【作者】 秦勇；

【导师】 张怡；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 经济法学， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 1994年分税制改革之后，中央政府的财政收入占整体财政收入的比重大大增加，与之相反，地方政府的财政收入占整体财政收入的比重大大下降。但地方政府财政收入的降低并非意味着事权的减少，上级政府对事权的推诿导致地方政府的事务更加繁杂。面对“财权上收，事权下放”的格局，地方政府开始想方设法广挖财源，最终他们将目光盯在了“土地”上。可以说，地方政府财政收入中的大部分都是通过收取土地出让金和土地税费获得的。总之，地方政府的财政收入行为主要是围绕土地而展开的，我们把地方政府的这种行为称为“土地财政”行为。土地出让法律制度、土地税收法律制度和土地收费法律制度是地方政府获取财政收入的主要制度支撑。经由这三种制度，地方政府获取了巨额的财政收入。笔者将上述三种制度称为“土地财政”法律规制基本制度。论文的第一章对“土地财政”法律规制基本制度的历史和现状做了一个简单的描述。首先，对土地出让法律制度的变迁史进行了梳理，同时对土地出让金的概念、性质、特征做了一些探讨。其次，对我国土地税收法律制度的历史和现状做了介绍，其中主要对我国现行土地税制从土地取得、保有、流转三个方面做了详尽的分析。最后，对我国土地收费制度进行了梳理和归纳。地方政府的“土地财政”行为之所以广受诟病，从法学的角度考量，主要是因为“土地财政”法律规制基本制度的功能定位出现了偏差。论文的第二章以“土地财政”法律规制基本制度的功能分析为中心，论证了“土地财政”法律规制改革的正当性。首先，对“土地财政”法律规制基本制度的功能进行了全方位的探讨。其次，对我国“土地财政”法律规制基本制度的功能定位及其效应进行了分析。本文认为，我国现行的“土地财政”法律规制基本制度的总体功能定位出现了偏差，即过于关注“土地财政”法律规制基本制度的财政收入功能，而忽视了其他功能，这种功能定位引发了正负两方面的效应。再次，对我国“土地财政”法律规制基本制度功能定位偏差的原因进行了分析。其原因归结为三个方面：一是分税制使得地方政府陷入财政资金短缺的困境，财政资金的匮乏使地方政府有动力去筹集资金。二是以GDP和财政收入为核心的政政绩考核体制的压力。三是我国现行的土地制度为地方政府快速筹集财政资金提供了可能。至此，“土地财政”法律规制的框架已然搭建起来。地方政府通过土地获取财政收入主要经由土地出让、土地税收、土地收费法律制度，上述三种法律制度可称为“土地财政”法律规制基本制度。而很显然，财权事权划分法律制度与土地以及征收制度则是与“土地财政”行为密切相关的法律制度，可称之为“土地财政”法律规制相关配套制度。后文对“土地财政”法律规制改革的探讨同时涉及这两个方面。从第三章开始，论文转向对“土地财政”法律规制制度如何进行改革的探讨。第三章设定了“土地财政”法律规制改革的目标：经济安全与分配正义。第一节探讨的目标是经济安全。首先，对经济安全进行了界定。其次，论文探讨了“土地财政”法律规制改革将达致的经济安全状态：财政安全、金融安全和粮食安全。第二节探讨的目标是分配正义。首先，在对各种各样的分配正义观进行梳理的基础上，界定了分配正义的含义。其次，对“土地财政“法律规改革将达致的分配正义的应然状态进行了讨论，该讨论主要从以下几个方面进行：一是土地增值收益的分配公平；二是土地出让收益分配的程序正义；三是土地资源及土地收益的代际分配正义；四是土地税的分配正义。“土地财政”法律规制改革是一项较大的工程，它不仅涉及具体财政法律制度的制定、修改和完善，而且涉及到财政法的基本原则甚至宪政的基本理念。论文的第四章对“土地财政“法律规制改革应秉持的宪政理念进行了探讨。首先，“土地财政”法律规制的改革必须秉持人权保障的理念。人权保障既是“土地财政”法律规制改革的出发点又是改革的目的。为获得土地出让的收益，地方政府常常征用农民的土地，对农民的生存权和发展权造成了侵犯。在城市，由于“土地财政”模式导致的房价飙涨使得居民拥有住房的愿望很难实现。与此同时，地方政府为获得土地而进行的拆迁也常常带有暴力的色彩，城市居民的住房权显然也没有得到很好的保障。因此，“土地财政”法律规制的改革应以人权保障为至高原则，改革的最终目的应能够更好地保障公民的人权，能够让公民更有尊严的生活。其次，在“土地财政”法律规制改革的过程中应坚持税收国家的宪政理念。在对税收国家的理论起源进行探讨之后，论文提出税收国家的宪政意蕴实质上就是纳税人权利的彰显以及政府权力的制约，而纳税人权利的彰显以及对政府权力的制约以两个基本原则——税收法定主义原则与税收公平原则——体现出来。在“土地财政”法律规制的改革过程中必须坚持这两个原则。总之，土地出让金、土地税、土地费制度需要进一步地调整和改革，改革的最终朝向是真正意义上的税收国家。再次，如前文所述，“土地财政”的形成与中央和地方之间的财政分权体制有着极为密切的关联。在一定程度上，正是由于财政权的不合理划分致使地方政府的财政资金出现短缺而迫使地方政府另谋出路寻求自己的财政资源。因此，“土地财政”法律规制改革的关键是在财政方面如何分权。在此节中，首先对财政分权的一般理论进行了分析。在此基础上，笔者指出我国的财政分权理念应以地方财政自主权的保障为关键点，并对地方财政自主权的外延做了较深入的讨论。论文的第五章对“土地财政”法律规制制度的具体改革提出了自己的设想。在第一节中，首先对土地出让法律制度的改革进行了分析。本文认为，土地出让制度的总体改革方向是“租”改“税”。但由我国土地公有制的国情决定，土地出让制度的改革只能分两阶段进行：长期目标是土地出让金应取消而代之以物业税，这符合税收国家的基本理念；短期目标是现行土地出让金中的一部分并入物业税征收。其次，对土地税费制度的改革思路和具体制度设计进行了探讨。论文的第二节对“土地财政”法律规制相关配套制度的改革进行了探讨。本文认为，首先要完善财政收支法律制度，合理配置中央和地方的财政权限。赋予地方政府一定的财权的主要目的是为了消解其依靠土地筹资的激励或者说动机。完善我国现行财政收支法律制度的路径是制定专门的《财政收支划分法》，财政收支划分法的主要内容应包括：财政级次划分制度、财政支出划分制度、财政收入划分制度。其次，地方政府有了财权未必有财力，为使地方政府的财力足以应付日渐繁杂的事务，必须改革和完善财政转移支付法律制度。为此，应尽快出台《中华人民共和国财政转移支付法》；简化和规范财政转移支付方式，建立科学规范的计算依据；建立和细化财政转移支付的相关法律程序。但是，应注意的是，地方政府即使有了财权充实了财力，如果土地制度和征收制度不改革，地方政府仍有创收的动力并会付诸实践，因此应对土地制度与征收制度进行改革。改革现行土地制度与土地征收制度的基本思路是：首先区分是否公益用地，如果是公益用地则采用国家征收的方式；如果不是公益用地而是经营性用地，则农村集体土地所有权主体可以享有同国家一样的权利，即将自己所有的土地进行市场化处置的权利。因此，应在法律上明确农民为土地承包经营权向非农业用途转让的权利主体，即确立农民在集体土地使用权交易中的主体地位。改革后的法律应承认农民承包经营土地的完全转让权，包括为农业用途和非农业用途转让承包土地的权利。如此，则农民的利益就可以有比较可靠的保障。总之，地方政府的“土地财政”行为已经严重影响了我国的经济发展甚至社会的稳定。我国对“土地财政”的法律规制存在诸多问题，改革的必要性和重要性毋庸赘言。“土地财政”法律规制改革应设定明确的目标，应秉持清晰的宪政理念，应设计详尽的改革措施。只有这样，才能从法律层面有效遏制当前地方政府的“土地财政“行为，才能使人民真正过上有尊严的生活。更多还原

【Abstract】 Since the tax distribution system reform in1994, the central government’s fiscal revenuehas taken a much larger share than that of the local governments in the total fiscal revenue.However, the drop of the local governments’ financial revenue does not mean the reduction ofits administrative power. On the contrary, with the decentralization of administrative powers,the local governments have more complicated work to do. Under this circumstance, the localgovernments have to find ways to raise their fiscal revenue and they set their eyes on “land”.Most of the fiscal revenue of the local governments comes from land transfer fees and landtaxes. In short, the local governments’ financial acts center mainly upon land. We call thiskind of acts of the local governments the “land finance acts”.The main supporting legal systems are the system of land transfer, the system of landtaxes and the system of land fees. With these three systems, the local governments haveobtained a huge amount of fiscal revenue. These three systems are referred to in this study asthe basic system of “land finance” legal regulation. In Chapter1, a brief overview is made ofthe history and the status quo of the basic system of “land finance” legal regulation. First, itmakes a brief survey of the development of the legal system of land transfer and, discussesthe concept, nature and characteristics of land transfer fees. Secondly, it makes anintroduction to the history and status quo of the legal system of land taxes in China and givesa detailed analysis of the present land tax system from three aspects: land acquisition, landretention and circulation. Finally, it sorts out and summarizes China’s land fee systems.The local governments have been widely criticized for their land finance acts. From alegal perspective, the reason lies in the wrong definition of the function of the basic legalregulation system of land finance. Focusing on the analysis of the function of this system,Chapter2justifies the reform on land finance legal regulation. Firstly, it makes an all-rounddiscussion of the function of the basic legal regulation system of land finance. Secondly, itanalyzes the functional orientation and effects of the basic legal regulation system of “landfinance”. It argues that the overall functional orientation of the system has been wronglydefined in that too much concern has been given to its function for increasing the fiscalrevenue, while other functions are neglected. This has resulted in both positive and negative effects. Thirdly, it analyzes the reasons for the wrong orientation of the function of the basiclegal regulation system of “land finance”. There are three reasons why the local governmentsconcern more about the basic system’s financial function than other functions. The firstreason is the local governments’ financial difficulty caused by the tax distribution system,which has forced the local governments to raise funds. The second reason is the pressure fromthe performance evaluation system which is centered upon GDP and fiscal revenue. The thirdreason is that China’s current land system makes it possible for the local governments to raisefunds quickly. Up to Chapter2, the framework of “land finance” legal regulation is set up.The local governments use land to raise their fiscal revenue mainly through three legalsystems, that is, land transfer, land tax and land fees, which can be referred to as the basiclegal regulation system of “land finance”. And obviously, the legal systems of financial powerdivision and administrative power division, and the land system and levy system are closelyrelated to “land finance” acts. These systems can be referred to as the relevant legal regulationsystems of “land finance”. Both these two kinds of systems will be involved in the followingdiscussions of the reform on “land finance” legal regulation.From Chapter3, this paper starts to explore how to reform the “land finance” legalregulation system. The third chapter sets the targets for the reform, that is, economic securityand distribution justice. The first section is devoted to the first goal, economic security. First,economic security is defined. That is the extent to which a country’s economic sovereigntyand basic economic order and the interest and acts of economic subjects in economicactivities are protected as well as the possibilities of being harmed. Secondly, the economicsecurity state to be achieved by the reform is discussed, that is, the fiscal security, financialsecurity and food security. Section2focuses on the second target of reform, i.e. distributingjustice. First, distribution justice is defined after a survey of various views about it. Secondly,the “ought to be” state of the reform is discussed from three perspectives: fair distribution ofland value-added income, procedural justice in land transfer fees distribution, fair distributionof land resources and land income between generations, distributing justice in land taxes.“Land finance” legal regulation reform is a large-scale project involving not only theformulation, revision and perfection of specific financial legal system, but the basic principlesof Finance Act and fundamental ideas of constitutional government. Chapter4is dedicated tothe discussion of these ideas of constitutional government. Firstly, the reform on “land finance” legal regulation must adhere to the idea of guaranteeing human rights. To guaranteehuman rights is both the starting point and the final goal of the reform on “land finance” legalregulation. To make profits from land transfer fees, the local governments often expropriatesfarmers’ cultivated land, which makes farmers lose their land and jobs and violates farmers’rights of existence and development. In cities, the soaring price of houses resulted from the“land finance” mode makes it very hard for townspeople to have their own houses.Meanwhile, as the local governments usually conduct violent demolition and resettlement inorder to obtain land, the urban residents’ right to shelter has not been guaranteed effectively.Therefore, to guarantee human rights should be the unshakable principle of “land finance”legal regulation reform and to guarantee citizens’ human rights more effectively and let themlive with respects should be its final goal. Secondly, the reform should adhere to theconstitutional idea of tax state. After probing into the theoretical origins of tax state, the thesisargues that the constitutional meaning of tax state is essentially the assertion of tax payers’rights and the limitation of government’s power, which are represented by two basicprinciples, that is, the principle of legality in taxation and the principle of tax equality. Thesetwo principles should be followed in the reform of “land finance” legal regulation. To be brief,the systems of land transfer, land tax, and land costs need to be further adjusted and improvedtowards a real tax state. Thirdly, as mentioned above, the formation of “land finance” isclosely related to the division of financial power between the central and local governments.To some extent, it is the unreasonable division of financial power that causes the localgovernments’ shortage of financial funds, which has forced them to look for new financialresources. Therefore, how to divide the financial power is the key to the reform. In this part,with an analysis of the general theory of fiscal decentralization, the author points out that theguarantee of local financial autonomy should be the key point of fiscal decentralization in ourcountry. An in-depth discussion of the extension of local financial autonomy is also given.In the fifth chapter, the author puts forward in detail his own design of the reform. In thefirst section, an analysis is given to the reform of land transfer fees legal system. It argues thatthe overall direction of the reform is to change leasing into taxation. Considering the publicownership of land in our country, the land transfer fees reform should be carried out in twosteps: the long term objective is to replace land transfer fees by property tax, which is incompliance with the idea of tax state; the short term objective is to let part of the land transfer fees be levied together with property tax. The reform of land tax system mainly involves thereforming methods and the design of specific systems. In order to change the present situationin which the local governments make money by land, relevant supporting systems are needed.The second section of this chapter then focuses on the reform of relevant systems of “landfinance” legal regulation. First of all, it argues, the laws of financial revenues andexpenditures should be perfected so as to allocate reasonably the fiscal power between thecentral government and local governments. The main purpose of giving local governmentscertain fiscal power is to gradually eliminate the stimulus and motivation for raising moneyby land. The way to perfect current law of financial revenues and expenditures is to make aspecific “Revenue and Expenditure Classification Act”, which consists mainly of three parts:the financial level classification system, financial expenditure classification system andfinancial revenue classification system. Furthermore, the local governments may still have nofinancial resources even though they have been given some fiscal power. In order to ensurethe local governments to have enough money to deal with the increasingly complicated issues,the financial transfer payment system should be reformed and perfected. The “FinancialTransfer Payment Law of People’s Republic of China” should be launched as soon as possibleto simplify and regulate the financial transfer payment, to establish a scientific calculationstandard, and to set up detailed legal procedures for financial transfer payment. However, ithas to be noticed that even with fiscal power and enough money the local governments willstill be motivated and take action to make profits, if the land system and land expropriationsystem are not changed. Therefore, the current land system and land expropriation systemshould be reformed. First, land for public welfare should be distinguished from land for otherpurposes. Land for public welfare can only be expropriated by the state. If the land is forcommercial purpose, the subjects of rural collective land ownership have the same right as thestate to adopt the market-based disposal of their land. Therefore, the status of farmers as thelegal subjects to transfer their contractual right of the rural land to non-agricultural use shouldbe clearly asserted by law, that is, to establish farmers’ subjective status in the transaction ofthe collective land use right. The reformed law should acknowledge farmers’ complete rightto transfer their land contracted both for agricultural use and nonagricultural use. Thus,farmers’ interests can be firmly guaranteed.In short,the local government’s “land finance” behavior has seriously affected China’s economic development and even social stability.There are many problems of “land finance”legal regulation, reform of the necessity and importance goes without saying. The reform on“land finance” legal regulation should set clear objectives, uphold clear constitutionalconcepts and design comprehensive reform measures.The only way to effectively contain thecurrent “land finance” behavior,to make people truly live a life of dignity.更多还原