AN ACUTE QUEENING MOVE FOR CHINA’S TAXATION LEGAL REFORM: ISSUES AND PROPOSALS

• Published in: Frontiers of law in China Vol. 11; no. 4; pp. 616 - 655
• Main Author: Tianlong, HU
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Beijing Higher Education Press 01.01.2016; Higher Education Press Limited Company
• Subjects: Fiscal policy; international tax; International taxation; Rule of law; tax judicature; tax law reform; Tax legislation; Tax reform; Taxation; China
• ISSN: 1673-3428; 1673-3541
• DOI: 10.3868/s050-005-016-0038-8

China’s fiscal and taxation law reform is at a critical stage since Chinese economy development needs to consider compromising interests and conflicts from all sources, such as the social benefit network, real estate industry avidity, internationalizing currencies, fostering a philanthropic culture, and growing as a leader in the world market. These undertakings all demand a modern, handy fiscal and taxation law system. On the other hand, after two decades of implementation of the 1994 tax sharing system, the original initiative of strengthening centralized control might not keep pace with the needs of balancing decentralization and local financing demands, in addition to the troublesome taxpayers’ protection, tax judicature reform, and worsening environmental irregularities. Admittedly, China’s fiscal and taxation law reform faces new challenges and incentives. Rigorous international tax frameworks and multi-jurisdictional cooperation drive China to respond as an international trade giant and a responsible game player. Such international tax policy orientations create another layer of incentives and necessity for China to fine-tune its domestic fiscal and taxation legal framework, ranging from promotion of free trade zones, global sourcing practice and supply chain management, renegotiation of outdated tax treaty articles, more active participation in consequential overseas investments, to WTO Protocol compliance review, and international tax dispute resolution. Therefore, this article argues that, no matter the extent to which feasible, plausible or pragmatic proposals are presented, a top level architecting and a serious pursuit to upgrade citizens’ livelihood must be prioritized in earnest.