反思与重构:成品油税目具体化路径之优化

Reflection and Reconstruction:Optimizing the Specific Path of Refined Oil Consumption Tax Items

在"悦达公司诉常州市国税案"中,"生物重油"的定性存在争议,其根源在于成品油税目范围的不确定。国家税务总局通过规范性文件具体化税目具有正当性。但现有路径因"一事一议"模式下的反复修正,类推适用的一般化缺乏一贯性,形式上极不稳定。又因成品油实质及消费税立法宗旨等因素的忽略,导致规范性文件内容实质存在问题。加之,规范性文件审查制度尚不完善,纳税人只得承受实质之不公。为了税收执法中征税范围的确定,具体化税目时应禁止"一事一议"模式,适当限制国家税务总局解释权;允许纳税人参与税务行政解释制定过程,以期减少文义冲突;并加强规范性文件的实质性审查,限制类推适用一般化。

A dispute exists in the definition of "bio-heavy oil" in the case that Yueda Company charges Changzhou National Taxation Bureau, which is caused by the uncertainty of the range of refined oil tax items. It is justifiable for the State Administration of Taxation of the PRC to specify the tax items by means of the normative documents. However, due to repeated revisions on the case-by-case basis, the generalization of analogy application in the current approach lacks consistency, and it is extremely unstable in form. Meantime, the neglect of such factors as the essence of refined oil and the legislative purpose of consumption tax results in the problemsin the essential content of normative documents. In addition, the deficiencies in the reviewing system of normative documents also force the taxpayers to bear this substantial injustice. In order to define the scope of tax items in the tax enforcement, the case-by-case mode is suggested to be prohibited when tax items are specified so as to restrict the interpretation of the State Administration of Taxation appropriately. Moreover, the taxpayers are allowed to participate in the process in which the administrative interpretation of tax is enacted in the hope that the conflict from the textual meaning can be reduced. In addition, it is suggested to strengthen the substantive review of normative documents, which will restrict the generalization of analogy application.