【作者】 王冬；

【导师】 李昌麒；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 经济法， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 当胡锦涛同志在十七大报告中明确提出“坚持依法治国基本方略,树立社会主义法治理念”后,明确、论证、解释和准确理解“法理念”的确切涵义便成为了承担着“为法治提供理论正当化”功能的法学研究中一个极其重要且现实的课题。然而目前学界对于这个问题的研究明显还处于起步阶段,这不仅表现在相关研究成果数量不多而且就其质量来看也难言价值突出。本文之所以以“税法理念问题研究”为题,从一定意义上讲也是希望以“税法理念”作为一个切入口,以期能通过相对具体范围内的探讨以小见大地对“法理念”研究作出一定的有用性贡献。当然这并不是说“税法理念”本身没有独立的研究价值,本文更多笔墨还是集中在该问题之上的。从大体结构上本文可以划为两个部分。第一个部分可归为“基础理论篇”,它包括第一章“税法理念的理论基础”和第二章“税法理念的内涵确立”两个篇章。其中第一章对于哲学“理念”之内容进行了一番较为详细的整理,并对其要义进行了归纳。在笔者看来,这是既有“税法理念”研究中较为薄弱之处,但却又是任何以“税法理念”为题的研究性工作所无法绕过的前提性问题。离开了对“理念”的明确定位,“税法理念”无疑就成为了一个内涵飘忽的术语。因而本文对于“税法理念”的全部内容都是严格沿袭着哲学“理念”的命意而梳理出来的。笔者并不认为其中关于“税法理念”之定位、价值和意义的界定就一定是准确的,但却自信这种研讨的进路应该是对学界相关之研究有所补益的。第二章虽然是着力于对税法理念的具体内涵的界定,但是其背后所蕴藏着的将“理念论”之方法论运用于对具体部门法理念内涵之确定的研究方法或许还是可以为当下方兴未艾的部门法理念研究在方法论层面起到一定的“抛砖引玉”之功效;第二个部分可归为“价值意义篇”,它包括了第三章“税法理念对传统税法理论的反思与重塑”、第四章“税法理念对于税法实践的关照与重构——以中国税收法律实践为例”和第五章“税法理念与中国语境的融合”。通过对既有“税法理念”研究成果的检视,笔者个人妄自对其归纳出两个缺陷,即内涵不清和意义不明。前者遗留出了“税法理念”本身“是什么”的问题,后者则没能解决我们“为什么”要研究它的问题。对于前一个问题我们在第一部分已经解决,因此本部分就主要是围绕着后一个问题在进行。税法理念要有被认为意义就必须说明它自身是重要的,并且这种重要性不是相对于别人,而必须是相对于“我们”而言的。第三章、第四章分别就其对理论上的“重要性”和对现实的“重要性”进行介绍,而第五章则可视为是在解释这种“重要性”与当下生活在中国社会的“我们”之间的亲疏距离。本文正是基于上述逻辑框架而为税法理念勾勒出一番大致的轮廓。进一步详言之:在第一章中,主要对于税法理念的理论基础进行明确。从严格意义上讲,“理念”和“税法理念”间在逻辑上属于“种属”关系,传统的法学范畴中并没有“税法理念”甚至“法理念”的存在位置,两者共同根源于哲学“理念”。因此要研究“税法理念”就必须首先回溯到“理念”上去。通过对哲学“理念”的理论梳理,本文将其定位于“人文领域之本原”的位置。法律属于人文领域之一部分,因此所谓“税法理念”便是指涉税法本原的一种称谓。由于它是“理念”在税法领域中的具体化,因而其内涵、价值、意义和求得方式都只能来源于对哲学“理念论”的一种分享。笔者正是在作为“理念”之过渡、分有和转化意义上来对“税法理念”进行定位的。在个人看来,这样的定位未必是最清晰、准确的,但无疑却是附合学术规范的。第二章在明确了税法理念的理论基础,亦即应当在何种意义上来对其进行研究的情况下,就其具体内涵作了一番探讨。而这种探讨的路径完全是按照在前一章中所确定的“税法理念”的认知途径来进行的:既然“税法理念”是税法的本原,而具体税法制度只是人们对这一本原进行“摹仿”和“比照”情况下创造出来的,那么现实中所存在过的关于其总结性认识便只能是种种不甚完善的“摹本”,它们中存有一定的合理性认识,然而单凭它们中的任何一个都不足以代表“税法理念”之全部意涵。历史上的“无代表不得征税”与“无代表,不纳税”即是其例。由于“理念”并不是事物的“共相”,而是由“共相”在以“善”为最终归依的情况下的一种向上“飞跃”。因此本部分对于“税法理念”内涵的确定便是通过对“无代表不得征税”与“无代表,不纳税”之具象的研究,抽象出其共有的品相,然后再以“实现良善社会”为终极目标对其进行“拔升”,最终将其确定为“无代议士不得征税”的内涵上。第三章对于税法理念的理论意义进行了相应研究。在笔者看来,税法理念最大的理论意义在于其可以帮助税法学现实一种知识的系统化。既往税法学研究中一个较为突出的弊病就在于其对于一些基础性范畴和问题存在着混淆和模糊,例如“税”与“税收”、“税收法律关系的性质”以及“税法学与税收学关系”等,由于在这些问题上存在着混乱从而致使整个税法学的知识散碎凌乱、体系架构参差错裂、逻辑主线昏暗不明。税法理念作为税法之本原同时也构成我们认识税法的一切知识源点,从这个源点出发可以梳理出从“税”到“税权”、“税收”、“税法”、“税的法律关系”直至“税法学”这样一条逻辑清晰的知识主线,顺着这根主线向外树状发射便可构建起整个税法学的知识体系。本部分在对既有学说进行反思的基础上,尝试性地以税法理念作为税法学知识的源点对诸如“税”、“税权”、“税收法律关系的性质”以及“税法学研究的独立性”等问题进行了重新诠释,进而提出了一套自认为是逻辑一贯同时又符合事物本质的税法学知识体系的轮廓“图画”。第四章则是重点论述税法理念的现实意义。在该部分中为了把相关问题说明得更为清楚同时又保证其不与前后文内容上“断线”,因而笔者同时采用了两条逻辑线索,一条可归为运思上的,一条则是叙事上的。就运思逻辑而言,由于前文界定“法理念”之现实意义于“批判之参照”和“型塑之摹本”两个方面,因此本部分也就相应对税法理念的现实意义作了两个部分的划分,前一部分主要是以税法理念为参照对现实中税收法律实践以及被诸多学者认为是改革之出路的“税收法定原则”进行检讨,从而发现一些在没有这个参照下发现不了或不易发现的问题,以此来表明其“批判”之作用;后一部分则可视为是在描述以税法理念为摹本对现实进行提撕和拉扯后所可能出现的“画面”,以此来证明其“型塑”的功能。但是鉴于现实生活的复杂性以及其自有一套自身的实践逻辑,若严格按照上述逻辑来安排文字难免会有将现实情况“削足适履”之嫌,为此本部分在论述时固又安排了一条叙事逻辑的线索,既按照“现实中存在什么问题?”到“对这些问题我们采用了什么解决办法?”再到“这些办法为什么不能彻底解决问题?”最后直至“我们应该用何种方法来解决?”的逻辑思路来将税法理念的现实意义一步步呈现出来。两条线索中后者较为明显而前者则较为隐含,由于笔者对于自己的文字功力实在不够自信,因此特在此处明确交待,以期不至让读者被自己这样线索纠缠的行文安排带入云端雾里。第五章则主要讨论税法理念同中国语境间的关系。“无代议士不得征税”这话本身对于中国读者而言就让人感觉很“新鲜”,尤其在当下大有将“本土性”作为学术成果的检验标准的中国学界里就更容易让人产生敏感。将税法理念定位在这么一句充满“洋味”的话上难免会让人怀疑笔者是不是又是一个捧着本“洋经”在中国来念的“假和尚”。为了消除这种误会,本部分首先具体分析了中国以往为什么没有能够产生出“无代议士不得征税”理念的原因,随后向读者论证了在当下的环境中不仅之前阻碍税法理念产生的因素已经消除,更主要的是“无代议士不得征税”这一税法理念的内涵同现实中国的诸多主流思想和话语在相互之间是有着牵续关系的,它们之间并不存在互相排斥和拒绝的可能。从而证明“无代议士不得征税”对于当下语境而言既不属于“中”也不属于“洋”而是在其之间属于一个“里(理)”。更多还原

【Abstract】 ‘Persist in basic country-governing strategy of according to law and establish a socialism rule of law’s idea’Stated in Hu Jintao’s report at 17th party congress. In regarding to this statement, research in law, which carries on the duty of justifying the idea of law, is expected to focus on defining, discussing, explaining and accurate understanding of the idea of law. However, considering the quantities and qualities of the results, research in this area is at the primary stage. Named‘research in issues on idea of taxation law’, this article is in fact, to some extents, expected to contribute to the research of idea of law through a relatively specific research on idea of taxation law. However, that does not mean the research in rule of taxation law is worthless and this article is chiefly on rule of taxation law.Therefore,this article is divided into two parts. First is the“basic theory”including first chapter“theoretical basis of tax law concept and second chapter“connotation of tax law concept”.For the right theory strcutrue and concrete orientation, in first chapter, writer details and concludes the“philosophical concept”. As a result, the contents of law concept in this article is arranged in an orthodoxy philosophy . Although the definitions for connotation、value and meaning of law concept in the article is precise, this orientation is quiet beneficial for the reseach. In the second chapter, writer pays quiet effort in the specifc connotation of tax concept and implys the triggering effect in the application of Methodology of“idea”for the definition of specific connotation of taxconcept. Second part can be regarded as“value and meaning”consisted by“theoretical meaning of tax concept”、“realistic meaning of tax”and“tax concept and Chinese language enviormen.”By probing the current research, writer boldly concludes two disadvantages:“the unclear connotiaon and the inaccurate meaning”The former one roots in the question of“what is it”of the law concept. The latter one roots in why pay much attention on the research. Writer has made a clear explanation for the former one in the first part and the second part focus on the latter one. Writer introduces the realistic and theoretical importance of tax concept in the third and fourth chapter and explicits the relation between“the importance”and our lives. The following is the article outline in a more diteiled way.“realistic meaning of taxtation”and“ideaology of taxtation and Chinese language enviorment. By probing the current research, writer boldly conclude two disadvantage:“unclear innotiaon and inaccurate meaning”The former one roots in the question of“what is it”of the law ideaolgy. The latter one roots in why pay much attention on the research. Writer has made a clear explanation for the former one in the first part and the second part focus on the latter one. Writer introduces the realistic and theretical importance of taxtion ideaology in the third and fourth chapter and explaines the relation between“the importance”and our lives.The following is a more ditailed article outline:The theoretical basis of tax is explained in the first chapter. Traditonally, there is a”concluding relation”among“concept”“law concept”and“tax concept.”we can not find the latter two concepts in traditional laws and in fact they derived from the“philosophical concept”That why we have to make more research in“concept”before“tax concept”.“philosophical concept”is always concluded into the original sourse of humanistic science and law concept is the embody of“philosophical concept”in laws. That means the understanding of theconnovation, value, meaning and derivation of law concept should based on the“philosophical concept”. Maybe, the writer’s understanding is not compeletly clear and accurate, but is allowed in research.The theoretical basis is clarified in the second chapter. The exploring path in this chapter is the same with the first chapter. So we can understand this chapter in the following way .“Tax law concept”is the original sourse and tax systems are the imitation of the original sourse. Therefore,the summarized knowledge in the reality is partially reasonable but can not represent the whole. This is reflected by the“no representation can not tax”and“no representation, no tax”The concept is the upgrading understanding instead of the integration of the commons. So this chapter first finds the commons among the reality such as“no representation can not tax”and“no representation, no tax”and then abstracts the upgrading understanding.Writer makes the research in theoretical meaning of tax concept in the third chapter. Writer thinks that the most meaning of tax concept is the establishment of the systemization of knowledge. There is an acute disadvantage in the previous research that unclear understanding of some basic categories and questions such as“tax”、“the nature of the relation between tax laws”and“Tax and Taxation Law.”The disadvantage results in the messed knowledge, disassembled structure and dim logics.As the original sourse of tax law, tax concept is also the sourse that we understand the tax law. We can abtain a clear logics among“tax”、“tax rights”、”taxation”、”taxation law“,“relation between tax laws and taxation.”Following the radiation of this logics we can establish the whole system of tax laws and writer concludes some new logical opinions and outline that can reflect the nature of tax law system.This chapter focuses on the realistic meaning of tax concept. In order to make a clear and consistent explanation, writer chooses two clues in the chapter. The first one is logical clue and the second is realistic clue.Following the same struction with the previous contents, writer divides the realistic meaning of tax concept into two parts. The first part, compared with realistic tax, writer investigates the reform in the“the tax law principle”and found some potential questions that have been veiled before.The second part describles the questions unveiled with the comparison. Because of the complexity and logics, writer arranges the contents in another clue:“question”, solution and“right solution?”The final chapter mainly disuccses the tax concept and Chinese language environment. The concept of“no taxationa without representation”is fresh for Chinese, It is especially sensitive on the circumstance that mojortiy of reseacher judges the scientific research outcome by the“localization”. To avoid the misunderstanding, this chapter first makes analysis on the reason that china failed to produce the concept of“no taxation without representation”.Then demonstrates there is no circumstance prevents the production of“no taxation without representation”now and there are connections intead of contradiction between chinese major minds and this concept.更多还原