We invite you to click "Follow" to receive exciting content and see different stories every day
Agricultural tax is a tax with a long history, which used to be an important source of state revenue and an important burden on farmers. Since January 1, 2006, the mainland has completely abolished the agricultural tax, ending the history of collection that has lasted for more than 2,000 years, reducing the economic pressure on hundreds of millions of peasants and creating favorable conditions for the economic and social development of rural areas.
However, in recent years, along with the mainland's economic and social transformation and upgrading, some experts and scholars have put forward a proposal to relevy agricultural taxes, believing that this will increase the government's fiscal revenue, support the development of agriculture and rural areas, crack down on some "big farms" formed by "capital going to the countryside," and encourage peasants to devote themselves more to agricultural production.
This suggestion has aroused widespread concern and heated debate from all walks of life. So, is it necessary to reintroduce agricultural taxes? What are the pros, cons and risks? In this regard, this article will analyze and discuss the following aspects.
1. The theoretical basis and practical motivation for releving agricultural taxes
From the perspective of fairness and justice, peasants, as citizens of the state, enjoy the public services and social benefits provided by the state, and should also bear the corresponding tax obligations. The abolition of agricultural taxes makes farmers the only group that does not pay taxes, which is inconsistent with tax principles and social equity.
From the perspective of fiscal revenue, with the adjustment, transformation and upgrading of the mainland's economic structure, the growth of tax revenue in traditional industries and commerce has slowed down, while the tax contribution of emerging industries and service industries is not enough to make up for the gap. Therefore, the reintroduction of agricultural taxes can increase the government's fiscal revenue to support the development of public services and social welfare.
From the perspective of resource allocation, the abolition of agricultural taxes makes land a low-cost or even cost-free factor of production, resulting in inefficient use and waste of land resources. The heavy imposition of agricultural tax can increase the cost of land use and promote the conservation and optimal allocation of land resources.
From the perspective of industrial structure, the abolition of agricultural taxes has led to the phenomenon of "capital going to the countryside" in some wealthy areas, forming some "big farms" with large scale, low efficiency, serious environmental pollution, and mismatch with local resource endowments.
A heavy agricultural tax can discourage the development momentum of these "big farms" and encourage a modern agricultural business model that is small- and medium-scale, efficient and economical, green and ecological, and compatible with local resource endowments.
2. The potential risks and adverse effects of re-imposing agricultural taxes
From the perspective of policy continuity and stability, the abolition of agricultural taxes is a major reform measure made by the CPC Central Committee and the State Council, an important policy to benefit the peasants, and an important policy to support agriculture and rural areas.
The abolition of agricultural taxes has already formed a social consensus and legal norms, and if agricultural taxes are reintroduced, it will not only disrupt the development plans of agriculture and rural areas, but will also damage the credibility and image of the government and arouse social dissatisfaction and opposition.
From the perspective of peasants' incomes and burdens, although the abolition of agricultural taxes has relieved the economic pressure on peasants, it has not made peasants rich. At present, the income level of peasants on the mainland is still lower than that of urban residents, and the income gap between urban and rural areas is still quite large.
At the same time, farmers are also faced with a variety of expenses, such as medical care, education, pension, etc. If the agricultural tax is re-levied, it will undoubtedly increase the peasants' burdens, reduce their incomes, and affect the peasants' living standards and production enthusiasm.
From the perspective of agricultural production and development, although the abolition of agricultural taxes has not directly improved the efficiency and efficiency of agricultural production, it has not led to a decline or contraction of agricultural production. At present, the mainland's agricultural production is facing many difficulties and challenges, such as the reduction and degradation of cultivated land resources, the pressure and risk of food security, and the deterioration and constraints of environmental pollution.
If the agricultural tax is reintroduced, these difficulties and challenges may be exacerbated and the stability and development of agricultural production will be affected. From the perspective of social stability and development, although the abolition of agricultural taxes does not fundamentally solve the "three rural" problems, it is also conducive to improving the relationship between cadres and the masses, alleviating social contradictions, and promoting social harmony.
At present, the mainland is in a critical period of economic and social transformation and upgrading, and is facing a variety of complex and changeable internal and external environments. If the agricultural tax is re-levied, it may lead to a series of social problems, such as increasing the gap between urban and rural areas, intensifying class contradictions, aggravating social injustice, and triggering mass incidents, which will affect social stability and development.
epilogue
To sum up, although there is a certain theoretical basis and practical motivation for the recollection of agricultural tax, there are also potential risks and adverse effects that cannot be ignored. Therefore, before considering whether to reimpose agricultural taxes, it is necessary to conduct sufficient argumentation and assessment, and listen to the opinions and suggestions of all parties extensively, so as to avoid unnecessary losses and consequences.
At the same time, in solving the problems of state finance, local economy, and rural society, we should not simply rely on the measure of recollecting agricultural taxes, but should adopt comprehensive, systematic, and long-term policy measures in various aspects to promote the coordinated development of state finance, local economy, rural society, and other aspects.