But from the data, we can draw two conclusions:

First, the proportion of actual tax revenue to GDP in China is not high. In 20 1 1-20 14, the tax revenue accounted for 18.96%, 18.92%, 19.20% and18.77% respectively. The average tax revenue of 34 OECD34 member countries accounts for 24.4 in 20 1 1 year and 24.7 in 20 12 year, which are 5.44 and 5.78 percentage points higher than those of China respectively. It can be seen that, on the whole, whether social security tax is included or not, China's macro tax burden level is more than 5 percentage points lower than the average level of developed countries and slightly lower than the average level of developing countries.

Second, the income burden of our government is not low. Mainly because in addition to tax revenue, non-tax revenue accounts for a large proportion. If the income from government funds and state-owned capital operation is added, the income actually controlled by the government is much larger. According to the latest statistics released by relevant departments, China's government revenue, including general public budget revenue, social security fund revenue, government fund revenue and state-owned capital operating income, accounts for about 37% of GDP. In fact, 37% of the government revenue level is higher than the average level of macro tax burden of the above 34 OECD34 countries and 33 developed countries. However, if all the income of government funds is included in the tax burden, the calculation caliber of income is obviously too wide. "Social security fund income" includes not only various social security premium income, but also other income such as financial allocation to social security and interest income from fund deposits, which obviously cannot be included in the scope of social security tax collection; The same is true of government fund income. At present, many of the 45 fund projects, especially the income from land transfer, are actually used for special expenditures in the form of cost compensation and do not constitute the disposable income of the government. Excluding only the income from land transfer, the proportion of government fund income in GDP will be reduced by more than 6.5 percentage points. Excluding the above two aspects, the real fiscal revenue will account for less than 30% of GDP, not about 37%.

From the above, we can see that even if we think that the "macro tax burden" calculated by large caliber in China is too high and needs to be reduced, we should not reduce taxes, but should reduce fees and funds. In addition, whether the macro tax burden is appropriate depends not only on its proportion, but also on the level and quality of public services provided by the government. If the two match, then the higher macro tax burden is reasonable; If it does not match, then it may be necessary to reduce the macro tax burden.

At present, the economic growth rate is declining and it continues to face downward pressure. Although different people have different interpretations of the specific reasons for the decline in economic growth, there are two main reasons for their understanding: first, the overall development of the world economy is weak, and external demand continues to be sluggish; Second, the expansion growth mode driven by investment has reached the bottleneck, which is characterized by serious overcapacity in many industries such as steel and cement, while the supply constraints and environmental carrying capacity of the production factors supporting expansion-land, labor, energy and resources are almost saturated. From a macro point of view, it is unsustainable to rely solely on stimulating investment and consumption to drive the economy to continue its extended expansion. At this time, if we blindly reduce taxes in an all-round way to stimulate the economy, the adverse consequences will be more serious. The fundamental way out for the current economy lies in economic transformation, and the quality of economic development can be improved through technological innovation and management innovation. Tax policy also needs to guide and promote the structural transformation of the economy through structural tax reduction on the basis of stabilizing tax burden.