本文選題：房價 + 政府財政收入　； 參考：《浙江大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：近年來,我國房價快速上漲,房地產(chǎn)業(yè)保持高速發(fā)展的態(tài)勢,在國民經(jīng)濟的比重也越來越大。地方政府熱衷于發(fā)展房地產(chǎn)業(yè),將其視為本地區(qū)支柱產(chǎn)業(yè),認為房價上漲有助于本地區(qū)財政收入增加。但是,最近文獻研究和經(jīng)驗觀察告訴我們,房價上漲除帶來正面效應(yīng)之外,負面效應(yīng)也日益顯現(xiàn)。因此,我們不禁要問,房價上漲有助于提高政府財政收入嗎?為了回答這一問題,.本文參考現(xiàn)有文獻,首先從理論上探討房價上漲對政府財政收入的影響機制,并提出五個基本假說。假說1:不考慮中央與地方分成機制,將中央和地方政府視為一個整體,房價對政府總財政收入存在正向效應(yīng),但隨著時間推移,這一效應(yīng)逐漸減弱,長期甚至消失;假說2:房價對制造業(yè)、其他服務(wù)業(yè)稅收收入存在正向效應(yīng),但隨著時間推移,這一效應(yīng)逐漸減弱,長期甚至消失;假說3:房價對房地產(chǎn)業(yè)財政收入存在正向效應(yīng),但隨著時間推移,這一效應(yīng)逐漸減弱,長期依然為正;假說4:考慮中央與地方分成機制,房價對地方政府財政收入存在正向效應(yīng),但隨時間推移,這一效應(yīng)逐漸減弱,長期依然為正;假說5:房價對政府財政收入的影響存在區(qū)域異質(zhì)性,表現(xiàn)為在房地產(chǎn)發(fā)展水平高的地區(qū),房價的負效應(yīng)可能會更加明顯。其次,本文使用1998-2014年中國省級面板數(shù)據(jù),從整體政府、地方政府和關(guān)聯(lián)產(chǎn)業(yè)三個層面,對上述假說進行實證檢驗。結(jié)果表明,上述假說均被證實。特別地,本文有兩大重要發(fā)現(xiàn):第一,在長期,房價上漲不會影響政府總財政收入,但會增加地方政府財政收入,這從根本上回答了為何中央政府大力調(diào)控房地產(chǎn),而地方政府卻不愿配合中央執(zhí)行房價調(diào)控政策這一重大問題。第二,房價上漲對政府財政收入的影響存在區(qū)域異質(zhì)性。從長期來看,對于房地產(chǎn)發(fā)展水平高的地區(qū),房價上漲不僅無法增加其地方財政收入,還會減少其政府總財政收入;對于房地產(chǎn)發(fā)展水平低的地區(qū),房價上漲并不會對其地方財政收入和政府總財政收入產(chǎn)生影響。上述發(fā)現(xiàn)表明中央應(yīng)當采取分區(qū)域的房價調(diào)控政策,特別是要加強對房地產(chǎn)發(fā)展水平高地區(qū)的調(diào)控。
[Abstract]:In recent years, China's housing prices are rising rapidly, the real estate industry maintains a rapid development trend, and the proportion of the real estate industry in the national economy is increasing. Local governments are keen to develop real estate as a pillar industry in the region, arguing that rising house prices will help increase revenue in the region. However, recent literature studies and empirical observations tell us that, in addition to the positive effects, the negative effects of rising house prices are becoming increasingly apparent. So we can't help asking, can rising house prices help raise government revenue? In order to answer this question. Referring to the existing literature, this paper first discusses theoretically the mechanism of the effect of house price rise on the government's fiscal revenue, and puts forward five basic hypotheses. Hypothesis 1: the central and local governments are regarded as a whole without considering the mechanism of central and local division, and the housing price has a positive effect on the total fiscal revenue of the government, but with the passage of time, this effect gradually weakens, and even disappears for a long time; Hypothesis 2: there is a positive effect of house price on the manufacturing industry and other service industry tax revenue, but with the passage of time, this effect gradually weakens, even disappears for a long time; hypothesis 3: housing price has positive effect on real estate revenue. However, over time, this effect gradually weakens and remains positive for a long time. Hypothesis 4: considering the mechanism of central and local division, housing prices have a positive effect on local government revenue, but over time, this effect gradually weakens. Hypothesis 5: there is regional heterogeneity in the influence of house price on government revenue, which shows that the negative effect of house price may be more obvious in areas with high real estate development level. Secondly, using the provincial panel data from 1998 to 2014, this paper empirically tests the hypothesis from three levels: the overall government, the local government and the related industry. The results show that all these hypotheses have been confirmed. In particular, this paper has two important findings: first, in the long run, rising house prices will not affect the total government revenue, but will increase local government revenue. This fundamentally answers why the central government has made great efforts to control real estate. But the local government is unwilling to cooperate with the central government to carry out the housing price control policy this important question. Second, the impact of rising house prices on government revenue exists regional heterogeneity. In the long run, for areas with high levels of real estate development, rising house prices will not only fail to increase their local fiscal revenues, but will also reduce their total government revenue; for areas with low levels of real estate development, Rising house prices will not have an impact on local revenue and total government revenue. The above findings suggest that the central government should adopt sub-regional housing price control policies, especially to strengthen the regulation and control of areas with high real estate development level.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：浙江大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：F299.23;F812.41

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 余靜文;王媛;譚靜;;房價高增長與企業(yè)“低技術(shù)鎖定”——基于中國工業(yè)企業(yè)數(shù)據(jù)庫的微觀證據(jù)[J];上海財經(jīng)大學(xué)學(xué)報;2015年05期

2 陳斌開;金簫;歐陽滌非;;住房價格、資源錯配與中國工業(yè)企業(yè)生產(chǎn)率[J];世界經(jīng)濟;2015年04期

3 吳曉瑜;王敏;李力行;;中國的高房價是否阻礙了創(chuàng)業(yè)?[J];經(jīng)濟研究;2014年09期

4 羅時空;周亞虹;;房價影響企業(yè)投資嗎:理論與實證[J];財經(jīng)研究;2013年08期

5 郭珂;;土地財政依賴、財政缺口與房價——基于省際面板數(shù)據(jù)的研究[J];經(jīng)濟評論;2013年02期

6 王先柱;趙奉軍;;房價波動與財政收入:傳導(dǎo)機制與實證分析[J];財貿(mào)經(jīng)濟;2012年11期

7 郝壽義;王旺平;;我國房價與地價關(guān)系的動態(tài)研究[J];經(jīng)濟問題;2012年09期

8 況偉大;李濤;;土地出讓方式、地價與房價[J];金融研究;2012年08期

9 黃少安;陳斌開;劉姿彤;;“租稅替代”、財政收入與政府的房地產(chǎn)政策[J];經(jīng)濟研究;2012年08期

10 陳彥斌;邱哲圣;;高房價如何影響居民儲蓄率和財產(chǎn)不平等[J];經(jīng)濟研究;2011年10期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前5條

1 夏繼敏;房地產(chǎn)市場波動對地方財政收入的影響分析[D];東北財經(jīng)大學(xué);2014年

2 章金龍;我國城市地價對房價的影響機制研究[D];南京財經(jīng)大學(xué);2015年

3 侯正望;浙江省房地產(chǎn)發(fā)展和經(jīng)濟增長關(guān)系的研究[D];浙江大學(xué);2010年

4 袁振華;房地產(chǎn)價格波動對地方財政收入的影響研究[D];上海師范大學(xué);2010年

5 鄭光輝;基于Kriging技術(shù)的城市地價動態(tài)監(jiān)測實現(xiàn)方法研究[D];南京師范大學(xué);2005年

，

本文編號：1945379