According to the report of China Academy of Social Sciences, more than 90% of tax revenue comes from enterprises, which means that China has become a well-deserved country with high tax burden, and it also means that the tax burden pain index of China people has further soared. The report also shows that from the data of 20 12, the proportion of government expenditure in GDP has exceeded 35%, which is relatively high internationally. From the perspective of "full caliber", the proportion of investment and constructive expenditure in government expenditure exceeds 50%, which is much higher than that of developed countries 10%; The proportion of social welfare expenditure in China is about 40%, which is far lower than the proportion of 60%-70% in developed countries.
In late July last year, a report issued by the Economic Construction Department of the Ministry of Finance also showed that the tax burden of Chinese enterprises is relatively heavy at present, and the tax burden after comprehensive consideration of taxes, government funds, various fees and social security contributions exceeds 40%, exceeding the average level of OECD countries. Relevant data show that in the past 30 years, the average macro tax burden of OECD countries was about 24%~27%, while the macro tax burden of Japan, South Korea and the United States was relatively low, which was about 20% in the past 20 years. This report of the Ministry of Finance confirms the fact that the government has been concealing the tax burden in the past. I remember as early as 20 1 1, People's Daily and Xinhua News Agency published articles to refute Forbes' assertion that China's macro tax burden was high. However, the "macro tax burden" declared by the official media and experts in unison is not high, which is far from the "pain" index of tax burden felt by hundreds of millions of people. Ordinary people do not directly feel any benefits brought by people's livelihood expenditures such as housing, travel, consumption, education, medical care and old-age care, but only feel the increasing tax burden.
The World Bank once put forward a classification standard for the income level types of different countries: countries with per capita GDP below 785 US dollars are low-income countries, and the average macro tax burden is generally13.07%; Countries with per capita GDP of $ 786-3 1.25 are low-income countries, and the average macro tax burden is generally1.8%; Countries with a per capita GDP of $365,438+0.26-9,655 are upper-middle income countries, and the average macro tax burden is generally $265,438 +0.59%. Countries with per capita GDP greater than $9,656 are high-income countries, and the average macro tax burden is generally 28.90%.
According to this standard, China is still an upper-middle-income country, but its macro tax burden has exceeded that of high-income countries by 28.90%. At present, there are 19 taxes in China, which run through all aspects of life except personal income tax, consumption tax, value-added tax, business tax, stamp duty, deed tax, tobacco tax, customs duty and travel tax. In particular, turnover tax accounts for more than 70% of tax revenue. This means that many taxes that taxpayers need to pay are invisible turnover taxes, which are not reflected in personal tax bills.
A big difference between China's tax system and foreign tax system is that besides taxes, there is also a charging subject that can almost keep pace with it: including budgetary fees, extra-budgetary income, extra-institutional income and so on. Comparing all these incomes with GDP is the real "macro tax burden". If we take the arbitrary charges, fines and apportionment outside the system, as well as all kinds of corruption and bribery expenditures and the actual tax rate increased due to inflation, we simply can't figure out what the tax burden level is.
The macro tax burden index of a country depends on how much people benefit from the government's fiscal expenditure. In other words, the level of tax burden and the weight of tax burden are not important. What matters is whether people generally benefit from government taxes. Ordinary people generally feel whether they directly benefit from the government's livelihood expenditures such as education, medical care, old-age care and housing. However, those huge military expenditures, security expenditures and administrative expenditures for performance projects will not benefit the people. No matter the statistics of the International Monetary Fund or the official data of the Ministry of Finance, in recent years, only about 28% of China's fiscal expenditure has been used in areas of people's livelihood such as education, medical care, social security and employment services, while the proportion in developed countries is generally over 60%, for example, Norway is 70.6%, Sweden is 68.6%, Denmark is 7 1.6%, and Finland is 68.3.
While paying attention to the growth of fiscal revenue, people should pay more attention to whether fiscal expenditure is widely used in people's livelihood. Has the fiscal expenditure established an effective disbursement mechanism and been supervised by taxpayers? Countries such as Northern Europe also have higher tax burdens, but people complain less, mainly because most of the fiscal revenue is used to improve people's livelihood. If the high tax burden of the whole people brings high welfare to the whole people, the public with high tax burden can accept it calmly.
The most terrible thing is that the "high tax burden" of the whole people in our country is only the "low welfare" or even "no welfare" of the vast majority of people, and the tax taken from the people is only used by a few people to squander and even swallowed up by various tofu projects. That is the sorrow of the whole people! When the national tax payment ratio is higher than that of developed countries, they enjoy very little public welfare and social security. Faced with the abnormal pressure and cost of living such as high tolls, high medical expenses and high education fees, most people can only sigh in the face of anger.