Fiscal Reform Is Inconsistent With The Central Timetable. Is It Really A Mess?

If we say that the six major tasks of the tax reform are before us now, there is a clear mismatch between the key points and the basic things that the Central Committee requires in 2016 to achieve the basic results. We can imagine that the whole fiscal system as a pillar of modern national governance and comprehensive reform supporting the overall financial system under the direction of fiscal modernization has already manifested the obvious difficulty and the challenge to our reform.

Where does money come from, how to use it and how to use it?

In the face of such a picture, facing the decisive stage of the 13th Five-Year Central Committee's overall well-off society, how should we consider further resolving our difficulties and contradictions and pushing forward the reform? Apart from continuing to study the feasible plans in all aspects, we should further promote the interaction of multiple subjects in accordance with the inner spirit of the modernization of the national governance system.

Above all aspects of society, we should actively participate in the interaction between reform and promotion with a comprehensive reform of the orientation of public choice. It should be based on the positive energy of the constructive opinions put forward by the decision-makers at the present level of the power of think tanks and the market operation of the various forces inside and outside the system, and the ideological contributions that all concerned with the reform may take part in the reform can be combined to discuss how to face the difficulties and challenges and resolve the mismatches that have been clearly seen, so as to overcome difficulties.

Jia Kang, the former director of the Finance Research Institute of the Ministry of Finance and President of the new supply Economics Research Institute of China, said in the "Eleventh Annual Meeting of China securities market", "more frankly, as a researcher's observation, fiscal reform is the highlight of the comprehensive reform and the opening signs and drums are showing signs of not matching the schedule required by the Central Committee".

Although fiscal and tax reform has made various progress in the process of promotion, more and more contradictions have emerged from the accumulation of contradictions and hidden dangers.

The central government has clearly demanded that the focus and basic issues of fiscal reform should be made in 2016, and that it will be in 2016 for more than a month.

The following aspects can only wait and see:

First of all, the original timetable is very clear that the VAT reform should be completed this year, so that all industries can be covered. So we can wait and see whether the real estate industry will be able to cover the most complicated real estate industry in the past month or so, as well as the complicated financial industry.

Second,

The reform has already had a good foreshadowing in 2014, but it is regrettable that in 2015, we basically did not hear the promotion of resource tax from the ad valorem mechanism to the subsequent coal.

We should only wait and see when logic should be pushed to metal and non-metallic products, including the active consideration of the tax adjustment mechanism for water resources.

Third, consumption tax reform.

In addition to playing the necessary regulatory role, in fact, we must match the adjustment of the financial structure between the central and local governments. After the camp has changed to increase, there will be no decent bulk revenue sources. The consumption tax should be given a relatively stable consumption tax in accordance with the original design idea. The consumption tax will be pushed back from the production link to the later sales link, and the tax source in the sales link can be handed over to the local government. In this regard, we are also sorry that we have not heard any further developments.

There are three other tasks of tax reform: environmental tax, real estate tax and personal income tax. These three taxes must be considered before the legislation is advanced, after the completion of the legislative process or the revision or establishment of the tax law.

I regret to say that progress has been very limited so far.

The controversial real estate tax heard the information for some time before it was finally incorporated into the NPC's legislative plan.

Now, I hear some information and reports that can be seen in the newspaper. It seems that there are some obvious disputes in this respect.

The controversy over this opinion is likely to result in internal delays in the process of legislative planning.

When will it enter the first instance? When will the real estate tax be solicited by the whole society after the first instance, and then its procedures will be completed? Now its uncertainty is more obvious.

I agree that there must be dynamic optimization under the top-level planning, but we should also be vigilant for reasons that can not be made public because of various internal reasons. Even the rough schedule that has been given under the whole delay of top-level planning is a timetable that I think should be instructive.