【摘要】：自2011年1月28日起，重慶市政府、上海市政府先后明確將正式試點開征房產(chǎn)稅。對于房產(chǎn)稅的征收，各界人士眾說紛紜。從法學(xué)的角度來看，這次的房產(chǎn)稅征收存在著一定的法律問題。《中華人民共和國立法法》第8條規(guī)定，有關(guān)稅收的基本制度只能制定法律。而我國這一次的房產(chǎn)稅征收是由國務(wù)院指定重慶和上海以制定地方性法規(guī)的方式來執(zhí)行的，是和我國《立法法》的相關(guān)規(guī)定不符合的。從授權(quán)立法的角度來看待這個問題，也是違反授權(quán)立法的相關(guān)理論的。在我國，授權(quán)主體是國家立法機(jī)關(guān)，我國的立法機(jī)關(guān)主要是全國人大及其常委會。而國務(wù)院不是我國憲法中規(guī)定的立法機(jī)關(guān)，其不具備授權(quán)主體資格。但是此次國務(wù)院卻授權(quán)重慶、上海市政府制定法規(guī)征收房產(chǎn)稅，這是違反授權(quán)立法相關(guān)規(guī)范的。同時，此次征收房產(chǎn)稅也是違反了我國憲法的基本原則的，如人民主權(quán)原則、權(quán)力制約原則以及法治原則。我國憲法規(guī)定，公民的合法的私有財產(chǎn)不受侵犯。而此次征收房產(chǎn)稅沒有通過正當(dāng)?shù)牧⒎ㄍ緩�，�?gòu)成了對于我國公民財產(chǎn)權(quán)的侵犯。另外，分析一下國外相關(guān)的稅收立法，我們會發(fā)現(xiàn)，國外有關(guān)稅收的基本問題都是由憲法規(guī)定的，，而我國憲法中對于這些問題則沒有規(guī)定，僅僅規(guī)定了公民有依法納稅的義務(wù)。在具體立法模式方面，西方主要國家一般都通過稅收基本法來規(guī)定有關(guān)稅收的基本問題，而我國則主要通過行政機(jī)關(guān)的授權(quán)立法。通過研究，本文認(rèn)為，對于房產(chǎn)稅的征收，應(yīng)該由立法機(jī)關(guān)通過制定法律的形式來執(zhí)行。
[Abstract]:Since January 28, 2011, Chongqing Municipal Government, Shanghai Municipal Government has made it clear that the formal pilot levy of property tax. For the collection of property tax, people from all walks of life divergent views. From the point of view of law, there are some legal problems in the collection of property tax. Article 8 of the Legislative Law of the people's Republic of China stipulates that the basic system of taxation can only be enacted. However, the collection of property tax in China this time is carried out by means of local laws and regulations appointed by the State Council in Chongqing and Shanghai, which is inconsistent with the relevant provisions of the Legislative Law of our country. From the perspective of enabling legislation, it is also a violation of the relevant theory of enabling legislation. In our country, the main body of authorization is the national legislature, and the legislative organ of our country is the NPC and its standing committee. The State Council is not the legislative organ stipulated in the Constitution of our country, and it does not possess the qualification of the authorized subject. But this time, the State Council authorized Chongqing, the Shanghai municipal government to enact laws and regulations to levy property tax, which is in violation of the relevant rules of the enabling legislation. At the same time, the levying of real estate tax violates the basic principles of our constitution, such as the principle of people's sovereignty, the principle of power restriction and the principle of rule of law. Our constitution stipulates that the lawful private property of citizens is inviolable. This property tax has not passed the proper legislative approach, which constitutes an infringement of Chinese citizens' property rights. In addition, by analyzing the relevant tax legislation in foreign countries, we can find that the basic issues of taxation in foreign countries are all stipulated by the Constitution, but there are no provisions on these issues in the Constitution of our country, which only stipulates that citizens have the obligation to pay taxes according to law. In the specific legislative model, the main western countries generally through the basic law of taxation to provide for the basic issues of taxation, while China is mainly through the executive authority to legislate. Through research, this paper holds that the collection of property tax should be carried out by the legislature through the formulation of laws.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：重慶大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D920.0;D922.22

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 薛鋼;;房產(chǎn)稅改革中需要注意的若干問題[J];領(lǐng)導(dǎo)之友;2011年03期

2 李秀江;;房產(chǎn)稅很難出臺,不征最好——專訪中國投資協(xié)會會長、發(fā)改委投資研究所張漢亞[J];小康;2010年11期

3 陳一鳴;;聽桑德拉太太聊美國房產(chǎn)稅[J];共產(chǎn)黨員;2010年24期

4 ;上海重慶將率先試點房產(chǎn)稅[J];共產(chǎn)黨員;2011年02期

5 劉俊;;房產(chǎn)稅的立法基礎(chǔ)[J];改革;2011年02期

6 ;房產(chǎn)稅:合法性難題[J];檢察風(fēng)云;2011年09期

7 ;法律顧問[J];光彩;1999年04期

8 鄂t

本文編號：2310369