检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:李波[1]
机构地区:[1]中南财经政法大学财税学院
出 处:《税务研究》2009年第3期35-39,共5页
基 金:国家社科基金项目(07CFX023)的部分研究成果
摘 要:当前针对我国个人所得税分类税制模式的改革,理论界有多种不同的观点:一种认为我国应坚持和完善现行分类所得税制,强化源泉课税,抑制税收流失;一种认为我国应彻底抛弃现行分类所得税模式,实行综合所得税制;很多人认同应该建立分类与综合相结合的税制模式,但是对具体操作又莫衷一是。本文认为,这些观点差异的产生,既有对理论和现实问题理解的偏差,也有对基本概念定义的误读,还有对国外税制模式发展观察的不足。因此有必要对个人所得税税制模式进行深入的比较考察,作为我国模式选择的铺垫和基础。In terms of China's current reform of the pattern of the personal income tax-sharing system, there are various arguments in the theory circle. One view is that the country should adhere to and improve the existing classified income tax system, strengthen taxation at source and prevent tax losses. Another view is that the country should abolish the existing one thoroughly, and implement a combined income tax system. However, many people argue that the classified one should be integrated with the combined one, but there are still different opinions on the specific operation. This paper argues that all these result from either the derivative understanding of theoretical and practical issues or the misunderstanding of the basic concepts and definitions, or the insufficient observation of the development of overseas tax system modes. So it is necessary to make an incisive comparative analysis on the personal income tax mode in order to establish the base and pave the way for its pattern choice in China.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.46