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
机构地区:[1]北京大学法学院,北京100091
出 处:《黑龙江八一农垦大学学报》2014年第2期106-112,共7页journal of heilongjiang bayi agricultural university
摘 要:中国的农业税改革未能完全达致为农民减轻负担、缩小城乡差距的制度目标。美国宪政历史上极为重要的"美国银行案",体现了对税权进行民主控制的重要性。以此来审视中国的税权分配体系,农业税废除之后农民负担仍然较重的根本原因是:在中央和地方的二元权力主体的博弈过程中,缺少了本应扮演"控制者"角色的农民的参与。对征税权的民主控制,是打破"每次税收改革,即便在当时降低了税负,最终仍然会导致税负加重"这一"黄宗羲怪圈"的关键。China 's agricuhural reform has not been fully achieved institutional goal of reducing the burden of farmers and the gap between urban and rural. "Bank of America case" was important extremely in america constitutional history, which reflected the importance of the right to democratic control taxes. In order to examine china's tax power distribution system, the agricultural tax was abolished, but the heavier fundamental reason of burden was that the lack of playing a control role of farmers" participation in the course of the game binary powers of the central and local. Democratic control of the taxing authority was breaking the key of Huangzhongxi vicious circle, which reduced the tax burden even at the time, and ultimately would lead to heavier tax burden.
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:216.73.216.7