Go homepage(回首页) Upload pictures (上传图片) Write articles (发文字帖)
The author:(作者)hpmailerpublished in(发表于) 2013/12/5 11:09:44 The former Deputy Director of the State administration of taxation
Beijing News reporter photo by Xue 珺
Current hot real estate tax, inheritance tax, property tax, Deputy Director of the State administration of taxation, the original Xu Shanda are against it, for which he was criticized. The Beijing News anniversary "2014" Special Edition interview, he said, the tax should be incorporated into the entire tax system to study. Like the housing market should be divided into affordable housing, housing and commercial upmarket housing three classes, and links at commercial high-grade housing consumption taxes.
Xu Shanda believes that, the size of the tax share to adjust slowly as the level of economic development, not human subjective designs. He believes China 10-15 years in the future, property taxes will only increase the share of 4%-5%, artificially ahead of design will not work.
The financial expenditure structure, Xu Shanda believes that is currently the biggest problem is the share of investment for State-owned assets is too large, while inputs share for social security is too small.
The Beijing News reporter Li Lei and intern Ann Blum
Estate duty is not suitable for China
"From all over the world-wide, the estate tax is in the extinction of the State. The level of personal income tax affecting population movements, not to mention the inheritance tax. ”
A: in addition to property taxes, property tax is another area of concern taxes from estate duty, the view was expressed that, China has introduced inheritance tax conditions, what do you think?
Xu Shanda: inheritance tax (property tax) is not in line with China's national conditions. From all over the world-wide, the estate tax in a dying State, currently in Hong Kong, Singapore has stopped levying estate duty. The level of personal income tax affecting population movements, not to mention the inheritance tax.
Chinese entrepreneurs to speed is pretty fast. In an economy, the wealthy immigrants too fast, it is definitely not a good thing.
Newspaper: levying property taxes are considered to be effective measures to reduce the increase of direct taxes indirect taxes?
Xu Shanda: tax structure, including indirect taxes, direct taxes (income taxes) and property taxes in three categories.
When an economy's level of development is low, its largest share of indirect taxes and smaller proportion of income tax, property tax share is even smaller. With the improvement of the level of economic development, growing GDP and social wealth, decline in the proportion of indirect tax, income tax and property tax share increase, this is the general rule.
In 1994, the proportion of indirect tax in our country more than 75%, income tax proportion was about 15%, about 1991–2002 share of property taxes. With the deepening of reform, indirect taxes especially VAT and income tax have corresponding tax cuts, at present, the proportion of indirect taxes exceeding 60%, proportion of income tax rose to 28% per cent, approximately 11% share of property taxes. Business tax to sales tax continues to progress, the proportion of indirect taxes will decline further. This is a trend, is the result of historical and natural economic development.
United States individual income taxes accounted for more than 70%, this is the United States decides the level of economic development. Specific gravity varies with the size of slowly adjusts the level of the economic development process, not artificial subjective designs.
Opposes the estate tax does not speak for the rich
"I just advocated the introduction of (high-end homes) sale excise taxes. Sellers and homeowners were wealthy, trading links, I have advocated taxing what is speaking for the rich? ”
Newspaper: of VAT tax reform plan is contrived?
Xu Shanda: camp increased design is modified in line with the direction of economic development.
If the tax reform is not in line with the direction of economic development, or beyond the level of economic development, they must not succeed.
Newspaper: new levy property taxes did not meet current levels of economic development?
Xu Shanda: I think the Chinese 10-15 years in the future, property taxes will only increase the share of 4%-5%.
Judging from the proportion of indirect tax changes, 20 fell by about 15%, indirect taxes average percentage cut of about 0.7% per cent a year.
Share of property taxes has increased by 20 years 4%-5%, the future is pretty much the same speed.
10-15 years in the future, the proportion of indirect taxes will be reduced to about 50%, the income tax increase to about 35% per cent, property tax share is about 15% or so. Throughout the history evolvement of tax structure of States, is highly correlated with its level of economic development. Subjective to practice as an idea, artificially ahead of design will not work.
Newspaper: even scholars have questioned some of your views speak for the rich, what do you think?
Xu Shanda: I know someone who has this claim, but no one told me to my face, if in person, I will debate with him.
On real estate issues, first of all I'm speaking for low-income groups, emphasizing the construction of affordable housing and the construction of ordinary housing is speaking for whom? Opposes the estate tax is not to simply speak for the rich.
I just advocated levying a sales stage of consumption taxes, levy is the commercial premium from retains links to trade links. Sellers and homeowners were wealthy, trading links, I have advocated taxing what is speaking for the rich?
Two mode of taxation, value-added tax is in favour of tenure does not speak for the rich, in favour of taxation is to speak for the rich trading links? This logic is clearly not established.
Proportion of revenue for social security than the United States in half
"One-third of the Chinese Government's fiscal revenue over GDP, with the United States. United States financial share for social security to 36%, our share of social security than the United States in half. ”
A: our country's financial expenditure structure is reasonable?
Xu Shanda: fiscal expenditure structure in our country have a lot of problems, I think the biggest problem is the share of investment for State-owned assets is too large, while inputs share for social security is too small.
One-third of the Chinese Government's fiscal revenue over GDP, with the United States. United States financial share for social security to 36%, our share of social security than the United States in half.
The Beijing News: Finance Minister Lou Jiwei believes that too much social security system vulnerabilities, how much to eat. Whether the social security system should be reformed?
Xu Shanda: the reform should, of course, the social security system, plug the loopholes of the reform must be completed. My financial Institute is studying issues of China's social security system reform, we believe that the reform of China's social security system is of the utmost importance to clarify the orientation of the reform of the social security system.
First of all, civil servants and the Government institutions ' access to the social security system, can no longer be borne by fiscal spending, it is a combination; other SOEs is farmers ' social insurance.
From raised social security funds of sources see, first, for Government civil servants and institution personnel of social security nature of financial expenditures to with this groups of combination synchronization classified to social security in the; second is operating sexual State assets value-added of part to cut Xia a classified into social security in the, let people can share operating sexual State assets of reality proceeds; also, on farmers land produces of proceeds also to has part classified into social security. Rural group all land access to the capital markets must be predicated on to resolve the farmers ' social insurance.
Particular emphasis is: we believe that affordable housing in pension, health care should be as much a part of China's social security system.
A: after the unification, the proportion of social security can be achieved?
Xu Shanda: now there is part numbers is not clear. But some of the data is can be considered, such as size of the part State-owned capital gains transferred to the social security.
The Beijing News: operating earnings of State-owned assets should be classified as social security?
Xu Shanda: the total size of operating state-owned assets is no accurate statistics, but the scale of State-owned assets supervision system of State-owned enterprises have statistical data, together with the financial system, cultural system of State-owned enterprises, State-owned assets total more than 100 trillion, their annual return on assets of approximately 1%. Part of the proceeds to them, can require them to annually follow the asset classified as 0.5% of the total social security fund, according to that ratio, annually transfer to scale up to hundreds of millions of social insurance.
State-owned assets to come up with part of the proceeds transferred to the social security principles should be clear down at the legal level, specific percentage can be calculated.
Should reduce local dependence on central financial
"Cannot be returned to rely prior to 1994 the central parts of the old regime. Both places have some liquidity, dependence on the Central Government should not be more than 20%. ”
The Beijing News: financial relationship between Central and local governments in China have always been a big problem. Contradiction of local government power and authority does not match seemed to become more and more prominent, what do you think?
Xu Shanda: match the power and authority is one of the very early reference. Financial resources match expenditure responsibilities, this proposal is better, but the best reference resources and had its purse strings match the expenditure responsibilities.
Judging from the various levels of government spending in proportion, proportion of Central Government expenditure to 15%, local Government's share of expenditures is 85%; but judging from the income, revenues slightly ahead of 50% of the Central Government, local government revenue is less than 50%. That is, the local government spent 8 cents at 5 o'clock, 3 5 Mao is waiting for the Central Government to pay for it. Share this view, reliance on local governments to the Central Government are too high.
A: high degree of reliance on Central Government local government which issues arise?
Xu Shanda: 8 5 3 5 requires the Central Government to give money, Governors and mayors is actually very difficult to work.
For local government, and give money to the speed and size of the expenditure of the Central Government does not match the speed and scale, so I have to spend. Where money rush to where central government money to stop back.
A: this issue should be how to solve it?
Xu Shanda: there are two solutions. First Central can take part on expenditure responsibilities. National co-ordination of the social security system, local governments wouldn't have to spend the part; or vertical management of the Court, the Central Government gave the money to the Supreme People's Court, and then allocated to the provincial, municipal and county levels by the Supreme People's Court Court. This can to some extent, ease the contradiction.
I think places reliance on Central Government cannot be higher than 20%.
The second way is to align financial expenditures and a certain amount of financial power and responsibility, by some financial power mean to have some tax autonomy of local governments. Such as consumption taxes in real estate sales, according to the supply and demand of local government discretion to determine the tax rate but also by the local tax Bureau levied. So-called purse strings, on the revenue side, including some degree of tax legislation and the right to impose.
Between Central and local governments should form such a fiscal situation. Central control, cannot be returned to rely prior to 1994 the central place of the old system, while places have some liquidity, dependence on the Central Government should not be more than 20%.
Consumption tax for local taxes
Now production the consumption tax should be transferred to the retail segments, along with the vehicle purchase tax to local taxes. That would give retail consumption and vehicle purchase tax.
Newspaper: local governments can control the tax autonomy, won't accept flowers?
Xu Shanda: this is a matter of the design of tax system. Such as in the sale of the property tax levy consumption taxes, what kind of House, such as how much to tax, tax for the local government itself, inappropriate change. Consumption tax related to how to design with the local real estate market, like Wenzhou, Ordos and the current real estate market conditions, tax rates are not high.
Local governments have a certain property might not be so bad, delegated to the local Government must tax legislation is in line with the reality of China. Idea that local governments have a certain amount of tax legislation as secession is not supported by the experience in other market economy countries, institutional design for Central decentralisation is the key.
The Beijing News: camp changed after the increase, local government financial waning?
Xu Shanda: that's right. Tax is a local maximum, taxes, tax reform, tax 100% goes places other VAT 75:25 ratio is divided into Central and local. Over time, this situation is not sustainable.
Such as corporate restructuring, VAT business may pay tax on business combinations, the combined share of taxes to how to divide? So final sales tax must be the same percentage share lost part of this means that the local business tax, identified divided into Central and local, and then transferred to the central parts, place cut part. Local financial revenue scale and proportion are shrinking. Such a pattern is bound to further enhance the local dependence on the Central Government. This is inconsistent with the current orientation of the reform of central-local fiscal relations.
Therefore, it is necessary to solve the problem of State main tax.
A: how to solve it?
Xu Shanda: the first thing to consider is consumption and vehicle purchase tax. Now should I think production value-added levy consumption tax to retail, together with the vehicle purchase tax to local taxes. That would give retail consumption and vehicle purchase tax. Current taxes on consumption of motor vehicles, motorcycles, cigarettes, alcohol, jewelry, luxury watches, 14 items, such as oil.
Consumption tax and vehicle purchase taxes are added together around 1 trillion, when camp this is the increased local revenues reduce the amount of the basic hedge. Go to retail and consumer tax, local government investment impulse would be weakened, encourage more consumption.
However, local tax retail sales tax currently has no experience, comprehensive introduction is unlikely to achieve, can change with camp increased the pace to pilot some taxable items, mature and then expand tariff lines.
To charge people by the NPC
"The Treasury's expanded coverage of the budget every year, but to date has not yet been fully completed, there are still a lot of government money into the budget management. ”
A: you said the future in the field of taxation, first of all to receive money to people and businesses that power constraints. There are still a lot of money without constraints of power?
Xu Shanda: I say this means not just taxes, tax legislation the NPC and the State Council regulations. Mainly fees and funds.
Delegation of national people's Congress and the State Department in the past to many charges of local government power. For example, due to insufficient education funding, the State Council has issued a document to say that all levels of Government to raise funding for education through multiple channels to meet the educational needs. What are channels? Among them the Municipal Government decided to levy a charge to address educational issues. Like a lot of things.
Governments at all levels take how much money from the GDP statistics did not accurately, finance expanded coverage of the budget every year, but to date has not yet been fully completed, there are still a lot of government money into the budget management.
A: how should constrain the power to collect money?
Xu Shanda: that everything the people paid to go through Congress, and you want to expose. Does not pass through the national people's Congress, after money not given, also in charge indicated on your ticket is collected on under which laws and regulations of the national people's Congress. Not approved by the national people's Congress, government departments issued a fixed charges shall be abolished. The system was introduced, the populace with much less arbitrary things that can substantially reduce the burden on ordinary people.
For example, individual businesses each year by various cost burden is very heavy. Some units do not have a legal consciousness, even paid to have randomness, give money, not invoiced less, not cost. Now some fines, said fined 200, bargaining to 50 do not vote, as well. And some fine targets, outlast indicator getting paid less, this is the wrong thing.
If charging in the future after the national people's Congress and the public, so much more harmonious society, many conflicts are now here.
Newspaper: difficult to implement, right?
Xu Shanda: I think it is not difficult, mainly determination problem.
Is not to charge, but in the process has to go through Congress, even if it is a county-level people's Congress. Government departments themselves completely, and certainly shouldn't have received money. NPC's supervision and intervention is a constraint, reduced charge of randomness.
(Original title: Xu Shanda: the proportion of revenues for social security is too small)
新京报记者 薛珺 摄
对于目前热议的房产税、遗产税等财产税，国家税务总局原副局长许善达一直是反对者，为此他遭到过非议。在《新京报》十周年“看2014”特刊的访谈中，他表示，房产税应纳入整个税制体系来研究。比如应该把住房市场分为保障性住房、普通住房和商业性高档住房三类，并在商业性高档住房的消费环节收税。
许善达认为，税种比重的大小要随着经济发展水平慢慢调整，不能人为主观设计。他认为中国在未来10-15年内，财产税的比重只会增加4-5个百分点，人为地超前设计是行不通的。
对于财政支出结构，许善达认为，目前最大的问题是用于经营性国有资产的投资比重太大，而用于社保的投入比重太小。
新京报记者 李蕾 实习生 安百隆
遗产税不符合中国国情
“从全世界范围来看，遗产税处于正在消亡的状态。个人所得税的高低都影响到人口流动，更不必说遗产税。”
新京报：除房产税，财产税中另一项备受关注的税种是遗产税，有观点认为，中国已经具备开征遗产税的条件，你怎么看？
许善达：遗产税(比房产税)更不符合中国国情。从全世界范围来看，遗产税处于正在消亡的状态，目前香港、新加坡都停征遗产税了。个人所得税的高低都影响到人口流动，更不必说遗产税。
中国的企业家移民的速度已经很快了。一个经济体中，富人移民速度太快，绝对不是件好事。
新京报：开征财产税被认为是降低间接税提高直接税的有效措施？
许善达：税制结构中包括间接税、直接税(即所得税)和财产税三类。
当一个经济体的发展水平较低时，其间接税的比重最大，所得税的比重较小，财产税比重就更小了。随着经济发展水平的提高，GDP和社会财富不断增长，间接税比重下降，所得税和财产税比重上升，这是一般规律。
1994年我国的间接税比重超过75%，所得税比重约为15%，财产税的比重约为6-8%。随着改革的深入，间接税尤其是增值税和所得税都实施过相应的减税政策，目前，间接税的比重超过60%，所得税的比重上升到28%左右，财产税的比重约为11%。随着营业税改增值税继续推进，间接税的比重将会进一步下降。这是一个趋势，是历史经济自然发展的结果。
美国的个人所得税占比超过70%，这是由美国的经济发展水平决定的。比重的大小是随经济发展水平慢慢调整的过程，不能人为主观设计。
反对房产税并非替富人说话
“我只是主张开征(高档住房)销售环节的消费税。卖房和买房的人都是富人，我主张在交易环节征税怎么是替富人说话？”
新京报：营业税改增值税的方案就是人为设计的？
许善达：营改增的设计是符合经济发展方向的。
如果所做的税制改革不符合经济发展方向，或者超越了当时的经济发展水平，就一定不能成功。
新京报：新开征财产税不符合现阶段的经济发展水平？
许善达：我认为中国在未来10-15年内，财产税的比重只会增加4-5个百分点。
从间接税比重的变化速度来看，20年下降了约15个百分点，每年间接税比例下调平均约为0.7%-0.8%。
财产税的比重20年间上升了4-5个百分点，未来也差不多会是这个速度。
未来10-15年中，间接税的比重会降至50%左右，所得税占比提高至35%左右，财产税比重约为15%左右。纵观各国税制结构的演变历史，是与其经济发展水平高度相关的。主观按照某种想法去实践，人为地超前设计是行不通的。
新京报：曾有网友甚至学者质疑你的一些观点是替富人说话，你怎么看？
许善达：我知道有人有这种说法，但并没有人当面这样跟我说，如果当面说，我会跟他辩论。
在房地产问题上我首先是替低收入群体说话，强调保障性住房建设和普通住房建设是替谁说话？反对房产税并不是简单地替富人说话。
我只是主张开征销售环节的消费税，征收方式是对商业高档房从保有环节变为交易环节。卖房和买房的人都是富人，我主张在交易环节征税怎么是替富人说话？
两种征税的方式，赞成保有环节征税就是不替富人说话，赞成交易环节征税就是替富人说话？这个逻辑显然是不成立的。
财政收入用于社保的比重不及美国一半
“中国政府的财政收入超过GDP的三分之一，跟美国的情况相当。而美国财政用于社保的比重占到36%，我们用于社保的比重不及美国的一半。”
新京报：当前我国的财政支出结构是否合理？
许善达：我国财政支出结构有很多问题，我认为最大的问题是用于经营性国有资产的投资比重太大，而用于社保的投入比重太小。
中国政府的财政收入超过GDP的三分之一，跟美国的情况相当。而美国财政用于社保的比重占到36%，我们用于社保的比重不及美国的一半。
新京报：财政部部长楼继伟认为社保制度漏洞太多，给多少都会吃光。社保制度是否应该改革？
许善达：社保制度当然应该改革，内部堵塞漏洞的改革也必须完成。我所在的财经研究院正在研究中国社保体系改革问题，我们认为中国社保体系改革最重要的是要明确社保体系改革的方向。
首先，政府公务员和事业单位人员进入大社保体系，不能再由财政支出负担，这是一项并轨；另外一项是农民社保并轨。
从筹集社保资金的来源看，首先，用于政府公务员和事业单位人员的社保性质的财政支出要随这个群体的并轨同步划到社保中；第二是经营性国有资产增值的部分要切下一块划入社保中，让老百姓能够分享经营性国有资产的现实收益；另外，对农民征地产生的收益也要有一部分划入社保。农村集体所有土地进入资本市场必须以解决这些农民的社保为前提。
特别应该强调的是：我们认为保障性住房也应当同养老、医疗一样成为中国社保体系的一部分。
新京报：并轨后，社保的比重能够达到多少？
许善达：现在还有一部分数字不清楚。但有的数据是可算的，比如经营性国有资产增值部分转入社保的规模。
新京报：经营性国有资产收益应当有多少划入社保？
许善达：经营性国有资产的总规模没有准确的统计，但国资委系统的国企规模有统计数据，再加上金融系统、文化系统等国企，经营性国有资产的总规模超过100万亿，其每年的资产收益率大约为1%。留一部分收益给他们，可以要求他们每年按照资产总额的0.5%划入社保基金，如果按照这一比例，每年转入社保的规模可达几千亿。
国有资产要拿出收益的一部分转入社保的原则应该在法律层面明确下来，具体的比例可以再测算。
应降低地方对中央财政依赖
“不能退回到1994年以前中央依赖地方的旧体制。同时地方又有一定的周转能力，对中央财政的依赖度不宜超过20%。”
新京报：中央和地方政府的财政关系，在中国历来是一个大问题。地方政府财权和事权不匹配的矛盾似乎越来越突出，你怎么看？
许善达：财权与事权相匹配是很早的一个提法了。财力与支出责任相匹配，这个提法要好一些，但最好的提法是财力和一定的财权与支出责任相匹配。
从中国各级政府的支出比重中来看，中央政府支出的比重为15%，地方政府的支出比重为85%；但从收入来看，中央政府的收入略超50%，地方政府的收入不足50%。也就是说，地方政府花8毛5时，有3毛5是等着中央政府给钱的。从这个比重来看，地方政府对中央政府的依赖度太高。
新京报：地方政府对中央政府依赖度高会产生哪些问题？
许善达：如果8毛5中有3毛5需要中央政府给钱，那么省长、市长实际上很难工作。
对于地方政府来说，中央政府给钱的速度和规模与其支出的速度和规模不匹配，所以只能倒着花。哪笔钱着急先给哪里，等中央的钱来了再补回去。
新京报：这个问题应当如何解决？
许善达：有两个解决办法。首先中央可以上收一部分支出责任。比如社保体系全国统筹，地方政府就不用支出这部分了；或者法院垂直管理，中央财政把钱给最高人民法院，然后由最高人民法院划拨给省、市、县级的法院。这样可以在一定程度上缓和矛盾。
我认为地方对中央的依赖程度不能高于20%。
第二个办法就是财力和一定的财权与支出责任相匹配，所谓一定的财权是指地方政府要有一定的税收自主权。比如在房地产销售环节征收消费税，地方政府根据供求关系自主确定税率而且由地方税务局征收。所谓财权，在收入方面，包括一定程度的税收立法权和征收权。
中央与地方之间应该形成这样一个财政格局。中央能控制地方，不能退回到1994年以前中央依赖地方的旧体制；同时地方又有一定的周转能力，对中央财政的依赖度不宜超过20%。
消费税可为地方主体税种
应当把现在生产环节征收的消费税转移到零售环节，与车购税一并改为地方税。这样零售环节就有消费税和车购税。
新京报：地方政府能否控制好税收自主权，不会乱收乱花吗？
许善达：这是税制设计的问题。比如在房产税的销售环节征收消费税，什么样的房子该征税、税率多少等都让地方政府自己制定，不合适再改。消费税如何设计与当地的房地产市场有关，像鄂尔多斯和温州目前的房地产市场状况，税率不可能定高。
地方政府有一定的财权并不是坏事，下放给地方政府一定的税收立法权是符合中国实际的。那种认为地方政府具有一定的税收立法权就会分裂国家的观点得不到其他市场经济国家经验的支持，关键是中央地方分权的体制设计。
新京报：营改增后，地方政府的财力会减弱？
许善达：对。营业税是地方最大的税种，营业税改的增值税100%归地方；其他的增值税中央和地方按75:25的比例分成。长期下去，这个局面是无法维持的。
比如企业重组，交增值税的企业可能与交营业税的企业合并，合并后的税收分成要如何划分？所以最终增值税一定是同比例分成，这意味着地方政府的营业税要减掉一部分，确定中央和地方的分成后又划归中央大部分，地方又减掉一部分。地方财政收入规模和比重都会缩小。这样的格局必然进一步提高地方对中央财政的依赖度。这是与当前中央地方财政关系改革的方向相悖的。
所以，必须要解决地方税主体税种的问题。
新京报：如何解决？
许善达：首先要考虑的是消费税和车购税。我认为应当把现在生产环节征收的消费税转移到零售环节，与车购税一并改为地方税。这样零售环节就有消费税和车购税。目前征收消费税的包括汽车、摩托车、烟、酒、珠宝、高档手表、成品油等14个税目。
消费税与车购税加在一起1万亿左右，这个数字跟营改增后地方收入减少的数额基本可以对冲。并且消费税转到零售环节，地方政府对于投资的冲动会有所减弱，更加鼓励消费。
不过，目前地方税务局在零售环节征收消费税还没有经验，全面开征不太可能实现，可以伴随营改增的步伐先试点几个税目，成熟后再扩大税目。
向老百姓收费应经过人大
“财政部每年都扩大预算覆盖范围，但到现在为止尚未全部完成，仍有很多政府收的钱没有纳入预算管理。”
新京报：你曾表示未来在财税领域，首先要把向老百姓和企业收钱的这个权力约束住。目前还有很多收钱的权力没有约束？
许善达：我说这句话的意思还不仅仅是税收，税收有人大立法和国务院条例。主要是各种收费和基金。
过去人大和国务院下放给地方政府很多收费的权力。举个例子，因为教育经费不够，国务院曾经发文说各级政府要通过多种渠道筹集教育经费以满足教育的需要。什么是多种渠道？其中就有市政府决定据此开征一项收费，解决教育问题。类似这样的事情很多。
各级政府从GDP中到底拿走多少钱并没有准确的统计，财政部每年都扩大预算覆盖范围，但到现在为止尚未全部完成，仍有很多政府收的钱没有纳入预算管理。
新京报：应该如何约束收钱的权力？
许善达：凡是跟老百姓收钱都要经过人大，而且要公开。不经过人大的，以后要钱不给，还要在收费的票证上标明是根据人大的哪条法律、法规收的。不经人大批准，政府部门自行发文定的收费一律废除。这个体制实行了，向老百姓乱收费的事情就少多了，能够大大减轻老百姓负担。
比如，个体工商户每年交的各种费用负担很重。有些单位没有法律意识，甚至收钱具有随意性，给多少钱都行，少一点儿就别开票，不要成本。现在有些罚款，说罚200，讨价还价给50不要票，也行。还有的罚款定指标，完不成指标少拿工资，这都是错误的东西。
如果以后收费都经过人大并且公开，那么社会要和谐得多，现在很多矛盾都产生在这里。
新京报：实施起来有困难吧？
许善达：我觉得不难，主要是决心问题。
不是不让收费，但在程序上要经过人大，哪怕是县市级人大。完全让政府部门自己定，肯定会产生不该收的钱。人大监督和干预是一个约束，减少收钱的随意性。
(原标题：许善达：财政收入用于社保比重太小)
赞