本文選題：依法治稅 + 自由裁量權(quán)　； 參考：《安徽財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：十八屆四中全會(huì)再次提出“依法治國”理念,總目標(biāo)是建設(shè)中國特色社會(huì)主義法治體系,建設(shè)社會(huì)主義法治國家。在法律層面上,中國屬于法制化國家,無論在哪個(gè)層面、哪條路線上,都要做到有法可依、有法必依、執(zhí)法必嚴(yán)、違法必究。但隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)的飛速發(fā)展,社會(huì)關(guān)系變得越來越復(fù)雜,規(guī)則的法律控制已經(jīng)不適應(yīng)中國的基本國情,即使法律法規(guī)在不斷地調(diào)整,但是由于立法技術(shù)的弊端,法律“滯后性”特征顯得突兀,法律控制始終跟不上社會(huì)的發(fā)展節(jié)奏。稅收作為國家財(cái)政收入的主要來源,在社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)中扮演中重要的角色,國家在各個(gè)方面也都有力的推動(dòng)依法治稅,稅收相關(guān)法律也變得紛繁復(fù)雜,在這樣的境況中,稅收執(zhí)法自由裁量權(quán)顯得格外重要�！抖愂照鞴芊ㄕ髑笠庖姼濉妨⒆阌凇耙婪ㄖ螄狈铰�,促進(jìn)稅收法制化,稅收相關(guān)法律法規(guī)也賦予稅務(wù)機(jī)關(guān)更多的自由裁量權(quán),稅務(wù)機(jī)關(guān)在稅收征管過程中的靈活性變得更大,有效的提高了稅收執(zhí)法效率。但是稅收執(zhí)法自由裁量權(quán)是把“雙刃劍”,其存在是有法律依據(jù)也是必要的,但在它帶來積極影響的同時(shí),它所帶來的破壞性的負(fù)面影響也日漸突出。基于人是理性的“經(jīng)紀(jì)人”假設(shè),稅收執(zhí)法自由裁量權(quán)最終掌握在執(zhí)法者個(gè)人手中,權(quán)利賦予的彈性決定權(quán)埋沒了法律所要求的一位合格的執(zhí)法者的所本該有的理性,使他們將所擁有的權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)化為謀求私利的工具,剝奪國家利益、相對人及其他利害相關(guān)人利益,破壞稅務(wù)機(jī)關(guān)等公共形象和法律的權(quán)威性,給社會(huì)帶來極大的負(fù)面影響。當(dāng)然,產(chǎn)生不恰當(dāng)使用稅收執(zhí)法自由裁量權(quán)問題的原因不僅僅是人這一主觀因素,還有很多客觀因素,他們共同成為不恰當(dāng)使用稅收執(zhí)法自由裁量權(quán)的原因體系。筆者在文章中將不恰當(dāng)使用稅收執(zhí)法自由裁量權(quán)利的形式總結(jié)為三點(diǎn),主要表現(xiàn)為:行使權(quán)力的目的和動(dòng)機(jī)不當(dāng)(事前)、程序不透明(事中)、結(jié)果顯失公正(事后)。研究出如何對稅收執(zhí)法自由裁量權(quán)加以有效的控制已是當(dāng)務(wù)之急。隨著稅收執(zhí)法自由裁量權(quán)的使用的頻率日漸升高,也日漸引起國內(nèi)外許多學(xué)者的關(guān)注,他們開始研究稅收執(zhí)法自由裁量權(quán)的問題,試圖探索出一個(gè)控制稅收執(zhí)法自由裁量權(quán)的有效辦法。本文以現(xiàn)代行政自由裁量權(quán)的理論為切入口,對社會(huì)上出現(xiàn)的典型的行使稅收執(zhí)法自由裁量權(quán)的案例進(jìn)行分析其發(fā)生的原因和給社會(huì)帶來的負(fù)面影響,并總結(jié)出控制稅收執(zhí)法自由裁量權(quán)使用的關(guān)鍵要素,并將理論結(jié)合實(shí)際,建立起一套包含四個(gè)模式的控制體系,以求能對控制稅收執(zhí)法自由裁量權(quán)的使用做出一點(diǎn)貢獻(xiàn),為推動(dòng)稅收法制化建設(shè)盡微薄之力。
[Abstract]:The fourth Plenary session of the 18th CPC Central Committee once again put forward the idea of "governing the country according to law", with the overall goal of building a socialist legal system with Chinese characteristics and building a socialist country ruled by law. On the legal level, China is a legalized country, no matter which level, which line, must have the law to abide by, must abide by the law, enforce the law strictly, must investigate the violation of the law. However, with the rapid development of economy, social relations become more and more complicated, and the legal control of rules has not adapted to the basic conditions of China, even though laws and regulations are constantly adjusted, but due to the shortcomings of legislative technology, The characteristic of lag in law is sudden, and legal control can't keep up with the pace of social development. As the main source of national financial revenue, tax plays an important role in the social economy. The state has also been able to promote the administration of taxes according to law in all aspects, and the relevant laws on taxation have become complicated, in such a situation, The draft of soliciting opinions on tax Collection and Administration Law is based on the general strategy of "governing the country according to law" to promote the legalization of taxation, and tax related laws and regulations also give tax authorities more discretion. The flexibility of tax authorities in the process of tax collection and administration has become greater, effectively improving the efficiency of tax enforcement. However, the discretion of tax enforcement is a "double-edged sword", which has legal basis and is necessary. Based on the assumption that man is a rational "broker", the discretionary power of tax enforcement is ultimately in the hands of the individual law enforcer, and the flexible decision given by the right undercuts the rationality that a qualified law enforcer is supposed to have, as the law requires. So that they can turn their rights into tools for seeking personal interests, deprive the national interests, the interests of relative persons and other stakeholders, destroy the public image of tax authorities and the authority of the law, and bring great negative impact to the society. Of course, the problem of improper use of tax enforcement discretion is caused not only by the subjective factor, but also by many objective factors, which together become the reason system of improper use of tax enforcement discretion. In this paper, the author summarizes the improper use of the discretionary power of tax enforcement into three aspects: the purpose and motive of exercising the power is improper (prior, the procedure is not transparent, the result is not fair after the incident). It is urgent to study how to effectively control the discretion of tax enforcement. With the increasing frequency of the use of the discretion of tax enforcement, many scholars at home and abroad pay more and more attention to it, and they begin to study the issue of the discretion of tax enforcement. This paper attempts to explore an effective method to control the discretion of tax enforcement. Taking the theory of modern administrative discretion as the entry point, this paper analyzes the causes and negative effects of the typical cases of exercising the discretion of tax enforcement in the society. And summarizes the key elements to control the use of tax enforcement discretion, and combines theory with practice, establishes a set of four models of control system, in order to control the use of tax enforcement discretion to make a little contribution. In order to promote the construction of tax legislation to do a meagre.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：安徽財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D922.22

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前7條

1 王延杰;李晶;;提升地方稅收征管能力的基本對策[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)研究參考;2013年46期

2 黃學(xué)賢;行政法中的比例原則簡論[J];蘇州大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2001年01期

3 秦隆伶;;稅務(wù)行政處罰自由裁量權(quán):存在問題與規(guī)范建議[J];國際稅收;2014年05期

4 錢俊文;韋國慶;;納稅評估的法律地位爭議及其解決——兼議《稅收征管法》與《納稅評估管理辦法》的修訂[J];稅務(wù)研究;2013年01期

5 李華;李易敏;;論行政自由裁量權(quán)的司法審查[J];人民司法;2014年03期

6 賈紹華;嚴(yán)嘉黎;;英美法系判例制度對完善我國稅收征管體系的啟迪[J];稅收經(jīng)濟(jì)研究;2014年04期

7 陳文輝;;如何防止行政自由裁量權(quán)的濫用[J];中外企業(yè)家;2013年23期

，

本文編號：1953705