论税务执行权的配置模式

On the Allocation Mode of Tax Enforcement Power

对于税务执行权,我国立法在“补充型配置模式”和“垄断型配置模式”之间几经反复。从行政执行权配置的典型模式可以发现,税务执行权配置的深层原理在于公正与效率两种基本价值的权衡。既往的税务执行权配置过于强调效率价值,但对公正价值有所忽略,而将税务执行权视为包含不同权能的权力束,则为建立“共享型税务执行权配置模式”、实现公正与效率的帕累托最优提供了可能。基于及时实现税收的考虑,税务执行程序原则上由税务机关主导,税务机关因而享有财产信息收集权、财产权属形式判断权、财产控制权、利益纠纷初步化解权、税款入库权;但在涉及实体判断时,由法院行使执行程序启动权、财产权属实质判断权、利益纠纷终局化解权、抵税财物变价权则更有利于实现公正价值。与此配套,税务机关、欠税人、利害关系人享有相应的程序性或实体性救济权利。

For the tax enforcement power,Chinese legislation has repeated several times between"supplementary allocation mode"and"monopoly allocation mode".From the typical pattern of administrative execution power allocation,we can find that the deep principle of tax execution power allocation lies in the balance of two basic values:justice and efficiency.In the past,the allocation of tax enforcement power overemphasized the efficiency value and ignored the justice value.However,the tax enforcement power was regarded as a power bundle containing different powers,which provided the possibility to establish a"sharing tax enforcement power allocation model"and realize the Pareto optimal of justice and efficiency.Based on the consideration of timely realization of tax revenue,tax enforcement procedures are in principle led by tax authorities,which have the right to collect property information,the right to judge the form of property ownership,the right to control property,the right to basically resolve interest disputes,and the right to deposit tax.However,when it comes to entity judgment,it is more beneficial for the court to exercise the right to start the execution procedure,the right to judge the substance of property ownership,the right to resolve the final dispute of interest,and the right to change the value of tax-deductible property.In line with this,the tax authorities,tax defaulters and interested parties have the corresponding procedural or substantive relief rights.