:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:臺灣土地課稅制度--問題、影響與改革
書刊名:臺灣土地研究
作者:蔡吉源
作者(外文):Tsai, Chi-yuan
出版日期:2001
卷期:3
頁次:頁37-82
主題關鍵詞:鎖定效果地租稅地價稅土地增值稅Lock-in effectSite rent taxLand value taxLand value increment tax
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(23) 博士論文(2) 專書(1) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:23
  • 共同引用共同引用:55
  • 點閱點閱:203
土地交易課稅之稅基是依買賣前後期公告現值之差距為之。公告現值有可能大於或小於買賣價格,再加上並未充份考慮賣方在持有期間的改良成本及管理費用,因此,與公平合理徵稅有很大的距離,尤其是租稅假期(tax holiday,即兩個年度公告現值調整期間)所有交易(及產權移轉)均不必納稅,形成嚴重的租稅漏洞。其所以發生如此嚴重缺失,均源於台灣平均地權土地稅制在土地價格體系的自我混淆。例如,土地持有課徵地價稅,其稅基以公告地價為主;土地交易課徵土地增值稅,其稅基以公告現值為主。全國平均公告地價略為公告現值四分之一。在台灣課徵地價稅之都市土地其公告地價略等於法院拍賣價與政府公地出售價的 8.9%到37.6%之間,公告現值略等於國有財產局公地出售價格的 22.71%到76.63%之間。換言之,我們既沒有公開的土地市場價格,也沒有合理的評估市場價值。由於資訊不公開,所以一般市場買賣價格都變成秘密。做為市場價值評估的重要參考資料—一般市場買賣價格—既然無法公開取得,則公告現值及公告地價就變成毫無意義可言,而扭取了地價稅與土地增值稅的經濟功能及財政功能。尤有進者,實質地價稅率相對偏低,實質增值稅率相對偏高。兩者合併考慮,就能發現偏低的平均實質地價稅負擔 (約0.1%)與偏高的平均實質土地增值稅負擔 (約10%)造成嚴重的鎖定效果 (lock-in effect),使市地供求失衡。本文利用簡單數學模型模擬,顯示現行稅制有利土地投機哄抬地價。為達公平正義原則,吾人認為改革土地稅制刻不容緩。改革方向應該減輕土地交易稅負,適度提高土地持有稅負,以消除土地投機,活絡房地產市場,促進經濟發展。
The tax base for land transaction tax is determined by the official present value (OPV) before and after the transaction. The official present value may be either larger or smaller than the transaction price; furthermore, it does not fully take into consideration the seller's improvement costs and management expenses during the period in which they held the land. There is thus a considerable gap between this system and fair, equitable taxation. This is particularly true because no tax need be paid on transactions (and transfers of title) during tax holidays (i.e. the period between consecutive annual adjustments of the official present value), creating a serious flaw in the taxation system. The reason why such a serious failing has developed is because of the confusion in the land valuation system under Taiwan's land rights equalization tax system. For example, when land value tax is levied on the ownership of land, the tax base, official land value, is derived mainly from the official present value. On average, official land value (OLV) in Taiwan is only one quarter of official present value. On urban land subject to land value tax, the official land value varies between 8.9% and 37.6% of the price that the land would reach if sold by court auction or by the government; official present value varies between 22.71% and 76.63% of the price at which land is sold by the National Property Bureau. In other words, there is neither an open land market price nor a reasonable appraised market value. Owing to the fact that information is not made freely available, the prices paid in ordinary market transactions are kept secret. As one of the most important bases for market value appraisal - the regular market sale price is not available, the official present value and official land value become meaningless, and the economic and fiscal functions of land value tax (LVT) and land value increment tax (LVIT) are warped. Even more serious, the effective land value tax rate is too low, while the effective land value increment tax rate is too high. If one studies the two in combination, one can see that the combination of an excessively low average effective land value tax burden (around 0.1%) and an excessively high effective land value increment tax burden (around 10%) results in a serious lock-in effect, causing a loss of equilibrium in market supply and demand. In this article, simple mathematical models are used to show that the current tax system encourages land speculation and the pushing up of land prices. I believe that the reform of the land tax system is an urgent task if fairness and justice are to be achieved. The method of reform adopted should be to reduce the land transaction tax burden, while raising the tax burden on the ownership of land, in order to eliminate land speculation, revitalize the real estate market and promote economic development.
期刊論文
1.陳文久(1994)。土地稅制須逆向改革。人文及社會科學集刊,6(2),135-165。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.華昌宜(19940600)。最適房地價稅率及其在臺灣政策應用之探討。人文及社會科學集刊,6(2),63-77。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.關秉寅(19940600)。「誰的公平?誰的正義?」--從土地增值稅爭議談公平與權力之關係。人文及社會科學集刊,6(2),99-133。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.蔡吉源(19970900)。凍省後縣市財政健全之道--以臺中市為例。財稅研究,29(5),125-136。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.蔡吉源(19970700)。論土地稅制改革:地價稅與增值稅。財稅研究,29(4),77-87。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.蔡吉源(19940600)。亨利喬治法則與都市土地稅制改革。人文及社會科學集刊,6(2),1-20。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.林全(19930100)。土地增值稅之改革芻議。財稅研究,25(1),7-12。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.Tiebout, Charles M.(1956)。A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures。Journal of Political Economy,64(5),416-424。  new window
9.Mieszkowski, Peter M.(1972)。The Property Tax: An Excise Tax or a Profits Tax?。Journal of Public Economics,1(1),73-96。  new window
10.蔡吉源(1982)。Taxes and Residential Choice。Public Choice,38,55-72。  new window
11.Bentick, B. L.(1979)。The Impact of Taxation and Valuation Practices on the Timing and Efficiency of Land Use。Journal of Political Economy,87(4),859-868。  new window
12.周玉津(1993)。土地增值稅問題全方位之探討。財稅研究(財稅研究雜誌社),25(4),121-126。new window  延伸查詢new window
13.陳文久(1993)。為何以土地實際增值比例課稅能遏阻低報。經濟前瞻,4月號,139-141。  延伸查詢new window
14.陳文久(1994)。實價認定、最適稅負與比例增值稅。財稅研究(財稅研究雜誌社),26(3),64-76。new window  延伸查詢new window
15.陳聽安(1993)。從公平與效率談土地增值稅何去何從。財稅研究(財稅研究雜誌社),25(1),1-5。new window  延伸查詢new window
16.蔡吉源(1987)。市地漲價不能沒有對策!。中國論壇,25(2),29-31。  延伸查詢new window
17.Oates, W. E.、Schwab, R. E.(1997)。The Impact of Urban Land Taxation: The Pittsburgh Experience。National Tax Journal,50(1),1-21。  new window
18.Pugh, Cedric(1997)。Poverty and Progress? Reflections on Housing and Urban Policies in Developing Countries, 1976-96。Urban Studies,34(10),1547-1595。  new window
會議論文
1.蔡吉源(1998)。Housing Location Under Land Consumption Restraint。公共經濟研討會,(會議日期: 1998/11/07)。中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.International Association of Assessing Officers、The International Association of Assessing Officers(1990)。Property appraisal and assessment administration。Chicago, IL:International Association of Assessing Officers。  new window
2.Harrison, Fred(1983)。The Power in the Land。London:Shepheard-Walwyn Ltd.。  new window
3.Youngman, Joan M.、Malme, Jane H.(1994)。An International Survey of Taxes on Land and Buildings。Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers。  new window
4.Rosen, H. S.(1992)。Public Finance。Richard D. Irwin, Inc.。  new window
5.林英彥(1991)。土地經濟學。土地經濟學。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
6.黃淑惠(1995)。論我國土地增值稅的功能及改進方向。論我國土地增值稅的功能及改進方向。臺北。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.Case, K. E.(1994)。Volatility, Speculation, and the Efficiency of Land Markets。Land Use and Taxation: Applying the Insights of Henry George。Cambridge, MA。  new window
8.George, H.(1883)。Progress and Poverty。Progress and Poverty。NYC。  new window
9.Hicks, U.(1961)。Development from Below: Local Government and Finance in Developing Countries of the Commonwealth。Development from Below: Local Government and Finance in Developing Countries of the Commonwealth。London, UK。  new window
10.Lin, Robert(1994)。Urban Land Policy Issues in Taiwan。Land Policy Problems in East Asia - Toward New Choices: A Comparative Study of Japan, Korea and Taiwan。Honolulu, HI。  new window
11.Muth, R.(1968)。Urban Residential Land and Housing Markets。Issues in Urban Economics。Baltimore, MD。  new window
12.William, Percy R.(1962)。The Pittsburgh Graded Tax Plan。NYC:Robert Schalkenbach Foundation。  new window
13.顏愛靜(1994)。The Effects of Land Reform on Changes in the Structure of Agriculture in Taiwan in the 1950s。Land Policy Problems in East Asia - Toward New Choices: A Comparative Study of Japan, Korea and Taiwan。Honolulu, HI。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE