論我國資本所得課稅──以北歐雙元所得稅制為借鏡

Abstract

在全球化的背景下，各國傾向對資本所得採取低稅負以競逐資本。我國為以貿易為導向的開放經濟體，在全球化帶來資本競逐的背景下，面臨稅率累進性、稅基全面性、稅捐中立性與稅制競爭性的四重困境。在四重困境下，我國資本所得稅制不僅違反稅基全面性與稅捐中立性，且多有違反量能課稅原則之處。本文針對我國包含金融市場與不動產市場之資本所得稅制觀察並評析，釐清我國資本所得稅制所面臨的問題，並透過參考他國稅制設計提出對我國稅制改革之建議。 本文以立法政策切入，引進北歐瑞典、挪威、芬蘭、丹麥四個國家的雙元稅制作為比較對象，嘗試提供更為全面的資本所得稅制作為借鏡，期望能夠促進社會公平、健全資本市場發展，並達成廣稅基、輕稅率和簡稅政的稅制目標。 本文主要貢獻有三：（一）將資本所得細分為孳息與資本利得，並同時討論其稅制；（二）將資本市場細分為不動產市場與金融市場，兩市場所得皆分為孳息與資本利得加以討論；（三）以北歐雙元稅制中有關資本所得之稅制作為比較對象，並對於我國資本所得稅制提出改革建議。 對於我國資本所得稅制，本文提出改革方向包括：（一）將資本所得與勞動力所得區分課稅，勞動力所得維持累進稅率，資本所得改採低比例稅率；（二）擴大資本所得稅稅基、調整稅率；（三）參考附加稅率制（Bracket Tax）及無風險利率報酬扣除額（Rate-of-return Allowance, RRA）。此外，針對不動產市場與金融市場資本所得課稅，本文進一步提出改革方向如：（一）對於不動產市場孳息改採比例稅率；（二）維持現行不動產市場資本利得課稅機制；（三）整合金融市場孳息類型所得，並改採比例稅率；（四）整合金融市場資本利得所得類型，並改採比例稅率；（五）對於金融市場孳息及資本利得提供無風險利率報酬扣除額。

Under globalization, governments worldwide tend to apply lower tax on capital income in order to stimulate capital accumulation. As an open economy, competitive pressure on certain income tax rates creates a quadrilemma or a four-way trade-off in domestic income taxation. Wanting to maintain a predetermined revenue level, the governments cannot achieve all of those four goals without seriously compromising at least one of them- competitiveness, symmetry (allocative efficiency), horizontal equity (comprehensive income taxation) and progressivity. Given the quadrilemma, our capital income tax code not only violates the horizontal equity (comprehensive income taxation) and allocative efficiency, but also fails to meet the ability-to-pay rule. Thus, this research focuses on both the capital of the financial markets and the real estate markets’ as well, trying to ascertain the problems in our tax code and evaluate our tax code in relation to our national tax code. Via studying a more comprehensive capital income taxation from Dual Income Taxation, this research is committed to enhance equality, broaden the development of capital market and tax base, lighten tax rate, and simplify administration cost. This research will compare Dual Income Taxation from Sweden, Norway, Finland and Denmark with Taiwan’s capital income taxation. The main articles of the research are as follows: 1) to dissect capital income into civil profits and capital gains, and discuss their relation to the tax code; 2) to dissect the capital market into the real estate markets and financial markets, and discuss their relation to the tax code; 3) to compare capital income taxation from the perspective of Nordic Dual Income Taxation, and propose suggested reforms for our capital income taxation. This research, while preliminary, has provided deeper insight into capital income taxation, and the findings of this study have a number of important implications for future practice. At first, dividing total income into “labor income” and “capital income”. The former remains at a progressive tax rate, while the latter changes to flat rate. Secondly, the broadening of the tax base and revision of the tax rate. Third, referring to the bracket tax and rate-of-return allowance in Norway. In addition, several suggestions emerging from this study are as follows: 1) adopt flat tax rates on the civil profits from real estate markets; 2) maintain the current tax system on the capital gains from real estate markets; 3) integrate the civil profits from financial markets, and adopt flat tax rate; 4) integrate the capital gains from financial markets, and adopt flat tax rate; 5) provide rate-of-return allowances for civil profits and capital gains from financial markets.