【作者】 任海兵；

【导师】 姬长生；

【作者基本信息】 中国矿业大学 ， 资源开发规划与设计， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 我国现行矿产资源有偿使用制度对于保障国家矿产资源所有权收益起到了重要作用,但现行制度中依然存在基本概念定位不准,各项税费功能划分不清,计征模式逻辑错位,收益分配不尽合理等问题;构成有偿使用制度的各组成部分在性质、功能和作用上没有区别国家作为矿产资源所有者、投资者和社会管理者三种不同的身份,致使税费收取、收益分配使用等的依据错位,税、费、金的性质和功能混淆;“矿产资源有偿使用”表面上应为“谁使用、谁付费”,但征收对象是开采者;探矿权采矿权使用费征收的实质是矿区使用费而不是获得矿业权所应支付的费用;探矿权采矿权价款功能定位是对地勘劳动的补偿,与资源税征收初始定位重复等。论文在研究了矿产资源价值、矿产品价值和矿产品利润等问题之后,深入剖析了现行矿产资源有偿使用制度中缴纳的各项费用的实质、作用及其来源,分析了矿产资源相关收益的组成。提出了将“矿产资源有偿使用”制度更名为“矿产资源有偿获取”制度,揭示了国家在出让采矿权时,矿产资源所有权已经发生了实质性流转,采矿权人应向矿产资源所有者缴纳财产使用费即矿产资源权利金和反映矿产资源禀赋形成的级差收入的优质资源出让金;将探矿权采矿权使用费改称矿区使用费,将探矿权采矿权价款改称矿业权投资收入;探矿权人因转让矿业权获得的超额利润和采矿权人因矿产品涨价获得的超额利润分别称为探矿权超额收益和采矿权超额收益,应按照一定比例上交给作为所有者的国家构成所有权分成。论文建议由国家凭借所有权收取的矿产资源权利金按照收入的一定比例分期收取。国家以所有者身份通过转让矿产资源所有权获得包括矿产资源权利金、优质资源出让金和所有权分成在内的各项收益;以投资者身份获得投资于矿产勘探和开发产生的矿业权投资收益和矿产品投资收益;以社会管理者身份获得管理、监督和服务等相关费用。以保障通过矿产资源国家所有权在经济价值上的充分实现来维护国家对矿产资源的所有权,国家以不同身份所发挥的不同作用获得不同的收益。优质资源出让金收取是凭借所有权而不受国家是否出资的影响,原则上应在转让矿产资源矿业权或采矿权时一次性收取。论文建立了矿产资源相关收益产生和分配模型、探矿权超额收益分成和采矿权超额收益分成的定量分析模型,研究了矿产资源所有权收益的评估确定方法。并建议国家收取的采矿权超额收益分成占销售收入的比例的合理范围和矿产资源权利金收取比率的合理值。更多还原

【Abstract】 The current compensation system for use of mineral resources in China played important role in safeguarding the state ownership income. But, there are some problems in the current system such as the incorrect orientation of basic concept, the blurry partition of the function of various taxes and dues, the mismatching of the logic of calculation methods, the unreasonable distribution of income, etc. The current system doesn’t distinguish the state between owner, investor and supervisor, which lead to the mismatching of the basis of distributing and utilizing income and the mixing up of the property and function of tax, royalties and fee. On the surface, the one who use mineral resources should pay for it, but actually, mining enterprises pay for that. Exploration fee and mining fee are actually block royalties but not fees for getting exploration rights or mining rights. Reimbursement fee for exploration right and mining right are designed to compensate for prospecting for mineral deposits, which repeated resource tax.The article analyzed mineral resources value, mineral products value and mineral products profit, etc. The essence, effect and source of money paid to get exploration right or mining right were analyzed in depth. Then, correlative income was also analyzed. The article put forward a new system about transferring ownership of mineral resources with compensation to replace the current system. The new system has announced that the ownership of mineral resources was actually changed when the state transferred mining rights. So, mining concessioner should pay the ownership of mineral resources in name of property fee which can also be called as mineral resources royalties. At the same time, mining concessioner should also pay high-quality mineral resources transferring fees which come from the differential profit of high-quality mineral resources. Exploration fee and mining fee should be called as block royalties, and reimbursement fee for exploration right and mining right should be replaced as mining rights investment income. The super profit comes from transferring exploration rights can be named as exploration rights excess earnings, and the super profit comes from the rising of the price of mineral product can be named as mining rights excess earnings. Both exploration rights excess earnings and mining rights excess earnings should be shared as revenue sharing for ownership at a rate by the sate who is the ownership of mineral resources. The article suggested that mineral resources royalties the state get by ownership should be paid in installments based on gross sales. The new system specified that as the owner of mineral resources, the state gets ownership income, including high-quality mineral resources transferring fees, mineral resources royalties and revenue sharing for ownership, as investor, the state gets mining right investment income and minerals investment income which come from the investment in exploring and developing mineral resources, and as supervisor, the state gets fees which come from supervising, administering and serving the mineral resources exploring and developing. The new system laid emphasis on safeguarding the state ownership income from mineral resources by realizing the economic value of mineral resources ownership. The state gets different income based on different identities. High-quality mineral resources transferring fees are based on ownership but not on investment and should be paid at a time in principle. The model of the production and distribution of correlative income was set up, and the quantitative analysis model of exploration right excess earnings share and mining right excess earnings share is founded. The article proposed the reasonable limit of mining right excess earnings share ratio and the reasonable ratio of mineral resources royalties.更多还原