Experts say adjustment of income distribution focuses on increasing regulation of high income mechanism

Income distribution is an important issue in relation to people's livelihood, which has always been attached importance by the party and government. Since the party's 16, the central Government attaches great importance to regulating income distribution, promulgated a series of policy measures, and achieved some results. But at present, the problem of widening income gap is still far from being solved, which has brought negative influence on promoting scientific development and promoting social harmony.　　This shows that to solve the problem of income distribution, we need to analyze its causes, grasp the key and prescribe the right remedy. The problem of income distribution is mainly due to the lack of regulation means. Many people attribute our country's income distribution problem to economic system transition, but in-depth analysis can be found that the economic system transition is a cause of widening income gap, but may not be substantial and fundamental reasons,　　Because in the economic system transition countries can also find the income gap is enlarged but not obvious, examples of low Gini coefficients, such as Hungary and the Czech Republic, should not be attributed to the widening of the income gap due to the introduction of a market economy system, as there are also examples of better handling of income distribution issues in countries with market economic systems. In fact, people often say that the problem of income distribution includes two aspects: one is the distribution gap, mainly refers to the distribution of the results, the other is inequitable distribution, mainly refers to the cause of the unequal distribution of the reasons for judgment, such as unequal opportunities. These two problems exist in all the economic systems and all stages of development that the human society has experienced, but differ only in the regulatory mechanisms and channels that are adopted or relied upon in different economic systems and at different stages of development.　　Therefore, the crux of the problem is what kind of regulatory mechanisms and channels we should deal with the income distribution gap and distribution of inequality. That is to say, if there is anything special about the current income distribution problem in our country, this particularity can only be attributed to the imperfect of the real market economy system. Taking the imperfect realistic market economy system as a clue to examine the current pattern of income distribution in our country, we can observe a basic fact: the government does not pay much attention to solving the problem of income distribution, but when it is put into action, it is often to find a place and an effective tool, Or the policy is good but cannot be implemented.　　Mechanism lacks, the channel is not smooth, perhaps is the current China income distribution problem main Crux. The urgent task is to construct a new regulation mechanism and channel under the traditional planned economy system, we have a set of effective regulation of income distribution mechanism and channels. The main pillar of the set of mechanisms and channels is the monopoly of agricultural and sideline products and the eight-level wage system for urban workers. In the monopoly of agricultural and sideline products, farmers surplus agricultural and sideline products can only be sold to the state-owned commercial sector in accordance with the price stipulated by the State. Under the condition of the eight-level wage system of urban workers, not only the urban workers are divided into several categories, each category is regulated by the Government's salary scale and standards, and when to raise wages and how much wages will be decided by the government. At that time, the main channel for farmers to obtain money income is the sale of surplus agricultural products, urban workers to obtain money income almost the only channel is the workersFunding。　　Therefore, as long as the farmers of agricultural and sideline products sales channels and urban workers in the wage channel, the national income distribution pattern is basically determined. With the transition from planned economy to socialist market economy, the wage system of agricultural and sideline products monopoly and city workers was gradually broken. The original regulation mechanism and channel have ceased to exist, and it is necessary to "rotation" the regulation mechanism and channel adapting to the socialist market economy. This is undoubtedly going through a "stones" process of exploration. So far, many approaches have been adopted, but in general, because of the lack of adaptability or adaptability to the socialist market economy system, most of these approaches have failed to achieve the desired results.　　The reconstruction of regulatory mechanisms and channels has never been solved. So, is there any adjustment mechanism and channel suitable for the socialist market economy? Can we find suitable and effective regulation mechanism and channel in the soil of socialist market economy in our country? With the deepening of practice, people's understanding becomes clearer: the burden of regulating income distribution cannot be expected to be borne by traditional administrative means that have been effective.　　Legal means such as the implementation and promotion of the minimum wage, of course, can play a role in a certain range, but after all, it is limited, auxiliary or supplementary, able to adapt to the market economy, there is greater space, mainly economic means. Theoretically, income distribution can be divided into two levels: initial distribution and redistribution. Initial distribution is the basic link, the foundation is not strong, others will be difficult to talk about. But this aspect of the problem is more market system, the role of the government space is rather limited. The government can neither directly adjust the wages of the workers in the Non-state-owned enterprises, nor intervene the workers ' wages of the state-owned enterprises too much. What the government can do and can do is to standardize the distribution of the market.　　In addition, economic instruments that can be used for adjustment and regulation can only or mainly come from the redistribution level. The soul or essence of redistribution is to regulate excess income and to pay for the poor from the rich. In the reality of China, "" poor "seems easy, because after all, there are mechanisms, channels-in the framework of the existing fiscal expenditure structure, can fully in the fixed stock, only by incremental (steady growth of revenue), under the premise of support for low-income groups to achieve the goal. By contrast, it is difficult to regulate excess income because it lacks mechanisms and channels.　　The government can use the means to regulate excessive income is basically tax, and the current tax system under the tax revenue is clearly not up to such a mission. For example, in terms of the overall distribution of the tax system, the function of taxing excess income should be linked to direct taxes rather than indirect taxes. A glance at the 2009 national tax revenue pattern will be seen, in the current tax system consisting of 18 kinds of taxes, including value-added tax, business tax and excise tax revenue accounted for about 70% of all kinds of turnover tax. And do not say that the turnover tax will be passed through all or part of the way out, the ultimate subject of taxation is difficult to grasp, it is summed up as a tired tax refund (high-income earners are satisfiedAs the proportion of tax revenue to income is less than that of low income, the moderating effect it may bring is also reverse. For example, as far as the distribution of direct taxes is concerned, the current system of direct taxation is mainly in the flow level of corporate and personal income tax. In 2009, the share ratio was 21% and 7 respectively. Although the enterprise income tax also has the adjustment function, but it adjusts mainly is the enterprise or the profession, but is not the inhabitant individual income disparity. The current personal income tax should serve as the main tool to regulate the income gap of residents, but its role is very limited because of its low share.　　Moreover, under the condition of applying the classified income tax system, the individual income is divided into several categories, taxed separately on different categories, and even apply different tax regulations separately, instead of implementing the regulation on the basis of comprehensive calculation of all its income, the limited effect is discounted. This means that, in the face of the income gap from the two levels of flow and stock, the actual tax can be adjusted at most to reach the flow, but not the stock.　　In view of the stock is the basis and to a certain extent determines the flow, can further determine that the actual tax income gap adjustment can only touch the fur, but can not affect bones. From the above analysis can be judged as follows: In the face of the increasingly severe income distribution situation, the urgent need to solve the problem is to establish and improve the socialist market economy to adjust the distribution of income mechanism and channels.　　It is an important choice for us to make a difference in adjusting the distribution of income by starting from the reconstruction mechanism and channel. To build a fully functional modern tax system to build regulatory mechanisms and channels, should start from the weakest link. From the previous analysis we have found that if the Government to implement the income distribution adjustment of economic means can only or mainly from the redistribution level, then, as a redistribution level of two points, the adjustment of excessive income and "poor" compared to "poor", and in the adjustment of excessive income.　　Therefore, one of the important tasks that should be done at present is to construct mechanisms and channels for regulating excessive income. The regulation of excessive income depends on direct taxes rather than indirect taxes. Therefore, according to the function standard of modern tax revenue, it is necessary to build a fully functional tax system which realizes tax revenue and adjusts income distribution and stabilizes economic function in a single functional pattern. The way to build such a tax system is to increase the share of direct taxation.　　This needs to adjust and reconstruct the overall layout of the current tax system by initiating a series of tax reforms that increase direct taxes and correspondingly reduce the proportion of indirect taxes. Increasing the share of direct taxes needs to create the conditions to put into practice the direct tax projects that have been incorporated into the tax reform plan but have long been pending.　　This includes at least two taxes: personal income tax and property tax. China's personal income tax system to take the "combination of integration and classification" road, isThe objectives of the reforms already established in the "XV" plan. However, we have not made much substantial progress in this regard over the past more than 10 years, mainly because of the obstacles that are difficult to cross in tax collection and management. Today, the grim situation of income distribution has not allowed us to drag on.　　Therefore, as soon as possible to promote a profound change in tax administration and thus to break the combination of integration and classification of the individual income tax system, so that the establishment of a comprehensive basis of the personal income tax system "settled" in China, has become an imminent move. Property tax is always connected with the word "levy" because it is strictly defined as the tax levied on the property or real estate owned by the residents, and such taxes do not exist in the current tax system. It has been 7 years since it was incorporated into the tax reform plan in October 2003. 7 years of Dystocia experience tells us, whether it is as a means to curb house prices or as the main tax of local government, it is difficult to be a sufficient reason for levying property tax, it is difficult to break the levy on the road of property tax obstacles. It can be said that they are the grounds for levying a property tax, but they are not the most important reason. The levy of a property tax is likely to be widely supported only when it is used in resolving current income distribution contradictions and as a means of regulating income distribution and narrowing the income gap.　　Once the property tax is levied and thus paves the way for the inheritance tax and other taxes which belong to the tax series, it will become a reality to put an end to the lack of property tax in the current tax system, and to establish a modern tax system which can adjust the income disparity from income, consumption and property. Similar to the combination of individual income tax integration and classification, the biggest problem of levying property tax comes from the restriction of tax collection and management mechanism. In general, the system of tax collection and administration is still in the level of "indirect + intercepting". The so-called "indirect" means that it basically can only be indirect taxation and not direct tax. The so-called "interception" means that it basically can only levy cash flow as the premise of the tax, but not the stock link tax. The proposed property tax is both a direct and a stock tax. Therefore, the tax authorities can levy direct taxation and stock tax, is the basic condition of levying property tax.　　This requires us to take all kinds of effective measures to break through the bottleneck of the actual tax collection and management mechanism to provide conditions for levying property tax. (Gao Peiyong, Director, Institute of Finance and Trade and Economics, CASS)