Please wait a minute...
金融研究  2021, Vol. 487 Issue (1): 71-90    
  本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
税费替代:增值税减税、非税收入征管与企业投资
赵仁杰, 范子英
上海财经大学公共经济与管理学院,上海 200433
Tax-Fee Substitution: VAT Tax Reduction, Non-tax Revenue Management and Corporate Investment
ZHAO Renjie, FAN Ziying
School of Public Economics and Administration, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics
下载:  PDF (810KB) 
输出:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 通过减税促进企业投资和提振宏观经济是近年来中国税收制度改革的重要目标,但减税政策的实际效果却存在争议。本文利用2009年增值税转型改革,研究了减税对地方政府税费收入和企业非税负担的影响,从税费替代的角度揭示非税负担变动如何影响企业固定资产投资。研究发现:(1)增值税转型在减税的同时提高了地方政府非税收入并加重了企业非税负担,地方财政收入受增值税转型冲击越大,企业非税负担上升越明显。(2)上述应主要体现在小型、微型和民营企业上,大中型、非民营企业的非税负担未发生明显变化。(3)非税负担上升会显著抑制小型、微型和民营企业的固定资产投资,促使小型微型和民营企业通过持有更多现金和减少流动性负债来应对税费负担不确定性。本文有助于理解减税政策对小型微型和民营企业非税负担的溢出效应及其影响,为通过减税降费促进投资和提振经济提供经验支撑。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
赵仁杰
范子英
关键词:  税费替代  增值税转型  非税负担  企业投资    
Summary:  Tax competition has in recent years resulted in lower tax rates worldwide. Promoting corporate investment and economic development has been the key target of the large-scale tax cuts in China's tax reform policies. The reduction of value-added tax and inclusive tax cuts for small enterprises are expected to reduce the tax burden and promote investment. However, the effectiveness of the tax reduction policy has been debated and the responses of some firms do no reflect the reduction in tax. Private investment has not increased significantly since the implementation of the tax reduction policy. Does the tax reduction policy then reduce the burden on firms? How do such policies affect corporate investment? What factors restrict the effectiveness of tax reduction policies? By addressing these questions we can better understand the actual effects of tax reduction policies, and thus tax reduction reforms can be further improved.
The tax reduction policies of China's central government often result in fiscal reductions for local governments under the tax sharing system. The financial stress faced by local governments from the implementation of tax reduction policies prompts us to investigate how they can strategically respond to tax reduction shocks. Non-tax fiscal revenue is essential for local governments, which they have the autonomy to collect and manage. However, the tax reduction policies implemented by the central government can reduce local tax revenues. To ensure a fiscal balance, local governments can better enforce the collection of non-tax revenues, which leads to an increase in the non-tax burden of enterprises, and the effect of “tax-fee substitution” in local fiscal revenues and corporate expenses, which eventually hinders the effectiveness of tax reduction policies.
Value-added tax is the main type of shared tax in China. When first established, value-added tax could not be deducted from the fixed assets purchased before tax, which significantly increases a firm's financial burden. In 2004, China began to pilot value-added tax transformation in its northeastern regions. This policy allows firms to deduct value-added tax from fixed assets purchased by enterprises before taxation, thus reducing the tax burden. We investigate the effect of the value-added tax reform implemented nationwide in 2009 based on prefectural city-level panel data from 2008 to 2011. The main findings are as follows. (1) The reform has greater and more adverse effects on regions that rely more on value-added taxes. (2) These regions increase non-tax revenues relative to others, and thus the value-added tax reform leads to fee-tax substitution.
In addition, based on 2008-2011 firm-level data from the national tax survey database, we use a difference-in-differences (DID) method to evaluate the impact of VAT transformation on firms' non-tax burden. We find that although the reform reduces tax burdens, it significantly increases corporate non-tax burdens. The effects of the reform on the reduction in tax for firms are not significantly different. However, the effects on the non-tax burden differ with the types and sizes of firms. Raising the non-tax burden mainly affects small, very small, and private firms. it has no significant effect on large and medium-sized firms and non-private firms. Thus, the tax and fee substitution are asymmetric. The fiscal pressure caused by tax cuts for local governments is mainly transferred to small businesses and private firms through an increase in the non-tax burden.
Tax and fee substitution will affect government fiscal revenue quality and corporate fixed asset investment behavior. Compared with taxation, local governments have greater autonomy in terms of non-tax items, and the resulting non-tax burden is much more uncertain for firms. The substitution effect of tax and fees resulting from the tax reduction policy increases the uncertainty of tax and fees for firms, prompting them to adopt more cautious investment strategies.
In the context of recent global tax cuts, we emphasize that the central government should fully consider the financial pressure that the reduction of the shared tax policy places on local governments. The fees they incur should also be reduced in the policy, along with taxes for small and very small firms. Regulating local governments' non-tax revenue collection from small and very small firms and gradually creating a central government tax and fee management process are both necessary to prevent tax reductions. Local governments have increased the non-tax collection from small and very small firms and its management, thus leading to increased uncertainty in the tax burden of small and micro enterprises, which ultimately adversely affects their development.
Keywords:  Tax-Fee Substitution    VAT Tax Reform    Non-tax Burden    Corporate Investment
JEL分类号:  H25   H32   D21  
基金资助: * 本文感谢国家社会科学基金重大招标项目(19ZDA076)和国家自然科学基金面上项目(71973088)的资助。
作者简介:  赵仁杰,经济学博士研究生,上海财经大学公共经济与管理学院,E-mail:xdjjzrj@126.com.范子英,经济学博士,教授,上海财经大学公共经济与管理学院,E-mail:ivannj@163.com.
引用本文:    
赵仁杰, 范子英. 税费替代:增值税减税、非税收入征管与企业投资[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 487(1): 71-90.
ZHAO Renjie, FAN Ziying. Tax-Fee Substitution: VAT Tax Reduction, Non-tax Revenue Management and Corporate Investment. Journal of Financial Research, 2021, 487(1): 71-90.
链接本文:  
http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/  或          http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/Y2021/V487/I1/71
[1] 才国伟、吴华强和徐信忠,2018,《政策不确定性对公司投融资行为的影响研究》,《金融研究》第3期,第89~104页。
[2] 陈工和洪礼阳,2014,《省级政府非税收入竞争的强度比较与分析——基于财政分权的视角》,《财贸经济》第4期,第5~13页。
[3] 陈硕和高琳,2012,《央地关系:财政分权度量及作用机制再评估》,《管理世界》第6期,第43~59页。
[4] 樊纲,1995,《论公共收支的新规范——我国乡镇“非规范收入”若干个案的研究与思考》,《经济研究》第6期,第34~43页。
[5] 范子英和彭飞,2017,《“营改增”的减税效应和分工效应:基于产业互联的视角》,《经济研究》第2期,第82~95页。
[6] 方红生和张军,2014,《财政集权的激励效应再评估:攫取之手还是援助之手?》,《管理世界》第2期,第21~31页。
[7] 高培勇和毛捷,2013,《间接税税收优惠的规模、结构和效益:来自全国税收调查的经验证据》,《中国工业经济》第12期,第143~155页。
[8] 顾研和周强龙,2018,《政策不确定性、财务柔性价值与资本结构动态调整》,《世界经济》第6期,第102~126页。
[9] 姜彭、王文忠和雷光勇,2015,《政治冲击、不确定性与企业现金持有》,《南开管理评论》第4期,第130~138页。
[10] 李凤羽和杨墨竹,2015,《经济政策不确定性会抑制企业投资吗?——基于中国经济政策不确定指数的实证研究》,《金融研究》第4期,第115~129。
[11] 李增福、顾研和连玉君,2012,《税率变动、破产成本与资本结构非对称调整》,《金融研究》第5期,第135~150页。
[12] 连玉君和苏治,2008,《上市公司现金持有:静态权衡还是动态权衡》,《世界经济》第10期,第84~96页。
[13] 连玉君、彭方平和苏治,2010,《融资约束与流动性管理行为》,《金融研究》第10期,第158~171页。
[14] 刘晓光和刘克勇,2006,《东北地区增值税转型试点政策的效应分析与改进建议》,《财政研究》第8期,第63~65页。
[15] 吕炜和陈海宇,2015,《“减税”还需“减费”:非税负担对企业纳税遵从的影响》,《经济学动态》第6期,第45~55页。
[16] 马双、吴夕和卢斌,2019,《政府减税、企业税负与企业活力研究——来自增值税转型改革的证据》,《经济学(季刊)》第2期,第483~504页。
[17] 马双、孟宪芮和甘犁,2014,《养老保险企业缴费对员工工资、就业的影响分析》,《经济学(季刊)》第3期,第969~1000页。
[18] 聂辉华、方明月和李涛,2009,《增值税转型对企业行为和绩效的影响———以东北地区为例》,《管理世界》第5期,第17~24页。
[19] 彭宅文,2009,《社会保障与社会公平:地方政府治理的视角》,《中国人民大学学报》第2期,第12~17页。
[20] 申广军、陈斌开和杨汝岱,2016,《减税能否提振中国经济?——基于中国增值税改革的实证研究》,《经济研究》第11期,第70~82页。
[21] 汪德华,2016,《差异化间接税投资抵扣能改善企业投资结构吗?——来自中国2009年增值税转型改革的经验证据》,《数量经济技术经济研究》第11期,第41~58页。
[22] 王红建、李青原和邢斐,2014,《经济政策不确定性、现金持有水平及其市场价值》,《金融研究》第9期,第53~68页。
[23] 王佳杰、童锦治和李星,2014,《税收竞争、财政支出压力与地方非税收入增长》,《财贸经济》第5期,第27~38页。
[24] 王素荣和蒋高乐,2010,《增值税转型对上市公司财务影响程度研究》,《会计研究》第2期,第40~46页。
[25] 王志刚和龚六堂,2009,《财政分权和地方政府非税收入:基于省级财政数据》,《世界经济文汇》第5期,第17~37页。
[26] 谢贞发,2016,《中国式分税制的税收增长之谜》,《中国工业经济》第5期,第92~108页。
[27] 徐向华和郭清梅,2006,《行政处罚中罚款数额的设定方式——以上海市地方性法规为例》,《法学研究》第6期,第89~101页。
[28] 徐业坤、钱先航和李维安,2013,《政治不确定性、政治关联与民营企业投资——来自市委书记更替的证据》,《管理世界》第5期,第116~130页。
[29] 许伟和陈斌开,2016,《税收激励和企业投资——基于2004—2009年增值税转型的自然实验》,《管理世界》第5期,第9~17页。
[30] 许志涛和丁少群,2014,《各地区不同所有制企业社会保险缴费能力比较研究》,《保险研究》第4期,第102~109页。
[31] 杨志安,2005,《东北增值税转型试点的初期效应及分析》,《税务研究》第4期,第50~52页。
[32] 张军,2007,《分权与增长:中国的故事》,《经济学(季刊)》第1期,第21~52页。
[33] 赵海益和贾驰,2016,《财政支出结构偏向刺激了中国地方政府罚没收入增长吗?》,《浙江社会科学》第10期,第38~47页。
[34] 赵健宇和陆正飞,2018,《养老保险缴费比例会影响企业生产效率吗?》,《经济研究》第10期,第97~112页。
[35] Bloom, N., S. Bond and J.V. Reenen, 2007. “Uncertainty and Investment Dynamics”, Review of Economics Studies, 74(2): 391~415.
[36] Boogaard, V. V. D., P. Wilson and J. B. Samuel, 2019. “Informal Taxation in Sierra Leone: Magnitudes, perceptions and implications”, African Affairs, 118, (471): 259~284.
[37] Chen, Y., Z. He and L. Zhang, 2013. “The Effect of Investment Tax Incentives: Evidence from China's Value-Added Tax Reform”, Social Science Electronic Publishing.
[38] Cleary, S., 1999. “The Relationship Between Firm Investment and Financial Status”, Journal of Finance, 54(2): 673~692.
[39] Fama, E. F. and K. R. French, 1993. “Common Risk Factors in the Returns on Stocks and Bonds”, The Journal of Finance, 33(1):3~56.
[40] Julio, B. and Y. Yook, 2012. “Political Uncertainty and Corporate Investment Cycles”, The Journal of Finance, 67(1):45~83.
[41] Kang, W. S., K. Lee and R. A. Ratti, 2014. “Economic Policy Uncertainty and Firm-level Investment”, Journal of Macroeconomics, 39: 42~53.
[42] Lin, Y. F., 2007. “Rural Informal Taxation in China: Historical Evolution and an Analytic Framework”, China & World Economy, 3(15):1~18.
[43] Liu, Y. Z. and J. Mao, 2019. “How do Tax Incentives Affects Investment and Productivity? Firm-level Evidence from China”, American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 11(3): 261~291.
[44] Liu, Y., 2018. “Government Extraction and Firm size: Local officials' Responses to Fiscal Distress in China”, Journal of Comparative Economics, 46:1310~1331.
[45] Loo, B. P. Y. and S. Y. Chow, 2006. “China's 1994 Tax-Sharing Reforms: One System Differential Impact”, Asian Survey, 46(2):215~237.
[46] Olken, B. A. and M. Singhal, 2011. “Informal taxation”, American Economic Journal:Applied Economics, 3 (4): 1~28.
[47] Ostrom, E., 1991. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
[48] Ozkan, A. and N. Ozkan, 2004. “Corporate Cash Holdings:An Empirical Investigation of UK Companies”, Journal of Banking and Finance, 28(9): 2103~2134.
[1] 李志生, 金凌. 银行竞争提高了企业投资水平和资源配置效率吗?——基于分支机构空间分布的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 487(1): 111-130.
[2] 赵娜, 王博, 张珂瑜. 融资租赁、银行信贷与企业投资[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 487(1): 150-168.
[3] 唐遥, 陈贞竹, 刘柯含. 需求和供给冲击对企业投资以及价值链的影响——基于突发事件的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 480(6): 40-59.
[4] 徐明东, 陈学彬. 中国上市企业投资的资本成本敏感性估计[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 470(8): 113-132.
[5] 才国伟, 吴华强, 徐信忠. 政策不确定性对公司投融资行为的影响研究[J]. 金融研究, 2018, 453(3): 89-104.
[6] 申广军, 张延, 王荣. 结构性减税与企业去杠杆[J]. 金融研究, 2018, 462(12): 105-122.
[7] 俞剑, 郑文平, 程冬. 油价不确定性与企业投资[J]. 金融研究, 2016, 438(12): 32-47.
[8] 倪婷婷, 王跃堂. 增值税转型、集团控制与企业投资[J]. 金融研究, 2016, 427(1): 160-175.
[9] 吴国鼎, 姜国华. 人民币汇率变化与制造业投资——来自企业层面的证据[J]. 金融研究, 2015, 425(11): 1-14.
[1] 王曦, 朱立挺, 王凯立. 我国货币政策是否关注资产价格?——基于马尔科夫区制转换BEKK多元GARCH模型[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 1 -17 .
[2] 刘勇政, 李岩. 中国的高速铁路建设与城市经济增长[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 18 -33 .
[3] 况伟大, 王琪琳. 房价波动、房贷规模与银行资本充足率[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 34 -48 .
[4] 祝树金, 赵玉龙. 资源错配与企业的出口行为——基于中国工业企业数据的经验研究[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 49 -64 .
[5] 陈德球, 陈运森, 董志勇. 政策不确定性、市场竞争与资本配置[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 65 -80 .
[6] 牟敦果, 王沛英. 中国能源价格内生性研究及货币政策选择分析[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 81 -95 .
[7] 高铭, 江嘉骏, 陈佳, 刘玉珍. 谁说女子不如儿郎?——P2P投资行为与过度自信[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 96 -111 .
[8] 吕若思, 刘青, 黄灿, 胡海燕, 卢进勇. 外资在华并购是否改善目标企业经营绩效?——基于企业层面的实证研究[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 112 -127 .
[9] 姜军, 申丹琳, 江轩宇, 伊志宏. 债权人保护与企业创新[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 128 -142 .
[10] 刘莎莎, 孔高文. 信息搜寻、个人投资者交易与股价联动异象——基于股票送转的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 449(11): 143 -157 .
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 《金融研究》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发 技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn
京ICP备11029882号-1