行政执法部门,因此存在着许多需要行使行政自由裁量权的环节,具有突出地位的税务稽查部门更是如此。由于行政自由裁量权的存在以及其他诸方面的因素存在,造成税务机关、税务稽查部门的相关人员在行使其职能进行行政执法的过程中会产生不同程度的差异。本文的目的就是要探讨这些税务差异的导因和解决方案。克服税务执法差异,进一步规范税务执法不仅是为了巩固国家税收部门的威信,维护税收执法的严肃性,也是依法治税的必然趋势和内在要求。
本文采用理论和实际研究相结合,纵向分析和横向分析相结合,比较分析研究等方法对税务稽查执法差异进行分析和探讨。论文的基本构架分为四个部分：
第一部分,阐述了税收执法权、税务稽查和行政自由裁量权等相关概念。论文首先阐述税收执法权的具体内容,进而将落脚点放在税务稽查上,对税务稽查的概念和特点进行阐述,然后引入行政自由裁量权已有的相关概念和理论。在此基础之上对执法差异进行解释和论述,表明本文的目的和观点。
第二部分,对我国税务稽查工作中存在执法差异的现状进行陈述和分析。论文以系统的观点,以实际工作为出发点,力争全面、全方位、从各个环节陈述执法差异的现状和表现。概括来说,目前我国税务稽查执法工作中法律依据存在不足,执法人员运用相关法律依据存在差异：执法程序不严格,监管力度不足,“人治”现象严重。
第三部分,在对执法差异现状进行陈述和分析的基础上,进一步梳理、分类和归结原因,归纳导致执法差异的六大类原因,包括税收立法不完善；税收执法程序不健全；税务稽查执法队伍综合素质有待进一步提高；纳税人法制意识不强；官僚制的负面影响；强大的行政干预力影响。然后针对这些原因逐条作深入分析。
第四部分,也是本文的重点。针对上述执法差异原因的分析,进一步探讨规范和克服执法差异的方案、方法。论文从理论认识到实际操作调整,从内部自省到改善外部环境,从伦理素质培养到管理关系的梳理改进等方面探讨了克服执法差异的方法。首先从理论认识层面提出要正确认识执法差异,在承认执法差异存在的同时,又要规范和克服不合理的执法差异；从实际操作上强调完善和强化稽查程序和执法责任制体系。然后在内部自省方面发挥重大税务案件审理的监督作用,逐步建立税务判例制度和形成税务行业管理规范；在改善外部环境方面强调面向纳税人和社会加强税收法制宣传教育,从思想上扭转人们对税收工作的看法,正确认识自己的权利和义务,从而实现双方平等互动和有效的外部反馈和监督。接着从伦理素质培养角度强调加强税务部门职业伦理道德建设,形成以社会公共利益为核心的价值观体系,强化提高业务素质,提高执法人员业务能力,从整体上培养高素质高能力的执法队伍；从内部管理关系角度提出对行政权力分配和机构作出调整的建议。
本文特点在于：第一,以系统的观点和角度分析阐述问题。第二,实事求是,从实际工作出发提出现实性问题。第三,结合时代特点和要求,提出改进和调整建议。
Tax revenue the state organizations, the main form and tools to ensure and achieve financial income plays an important role, is also an important lever of state regulation of the economy. Tax Audit work in the tax work which also has an important role and status. Tax Audit tax law is not only a taxpayer's supervision and guidance, but also other aspects of tax work complement and perfection. With the strengthening of the tax audit function, the more obvious the more comprehensive, involving all aspects of tax work. In a certain sense, the tax inspector has a certain concentration and representative, its status and importance of self-evident.
Tax authority is typical of administrative law enforcement departments, so there are many needs of the exercise of administrative discretion of the link, have a prominent place especially in the tax auditing department. Since the existence of administrative discretion as well as other factors, contributed to exist, resulting in tax authorities, tax auditing department of the relevant personnel in the exercise of their functions in the process of administrative law enforcement will have different degrees of difference. The purpose of this paper is to explore these differences because when the tax and solutions. To overcome the differences in tax law enforcement, to further standardize the tax law enforcement is not only to consolidate the prestige of the state's tax department, to maintain the seriousness of tax law enforcement, but also the inevitable trend of administering the tax and internal requirements.
In this paper, theoretical and practical research with consistency, vertical analysis and horizontal analysis combined with comparative analysis were used to analyze differences in the tax investigation and discussion of law enforcement. The basic framework of the paper is divided into four parts:
The first part, described the right to tax enforcement, tax inspectors and administrative discretion and other related concepts. Paper first described the specific details of tax law enforcement powers, then the end result on the tax inspection on the concept of tax inspectors and characteristics described, then the introduction of administrative discretion has the related concepts and theories. On this basis, the administrative law enforcement and discuss differences in interpretation, show that the purpose and point of view.
The second part, on the Tax audit differences that exist in the current situation of law enforcement statements and analysis. Thesis system point of view, to the actual work as a starting point, strive to comprehensive, full, all aspects of state law enforcement from the status and performance differences. In summary, the current enforcement of Tax Audit deficiencies in the legal basis, legal basis for law enforcement officers use related differences; enforcement procedures are not stringent enough supervision, "the rule of man" is serious.
The third part, differences in the status of law enforcement on the basis of statements and analysis, further clarification, classification, and attributed causes, summarized the differences led to six major categories of law enforcement reasons, including imperfect tax legislation; tax enforcement procedures are not perfect; Tax Administration Law be further improved overall quality of teams; taxpayers the legal system, not strong; the negative impact of bureaucracy; strong influence administrative intervention force. And for these reasons one by one in-depth analysis.
The fourth part is the focus of this article. The reasons for the differences in the analysis of law enforcement to further explore the differences between norms and law enforcement programs to overcome the method. Papers from the theoretical to the practical adjustment of the internal self-reflection to improve the external environment, from the ethical quality of the training to improve management of the Relationship Between discussed such as ways to overcome differences in law enforcement. First, from the theoretical aspects of law enforcement proposed to correctly understand the differences in the recognition of differences, while law enforcement, but also norms and law enforcement to overcome the differences unreasonable; from actual practice, emphasized improving and strengthening the inspection procedures and enforcement responsibility system. Terms of internal self-examination and then play a major role in the supervision of the tax case to be heard, establishment of tax systems and the formation of case management specification taxation step by step; in improving the external environment emphasis is given to taxpayers and the community to strengthen tax law publicity awareness campaigns, right from the ideological reverse people view tax work, correct understanding of their rights and obligations, in order to achieve both equality and effective interaction of external feedback and supervision. Then from an ethical point of view emphasizes the quality of training to enhance professional ethics development in the tax department, the public interest to form a core value system, strengthening to improve operational quality and enhance the operational capacity of law enforcement officers from engaging in high quality overall training capacity of law .enforcement personnel; from the angle of the internal management of relations and institutions of the executive power to adjust the distribution of the proposal.
This is characterized by:first, the system point of view and the perspective of the problem set. Second, seek truth from facts, proceeding from the practical reality of the problem. Third, the characteristics and requirements of the times, make improvements and adjustments proposed.
税务机关是典型的行政执法部门,因此存在着许多需要行使行政自由裁量权的环节,具有突出地位的税务稽查部门更是如此。由于行政自由裁量权的存在以及其他诸方面的因素存在,造成税务机关、税务稽查部门的相关人员在行使其职能进行行政执法的过程中会产生不同程度的差异。本文的目的就是要探讨这些税务差异的导因和解决方案。克服税务执法差异,进一步规范税务执法不仅是为了巩固国家税收部门的威信,维护税收执法的严肃性,也是依法治税的必然趋势和内在要求。
本文采用理论和实际研究相结合,纵向分析和横向分析相结合,比较分析研究等方法对税务稽查执法差异进行分析和探讨。论文的基本构架分为四个部分：
第一部分,阐述了税收执法权、税务稽查和行政自由裁量权等相关概念。论文首先阐述税收执法权的具体内容,进而将落脚点放在税务稽查上,对税务稽查的概念和特点进行阐述,然后引入行政自由裁量权已有的相关概念和理论。在此基础之上对执法差异进行解释和论述,表明本文的目的和观点。
第二部分,对我国税务稽查工作中存在执法差异的现状进行陈述和分析。论文以系统的观点,以实际工作为出发点,力争全面、全方位、从各个环节陈述执法差异的现状和表现。概括来说,目前我国税务稽查执法工作中法律依据存在不足,执法人员运用相关法律依据存在差异：执法程序不严格,监管力度不足,“人治”现象严重。
第三部分,在对执法差异现状进行陈述和分析的基础上,进一步梳理、分类和归结原因,归纳导致执法差异的六大类原因,包括税收立法不完善；税收执法程序不健全；税务稽查执法队伍综合素质有待进一步提高；纳税人法制意识不强；官僚制的负面影响；强大的行政干预力影响。然后针对这些原因逐条作深入分析。
第四部分,也是本文的重点。针对上述执法差异原因的分析,进一步探讨规范和克服执法差异的方案、方法。论文从理论认识到实际操作调整,从内部自省到改善外部环境,从伦理素质培养到管理关系的梳理改进等方面探讨了克服执法差异的方法。首先从理论认识层面提出要正确认识执法差异,在承认执法差异存在的同时,又要规范和克服不合理的执法差异；从实际操作上强调完善和强化稽查程序和执法责任制体系。然后在内部自省方面发挥重大税务案件审理的监督作用,逐步建立税务判例制度和形成税务行业管理规范；在改善外部环境方面强调面向纳税人和社会加强税收法制宣传教育,从思想上扭转人们对税收工作的看法,正确认识自己的权利和义务,从而实现双方平等互动和有效的外部反馈和监督。接着从伦理素质培养角度强调加强税务部门职业伦理道德建设,形成以社会公共利益为核心的价值观体系,强化提高业务素质,提高执法人员业务能力,从整体上培养高素质高能力的执法队伍；从内部管理关系角度提出对行政权力分配和机构作出调整的建议。
本文特点在于：第一,以系统的观点和角度分析阐述问题。第二,实事求是,从实际工作出发提出现实性问题。第三,结合时代特点和要求,提出改进和调整建议。
Tax revenue the state organizations, the main form and tools to ensure and achieve financial income plays an important role, is also an important lever of state regulation of the economy. Tax Audit work in the tax work which also has an important role and status. Tax Audit tax law is not only a taxpayer's supervision and guidance, but also other aspects of tax work complement and perfection. With the strengthening of the tax audit function, the more obvious the more comprehensive, involving all aspects of tax work. In a certain sense, the tax inspector has a certain concentration and representative, its status and importance of self-evident.
Tax authority is typical of administrative law enforcement departments, so there are many needs of the exercise of administrative discretion of the link, have a prominent place especially in the tax auditing department. Since the existence of administrative discretion as well as other factors, contributed to exist, resulting in tax authorities, tax auditing department of the relevant personnel in the exercise of their functions in the process of administrative law enforcement will have different degrees of difference. The purpose of this paper is to explore these differences because when the tax and solutions. To overcome the differences in tax law enforcement, to further standardize the tax law enforcement is not only to consolidate the prestige of the state's tax department, to maintain the seriousness of tax law enforcement, but also the inevitable trend of administering the tax and internal requirements.
In this paper, theoretical and practical research with consistency, vertical analysis and horizontal analysis combined with comparative analysis were used to analyze differences in the tax investigation and discussion of law enforcement. The basic framework of the paper is divided into four parts:
The first part, described the right to tax enforcement, tax inspectors and administrative discretion and other related concepts. Paper first described the specific details of tax law enforcement powers, then the end result on the tax inspection on the concept of tax inspectors and characteristics described, then the introduction of administrative discretion has the related concepts and theories. On this basis, the administrative law enforcement and discuss differences in interpretation, show that the purpose and point of view.
The second part, on the Tax audit differences that exist in the current situation of law enforcement statements and analysis. Thesis system point of view, to the actual work as a starting point, strive to comprehensive, full, all aspects of state law enforcement from the status and performance differences. In summary, the current enforcement of Tax Audit deficiencies in the legal basis, legal basis for law enforcement officers use related differences; enforcement procedures are not stringent enough supervision, "the rule of man" is serious.
The third part, differences in the status of law enforcement on the basis of statements and analysis, further clarification, classification, and attributed causes, summarized the differences led to six major categories of law enforcement reasons, including imperfect tax legislation; tax enforcement procedures are not perfect; Tax Administration Law be further improved overall quality of teams; taxpayers the legal system, not strong; the negative impact of bureaucracy; strong influence administrative intervention force. And for these reasons one by one in-depth analysis.
The fourth part is the focus of this article. The reasons for the differences in the analysis of law enforcement to further explore the differences between norms and law enforcement programs to overcome the method. Papers from the theoretical to the practical adjustment of the internal self-reflection to improve the external environment, from the ethical quality of the training to improve management of the Relationship Between discussed such as ways to overcome differences in law enforcement. First, from the theoretical aspects of law enforcement proposed to correctly understand the differences in the recognition of differences, while law enforcement, but also norms and law enforcement to overcome the differences unreasonable; from actual practice, emphasized improving and strengthening the inspection procedures and enforcement responsibility system. Terms of internal self-examination and then play a major role in the supervision of the tax case to be heard, establishment of tax systems and the formation of case management specification taxation step by step; in improving the external environment emphasis is given to taxpayers and the community to strengthen tax law publicity awareness campaigns, right from the ideological reverse people view tax work, correct understanding of their rights and obligations, in order to achieve both equality and effective interaction of external feedback and supervision. Then from an ethical point of view emphasizes the quality of training to enhance professional ethics development in the tax department, the public interest to form a core value system, strengthening to improve operational quality and enhance the operational capacity of law enforcement officers from engaging in high quality overall training capacity of law .enforcement personnel; from the angle of the internal management of relations and institutions of the executive power to adjust the distribution of the proposal.
This is characterized by:first, the system point of view and the perspective of the problem set. Second, seek truth from facts, proceeding from the practical reality of the problem. Third, the characteristics and requirements of the times, make improvements and adjustments proposed.
引文
①王珉灿.行政法概要.北京：法律出版社,1983.
①李丽均.自由裁量权需要多大“自由”,河北经济日报,2008-01-03(B01).
②李敏华.税收行政自由裁量权的滥用及对策.南方刊论,2008, (2).
③龙朝晖、方佳雄.我国税务行政自由裁量权浅议.税务研究,2005, (2).
①王艳、吕波.浅析对依法治税的理性认识.中国西部科技.2008,(23).
②靳万军.论影响税收执法权的因素及对策.税务研究,2001,(3).
①向良云.公共权力的哲学解读.云南行政学院学报,2004,(1).
②何显明.现代理性官僚制的理性审视.中共浙江省委党校学报,2004,(1).
③向良云.公共权力的哲学解读.云南行政学院学报,2004,(1).
①王艳、吕波.浅析对依法治税的理性认识.中国西部科技,2008,(23).
②李敏华.税收行政自由裁量权的滥用及对策.南方论刊,2008,(2).
①李敏华.税收行政自由裁量权的滥用及对策.南方论刊,2008,(2).
[1]姚锐敏.依法行政的理论与实践.北京：法律出版社,2000.
[2]姚锐敏.违法行政及其法律责任研究.北京：中国方正出版社,2000.
[3]朱新力.行政法基本原理.浙江：浙江大学出版社,1995.
[4](日)盐野宏.行政法工.台北：月旦出版社股份有限公司,1996.
[5](法)孟德斯鸠.《论法的精神》,北京：商务印书馆,1961.
[6](美)伯纳德·施瓦茨著.行政法.北京：群众出版社,1986.
[7]王珉灿.行政法概要.北京：法律出版社,1983.
[8]许善达.国家税收.北京：中国税务出版社,1999.
[9]汤贡亮.走向市场经济的中国税制改革研究.北京：中国财政经济出版社,1999.
[10]曾国祥.税收学.北京：中国税务出版社,2000
[11]刘海年.依法治国建设社会主义法治国家.北京：中国法制出版社,1996.
[12]王伟.行政伦理概述.北京：人民出版社,2001.
[13]吴祖民、王凤鹤.中国行政道德论纲.武汉：华中科技大学出版社,2001.
[14]罗德钢.行政伦理的理论和实践研究.北京：国家行政学院出版社,2002.
[15]胡建淼.行政法.北京：法律出版社,1998.
[16]马怀德.中国立法体制、程序与监督.北京：中国法制出版社,1999.
[17]涂龙力,王鸿貌.税收基本法研究.北京：东北财经大学出版社,1998.
[18](美)特里·库珀.行政伦理学：实现行政责任的途径(第四版).北京：中国人民大学出版社,2001.
[19](英)约翰·基恩：《公共生活与晚期资本主义》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1999.
[20](英)亚当·斯密.国民财富的性质和原因的研究.郭大力、王亚南译.北京：商务印书馆,1972.
[21](美)施瓦茨.行政法.徐炳译.北京：群众出版社,1986.
[22]国家税务总局教材编写组.税务稽查管理.北京：中国税务出版社,2008.
[1]于绍元、傅国云.论行政自由裁量权的合理运行.政法论坛,1994,(3).
[2]袁曙宏、沙奇志.自由裁量与司法审查合理空间的界定.中南政法学院学报,1990,(1).
[3]郭道晖.依法行政与行政权的发展.现代法学,1999,(1).
[4]毛光烈.试论行政合理性原则对行政自由裁量权的控制.汕头大学学报(人文版),1999,(1).
[5]姜明安.论行政自由裁量权及其法律控制.法学研究,1993,(1).
[6]李志勇.社会转型期行政自由裁量权的运行及控制.行政法研究,2001,(1).
[7]沈岿.论行政诉讼中的司法自由裁量权.行政法论丛,1997,(1).
[8]司久贵.行政自由裁量权若干问题探讨.行政法学研究,1998,(2).
[9]张明杰.行政自由裁量权及其控制.法学研究,1995,(4)
[10]李燕玲.论行政自由裁量权的几个基本理论问题.兰州大学学报(社科版),2001,(2).
[11]李伟宁、蓝常高.“无缝隙组织”理论与税收征纳机制取向.税务研究,2003,(4)
[12]李华.论税收自由裁量权制度控制体系的完善.税务与经济,2007,(2).
[13]吴伟达.试论我国税法监督体系的完善.税务研究,2005,(7).
[14]王宏伟、李红.我国行政审批制度改革的现状及进一步深入发展思路的探讨.经济师,2004,(1).
[15]李东.论我国行政责任机制的完善.中共长春市委党校学报,2004,(1).
[16]董建新.解析行政伦理.暨南学报,2004,(3).
[17]主艳、吕波.浅析对依法治税的理性认识.中国西部科技,2008,(23).
[18]龙朝晖、郭志伟.税收征管中的无缝隙组织建设研究.涉外税务,2005,(2).
[19]李敏华.税收行政自由裁量权的滥用及对策.南方论刊,2008,(2).
[20]龙朝晖、方佳雄.我国税务行政自由裁量权浅议.税务研究,2005,(2).
[21]何显明.现代理性官僚制的理性审视.中共浙江省委党校学报.2004,(1).
[22]向良云.公共权力的哲学解读.云南行政学院学报,2004,(1).
[23]张在群、顾爱华.论控制行政自由裁量权.辽宁师范大学学报(社会科学版),2000,(4).
[24]江燕.在税收中行使自由裁量权的思考.广西财经学院报,2006,(2).
[25]杨黎明.建立税务先例制度遏制税收自由裁量权滥用.财会月刊,2006,(5).
[26]刘湘宁.论公务员行政的伦理道德依据及行政人格的培养.湖南社会科
学,2005,(3).
[27]靳万军.论影响税收执法权的因素及对策.税务研究,2001,(3).
[28]李丽均.自由裁量权需要多大“自由”.河北经济日报,2008-01-03(B01).
[29]靳万军.关于税收执法权的一般研究.税务研究,2001,(2).
[30]靳万军.企业改革中涉及的税收法律问题研究.税务研究,1999,(4).
①李丽均.自由裁量权需要多大“自由”,河北经济日报,2008-01-03(B01).
②李敏华.税收行政自由裁量权的滥用及对策.南方刊论,2008, (2).
③龙朝晖、方佳雄.我国税务行政自由裁量权浅议.税务研究,2005, (2).
①王艳、吕波.浅析对依法治税的理性认识.中国西部科技.2008,(23).
②靳万军.论影响税收执法权的因素及对策.税务研究,2001,(3).
①向良云.公共权力的哲学解读.云南行政学院学报,2004,(1).
②何显明.现代理性官僚制的理性审视.中共浙江省委党校学报,2004,(1).
③向良云.公共权力的哲学解读.云南行政学院学报,2004,(1).
①王艳、吕波.浅析对依法治税的理性认识.中国西部科技,2008,(23).
②李敏华.税收行政自由裁量权的滥用及对策.南方论刊,2008,(2).
①李敏华.税收行政自由裁量权的滥用及对策.南方论刊,2008,(2).
[1]姚锐敏.依法行政的理论与实践.北京：法律出版社,2000.
[2]姚锐敏.违法行政及其法律责任研究.北京：中国方正出版社,2000.
[3]朱新力.行政法基本原理.浙江：浙江大学出版社,1995.
[4](日)盐野宏.行政法工.台北：月旦出版社股份有限公司,1996.
[5](法)孟德斯鸠.《论法的精神》,北京：商务印书馆,1961.
[6](美)伯纳德·施瓦茨著.行政法.北京：群众出版社,1986.
[7]王珉灿.行政法概要.北京：法律出版社,1983.
[8]许善达.国家税收.北京：中国税务出版社,1999.
[9]汤贡亮.走向市场经济的中国税制改革研究.北京：中国财政经济出版社,1999.
[10]曾国祥.税收学.北京：中国税务出版社,2000
[11]刘海年.依法治国建设社会主义法治国家.北京：中国法制出版社,1996.
[12]王伟.行政伦理概述.北京：人民出版社,2001.
[13]吴祖民、王凤鹤.中国行政道德论纲.武汉：华中科技大学出版社,2001.
[14]罗德钢.行政伦理的理论和实践研究.北京：国家行政学院出版社,2002.
[15]胡建淼.行政法.北京：法律出版社,1998.
[16]马怀德.中国立法体制、程序与监督.北京：中国法制出版社,1999.
[17]涂龙力,王鸿貌.税收基本法研究.北京：东北财经大学出版社,1998.
[18](美)特里·库珀.行政伦理学：实现行政责任的途径(第四版).北京：中国人民大学出版社,2001.
[19](英)约翰·基恩：《公共生活与晚期资本主义》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1999.
[20](英)亚当·斯密.国民财富的性质和原因的研究.郭大力、王亚南译.北京：商务印书馆,1972.
[21](美)施瓦茨.行政法.徐炳译.北京：群众出版社,1986.
[22]国家税务总局教材编写组.税务稽查管理.北京：中国税务出版社,2008.
[1]于绍元、傅国云.论行政自由裁量权的合理运行.政法论坛,1994,(3).
[2]袁曙宏、沙奇志.自由裁量与司法审查合理空间的界定.中南政法学院学报,1990,(1).
[3]郭道晖.依法行政与行政权的发展.现代法学,1999,(1).
[4]毛光烈.试论行政合理性原则对行政自由裁量权的控制.汕头大学学报(人文版),1999,(1).
[5]姜明安.论行政自由裁量权及其法律控制.法学研究,1993,(1).
[6]李志勇.社会转型期行政自由裁量权的运行及控制.行政法研究,2001,(1).
[7]沈岿.论行政诉讼中的司法自由裁量权.行政法论丛,1997,(1).
[8]司久贵.行政自由裁量权若干问题探讨.行政法学研究,1998,(2).
[9]张明杰.行政自由裁量权及其控制.法学研究,1995,(4)
[10]李燕玲.论行政自由裁量权的几个基本理论问题.兰州大学学报(社科版),2001,(2).
[11]李伟宁、蓝常高.“无缝隙组织”理论与税收征纳机制取向.税务研究,2003,(4)
[12]李华.论税收自由裁量权制度控制体系的完善.税务与经济,2007,(2).
[13]吴伟达.试论我国税法监督体系的完善.税务研究,2005,(7).
[14]王宏伟、李红.我国行政审批制度改革的现状及进一步深入发展思路的探讨.经济师,2004,(1).
[15]李东.论我国行政责任机制的完善.中共长春市委党校学报,2004,(1).
[16]董建新.解析行政伦理.暨南学报,2004,(3).
[17]主艳、吕波.浅析对依法治税的理性认识.中国西部科技,2008,(23).
[18]龙朝晖、郭志伟.税收征管中的无缝隙组织建设研究.涉外税务,2005,(2).
[19]李敏华.税收行政自由裁量权的滥用及对策.南方论刊,2008,(2).
[20]龙朝晖、方佳雄.我国税务行政自由裁量权浅议.税务研究,2005,(2).
[21]何显明.现代理性官僚制的理性审视.中共浙江省委党校学报.2004,(1).
[22]向良云.公共权力的哲学解读.云南行政学院学报,2004,(1).
[23]张在群、顾爱华.论控制行政自由裁量权.辽宁师范大学学报(社会科学版),2000,(4).
[24]江燕.在税收中行使自由裁量权的思考.广西财经学院报,2006,(2).
[25]杨黎明.建立税务先例制度遏制税收自由裁量权滥用.财会月刊,2006,(5).
[26]刘湘宁.论公务员行政的伦理道德依据及行政人格的培养.湖南社会科
学,2005,(3).
[27]靳万军.论影响税收执法权的因素及对策.税务研究,2001,(3).
[28]李丽均.自由裁量权需要多大“自由”.河北经济日报,2008-01-03(B01).
[29]靳万军.关于税收执法权的一般研究.税务研究,2001,(2).
[30]靳万军.企业改革中涉及的税收法律问题研究.税务研究,1999,(4).