Should the dangguoying | peasants' homes be taxed on property?

It is common practice in the world to impose a tax on immovable property on families or individuals, but it is not introduced in China. There are several difficult questions that have not been well answered, which may be the reason why this tax cannot be introduced. Some people think that China's land is publicly owned, so it cannot be taxed, and this reason cannot be established.

As long as the term of the right of use is long enough, there is no economic difference between the right of use and the ownership. The real puzzle is:

First, the income of most Chinese residents is very low, and taxation will increase the burden on them, how can we properly hedge this burden? In particular, most of the incomes of Chinese peasants are relatively low, and farm houses also have production functions, and all the houses of peasant households cannot be used as tax objects.

Second, most of China's urban residents live in high-rise buildings, strictly speaking, unit buildings are not real real estate, or the real estate nature of such residences is relatively weak, similar to "apartments", and the real estate tax levied on such weak property properties should be discounted. The standard tax object should be single-family houses with a permanent use period, but such houses are rare in Chinese cities. Do we only tax so-called villas? I'm afraid not. (Regarding the weak property nature of the unit building, I will have the opportunity to discuss it in detail later)

Third, of course, the real estate tax should take the market price of the residence as the target, but because of the various problems in the planning and management of the real estate industry in the past, it has indeed led to the situation that "the house is not only lived, but also speculated". Housing prices are too high, which is an ironclad thing in China. Our so-called house is not a house, but a flat. The high price of this kind of thing actually caused a large transfer of wealth; house prices did not reflect the equilibrium price of the market. Using such high-priced housing as the basis for tax calculation is not affordable by most policy-making officials.

For example, a 100-square-meter residence in the second ring road of Beijing is calculated at 15 million, taxed by 1%, and the tax is 180,000. However, it should be clear that in first- and second-tier cities, there is a bubble in the house and no bubble in the rent (there is speculation among middlemen, but it is difficult to maintain it for a long time). This is also generally the case in some third- and fourth-tier cities.

It is necessary to introduce a real estate tax taking into account the above factors. We cannot copy the general practice of developed countries. According to this, the main points of the tax design are:

First, in response to the first problem, the real estate tax rate should not be too high, and a tax exemption is determined. For farmers' houses, the allowance can be greatly increased.

Second, for residents living in buildings, there should be a tax discount, and the discount rate can take into account the plot rate.

Third, market-based rents or shadow rents are used as tax targets, rather than house prices. For example, the 15 million residences in Beijing's second ring road cannot be taxed by multiplying this price by 1%; consider calculating tax at 10% of the market-oriented rent. For example, the rent of this house is 150,000 per year, taxed at 10%, the tax amount is 15,000, and then consider the community plot ratio to give a discount, for example, the discount rate is 40%, the tax amount is 0.6 million.

Fourth, differential discount rates can be applied to families with multiple residences.