【作者】 罗敏；

【导师】 熊伟；

【作者基本信息】 武汉大学 ， 经济法学， 2022， 博士

【摘要】 在合伙企业的发展运行中,税收向来作为重要的因素之一为投资者所考量。合伙企业在私法中是可以进行损益分配契约自治的主体,在税法中则成为需将所得“穿透”至合伙人纳税的混合实体。按照这种设计,合伙人存在多种形式,不同身份的合伙人,其税收处理方式也存在差别,所以合伙企业具有十分广阔的避税空间,其可以利用损益分配的自由,结合税收待遇的复杂性,实施复杂的避税规划。譬如,合伙企业可能将利润分配给特定合伙人,也可能将亏损分配给特定合伙人,或者利用税收协定中的差别待遇。这些反映出合伙企业避税有别于自然人与法人企业,也引发合伙企业反避税的特殊性要求。不过,这些要求在合伙企业的反避税实践中并未得到太多回应。我国合伙企业所得税规则体系不仅缺少针对合伙企业的一般反避税条款,对税收中性原则也多有违背,此外还存在反避税标准与边界不清等问题。合伙企业反避税的本质,就是要对合伙企业及其合伙人参与的民商事交易关系在税法上重新认定和评价,构建不同于民商事法律的独立逻辑体系。不过如此一来,反避税所内含的交易调整权也会引发税权滥用、侵害纳税人权益的隐忧。在税收征纳秩序中,任何单方面的管控思维都应当摒弃,维护征纳双方权益、贯彻征纳平衡理念是税收治理的基本目标。基于税法承接与调整私法的基本思路,税法在承接合伙企业自治规则的时候,不应当轻易否定合伙企业的权利设定与基本属性。合伙企业反避税的根本目的是预防与规制合伙企业的避税行为,但也要避免对合伙企业自治特性的偏离与破坏。因此,合伙企业反避税需要处理好合伙企业自治性与税务机关干预的平衡,也要处理好合伙企业自治性与税法预防的平衡。具体来说,既要尊重合伙企业的契约自治自由与损益分配自由,也要防止合伙企业的权利滥用;另一方面,针对合伙企业的反避税也要有限度,寻找恰当的反避税平衡点,不能因为反避税的过度而损害合伙企业的优势。鉴于交易形式的变化莫测,合伙人利用合伙企业进行避税的隐蔽性与复杂性也会提升,应当在规则形成与规则执行阶段就要注意这个问题。所以,合伙企业反避税应当秉持平衡理念,在合伙企业所得税规则设定及规则执行过程中予以贯彻。这不仅是维护合伙企业自治特性的需要,也是税权谦抑性理念的内在要求,更是禁止权利滥用原则的应有之义。从我国引进合伙企业组织形式开始,其具体形式与构成发生了较大的变化,与之相应,合伙企业所得税制也几经演变。一方面,为了避免重复征税,我国的合伙企业所得税从合伙企业与合伙人双重征税模式,演化到只对合伙人征税的单边征税模式;另一方面,随着合伙企业组织形式的变化,我国合伙企业所得税规则也进一步明确了“先分后税”的征税格局,自然人合伙人与法人等其他组织形式的合伙人分别就源自合伙企业的收入缴纳所得税。在这个演变过程中,合伙企业作为纳税虚体不再负责纳税。但是,合伙企业的所得在分配给各个合伙人时,所得性质的上传规则从完全不允许所得性质的上传,演化为允许少部分特定项目所得的性质上传。具体来说,个人合伙人从合伙企业取得的利息、股息、红利所得,以及符合条件的创投企业在特定核算模式下的股权转让所得与股息红利所得,可以将所得性质上传至合伙人,对个人合伙人适用“利息、股息、红利所得”应税项目计算缴纳个人所得税,除此之外,合伙人的其他所得均统一按照“经营所得”项目进行计缴纳税。这意味着,合伙人从合伙企业分配到的所得,其税务处理方式的多样性严重缩水。另外,合伙企业亏损的抵减与结转,也发展出附期限允许合伙企业结转、禁止非个人合伙人的亏损抵减、以及严格条件下创投企业个人合伙人可以抵减等处理方式。总而言之,我国合伙企业所得税制度原则上禁止所得性质的上传与亏损抵减的传递,仅在极少数情形下放开权限。可以认为,合伙企业所得税制度建立之后,我国限制合伙企业所得性质的上传,以及限制合伙企业亏损抵减的传递,是为了预防和反制合伙企业的避税行为。随着合伙企业所得税规则体系的演进,反避税的理念也得到相应的践行,但合伙企业反避税所要求的特别平衡,在方式方法上处理的并不太好。合伙企业的避税特性说明,是否允许所得性质上传与亏损抵减,左右着合伙企业的避税空间。对所得性质上传以及亏损抵减的限制虽有必要,但其范围和力度如果拿捏不准,容易导致合伙企业自治性的不当限缩,另一方面,也会导致合伙人无法准确适用所得税法中的扣除规则、免税规则以及税收优惠条款,破坏了合伙人税基的真实性,掩盖合伙人的真实税收负担能力。此外,虽然我国合伙企业所得税规则已经融入了反避税理念,却仍然存在着反避税漏洞,不仅未曾顾及合伙人利用自身亏损抵减合伙企业盈利的避税风险,也未顾及合伙人与合伙企业关联交易的避税风险。这些方面凸显出来的问题说明,我国目前并没有很好地处理合伙企业自治性与反避税之间的平衡关系。合伙企业组织形式在域外也被广泛运用,其反避税问题并非国内特产。但是,域外的合伙企业所得税制大多允许合伙企业所得性质向合伙人上传,甚至允许合伙企业向合伙人分配亏损,用以抵扣合伙人的盈利。这样的设计,合伙企业的自治性得到了保证,却也意味着合伙企业的分配空间变大,避税风险徒增。不过,为了应对合伙企业自治性引发的避税风险,美国等合伙企业所得税先进国家也采纳了不少防范性制度,如实行合伙企业与纳税人双重申报制度、设置合伙人账目、限制合伙人的扣除与抵免,以及构建权益基值制度,等等。这些制度致力于从合伙人的税基确认与调整规则上切入,限制合伙人的任意分配,并要求合伙人的分配符合其在合伙企业中的经济利益,以此防范具有避税目的的特殊分配。此外,域外一些国家还设置了针对于合伙企业的一般反避税条款,允许税务机关对合伙企业所做的缺乏“实质性经济效应”的特殊分配予以调整,帮助税务机关更快速、准确地甄别合伙企业以避税为目的的特殊分配。通过这些法律实践,可以较好地处理合伙企业自治性与预防避税的平衡关系,以及其与反避税权力的平衡关系。此外,在域外合伙企业所得税制中,不论是合伙企业所得税法中的扣除与抵免规则,还是合伙企业一般反避税条款,或者是因循反避税需要而设置的合伙人出资账目与权益基值制度,都始终围绕着“实质性经济效应”做文章,追求合伙人分配份额在合伙企业中的客观经济利益真实性。因为尊重合伙企业损益分配自治性与维护国家税收利益的双重目标的实现,最终都以合伙企业纳税人客观经济实质的实现作为核心,所以,域外合伙企业反避税以“实质经济效应”要件为中心,强调对纳税人真实税收负担能力的尊重。以此为基础设计的合伙企业所得税规则,以及税务机关据此实施的反避税措施,契合了合伙企业反避税的价值取向。这些都是我国合伙企业反避税值得参考的经验。法律的规定来自经济生活的需要。现代合伙企业制度的基本特征,具有其历史必然性与合理性。税法可以基于反避税需求对合伙企业进行一定的介入与干预,但是,承认合伙企业的存在,并且尊重合伙企业的属性,应当成为反避税干预的前提。此外,在现代所得税法中,遵循量能课税的基本原则,税收客体的选取、归属与确认,都以经济能力作为判断的基准。因此,从方法论的视角观察,以经济能力作为线索,去考察合伙人在合伙企业中的客观经济效应,判断合伙人在合伙企业中的经济利益,是辨别合伙人真实税收负担能力的应然路径。鉴此,为完善我国合伙企业反避税法律体系,应首先尊重合伙企业分配的自治特性,并围绕纳税人的税收负担能力的辨识,帮助税务机关开展反避税工作。以此为基础,我国可考虑立足于既有的合伙企业税收法规及政策实践,创建一个由合伙企业一般反避税条款、特殊反避税条款组成的反避税法律体系。具体而言,可从四个面向贯彻实施,使反避税立场在合伙企业所得税规则中进一步优化:其一,对合伙企业所得税规则进行完善,构建合伙企业双重纳税申报制度,优化合伙企业的税收扣除规则与会计处理方法,并对合伙企业的亏损分担机制进行调适,明确合伙人与合伙企业的独立交易原则;其二,增设合伙企业一般反避税条款,或者以现有的一般反避税制度资源为基础,结合合伙企业的自治属性,对之予以整合;其三,融通国内税法与国际税法,结合合伙企业混合实体的纳税地位,建构契合于合伙企业的所得税规则体系;其四,完善合伙企业反避税的行政执法规则,秉持主客观相统一的反避税标准,从客观经济实质角度把握合伙企业的合理商业目的,建立层次化的合伙企业避税认定证明标准,以规范合伙企业的权利行使,制衡税务机关反避税的自由裁量权。更多还原

【Abstract】 In the development and operation of partnership,tax has always been considered by investors as one of the important factors.In private law,the partnership is the subject of contractual autonomy for profit and loss allocation,but in tax law,it is the hybrid entity that "penetrates" the income to the partner’s tax.According to this design,there are various forms of partners,and the tax treatment methods of partners with different identities are also different.The partnership has a very broad space for tax avoidance,which can take advantage of the freedom of profit and loss distribution and combine with the complexity of tax treatment to implement complex tax avoidance planning.For example,a partnership may distribute profits and losses to specific partners,or take advantage of differential treatment in tax treaties.These reflect the partnership tax avoidance is different from natural person and legal person enterprise,but also caused the partnership anti-tax avoidance special requirements.However,these requirements have not received much response from partnerships in their anti-avoidance practices.China’s partnership income tax system not only lacks the general anti-tax avoidance provisions for partnership enterprises,but also violates the principle of tax neutrality.In addition,there are some problems such as anti-tax avoidance standards and unclear boundaries.The essence of partnership’s anti-tax avoidance is to redefine and evaluate the partnership and its partners’ civil and commercial transaction relationship in tax law,and to construct an independent logic system different from civil and commercial law.However,the transaction adjustment right contained in the anti-tax avoidance will also lead to the abuse of tax power,infringement of taxpayers’ rights and interests.In the order of tax collection and payment,any unilateral control thinking should be abandoned.The basic goal of tax administration is to safeguard the rights and interests of both parties and implement the concept of balance of tax collection and payment.Based on the basic idea of accepting and adjusting private law in the tax law,the tax law should not easily deny the establishment of rights and basic attributes of partnership enterprises when accepting the autonomous rules of partnership enterprises.The fundamental purpose of the partnership’s anti-tax avoidance is to prevent and regulate the partnership’s tax avoidance behavior,but also to avoid the deviation and destruction of the partnership’s autonomous structure.Therefore,it is necessary to balance the autonomy of partnership with the intervention of tax authorities,and the autonomy of partnership with the prevention of tax law.To be specific,the freedom of contract autonomy and profit and loss distribution should be respected,and the abuse of partnership rights should also be prevented.On the other hand,the anti-tax avoidance of partnership enterprises should be limited,and a proper balance should be found,so that the advantages of partnership enterprises cannot be damaged by excessive anti-tax avoidance.In view of the vagaries of transaction forms,the concealment and complexity of tax avoidance by partners using partnership enterprises will also increase,which should be paid attention to in the formation and implementation of rules.Therefore,the anti-tax avoidance of partnership enterprises should uphold the concept of balance and be carried out in the establishment and implementation of the partnership income tax rules.This is not only the need to maintain the autonomy of partnership,but also the inherent requirement of the concept of the modesty of tax power,and the due meaning of the principle of prohibiting the abuse of rights.Since the introduction of partnership enterprise in China,its specific form and composition have undergone great changes,and correspondingly,the income tax system of partnership enterprise has also undergone several changes.On the one hand,in order to avoid double taxation,China’s partnership income tax has evolved from the double taxation mode of partnership and partners to the unilateral taxation mode of only partners;On the other hand,with the change of partnership organizational form,China’s partnership income tax rules have further clarified the taxation pattern of "split before tax",and natural person’s partner and legal person’s partner of other organizational forms shall pay income tax on the income derived from partnership respectively.In this evolution,the partnership is no longer responsible for taxes as a tax entity.However,when the income of the partnership is distributed among the partners,the uploading rules of the income nature have evolved from not allowing the uploading of the income nature at all to allowing the uploading of the income nature of a small part of the specific project.Specifically,personal partners from the partnership interest,dividends,bonuses,and eligible venture capital enterprises in particular accounting mode of equity transfer income,dividend income and dividend income from property can be uploaded to the partners,applicable to personal partners "from interest,dividends,bonuses" to calculate and pay individual income tax taxable items,in addition to this,All other income of the partners shall be taxed according to the items of "operating income".This means there is a significant reduction in the diversity of the tax treatment of income distributed by partners from partnerships.In addition,the deduction and carry-over of partnership losses have also been developed to allow partnership carry-over within a certain period,prohibit non-individual partners from deducting losses,and allow individual partners of venture capital enterprises to deduct losses under strict conditions.In a word,in principle,the income tax system of China’s partnership prohibits the uploading of income nature and the transmission of loss offset,and only liberalizes the authority in very few cases.It can be considered that after the establishment of the partnership income tax system,China’s restrictions on the uploading of the nature of the income of the partnership and the transmission of the loss offset of the partnership are to prevent and counter the tax avoidance of the partnership.With the evolution of the partnership income tax rule system,the concept of anti-tax avoidance has been correspondingly practiced,but the special balance required by the partnership anti-tax avoidance is not well dealt with in terms of methods.The tax avoidance characteristics of partnership enterprises show that the tax avoidance space of partnership enterprises depends on whether the income nature uploading and loss offset are allowed.The limitation on the nature of the upload and loss deduction is necessary,but its scope and strength if the winding,easily lead to improper partnership autonomy narrowed,on the other hand,can also lead to a partner can’t accurately apply the income tax law of tax deduction or exemption rules and preferential terms,destroyed the partner,the authenticity of the base,Masking partners’ true tax liabilities.In addition,although the concept of anti-tax avoidance has been integrated into the partnership income tax rules in China,there are still anti-tax avoidance loopholes,which do not take into account not only the tax avoidance risk of the partners using their own losses to offset the profits of the partnership,but also the tax avoidance risk of the associated transaction between the partners and the partnership.The problems highlighted in these aspects show that the balance between partnership autonomy and anti-tax avoidance has not been well dealt with in China.The organization form of partnership enterprise is also widely used outside the region,its anti-tax avoidance problem is not a domestic specialty.However,the income tax system of the partnership outside China mostly allows the nature of the income of the partnership to be uploaded to the partners,and even allows the partnership to distribute losses to the partners to offset the profits of the partners.Such a design ensures the autonomy of the partnership,but it also means that the distribution space of the partnership becomes larger and the tax avoidance risk increases..However,in order to deal with the risk of tax avoidance caused by partnership autonomy,advanced countries of partnership income tax,such as the United States,have adopted a number of defensive systems,such as implementing the dual declaration system of partnership and taxpayer,setting up partners’ accounts,limiting the deduction and credit of partners,and building the equity base value system,etc.These systems focus on the recognition and adjustment rules of partners’ tax bases,restrict partners’ arbitrary distribution,and require partners’ distribution to conform to their economic interests in the partnership,so as to prevent special distribution for tax avoidance purposes.In addition,some countries outside the region also set up general anti-tax avoidance provisions for partnership enterprises,allowing tax authorities to adjust the special distribution of partnership enterprises that lack "substantial economic effect",helping tax authorities to more quickly and accurately identify the special distribution of partnership enterprises for the purpose of tax avoidance.Through these legal practices,we can better deal with the balance between partnership autonomy and avoidance of tax avoidance,as well as the balance between partnership autonomy and anti-avoidance power.In addition,in the income tax system of extraterritorial partnership enterprises,whether it is the deduction and credit rules in the income tax law of partnership enterprises,or the general anti-tax avoidance provisions of partnership enterprises,or the partner’s capital account and equity base value system set up according to the need of anti-tax avoidance,all always focus on "substantial economic effect".Pursue the objective economic benefit authenticity of partner’s allotment share in partnership enterprise.This is because the realization of the dual goals of respecting the autonomy of profit and loss distribution of partnership enterprises and safeguarding national tax interests ultimately takes the realization of the objective economic essence of the taxpayers of partnership enterprises as the core,so the anti-tax avoidance of offshore partnerships focuses on the essential elements of "substantial economic effect" and emphasizes the respect for the real tax affordability of taxpayers.The partnership income tax rules designed on this basis and the anti-tax avoidance measures implemented by tax authorities agree with the value orientation of the partnership against tax avoidance.All these are worthy of reference experience for Chinese partnership enterprises to counter tax avoidance.The provisions of law arise from the needs of economic life.The basic characteristics of modern partnership enterprise system have their historical inevitability and rationality.Tax law can intervene and intervene partnership enterprises to some extent based on the demand of anti-tax avoidance.However,recognizing the existence of partnership enterprises and respecting the attributes of partnership enterprises should be the premise of anti-tax avoidance intervention.In addition,in the modern income tax law,following the basic principle of quantitative taxation,the selection,attribution and confirmation of tax objects are judged on the basis of economic capacity.Therefore,from the perspective of methodology,it is necessary to observe the objective economic effect of partners in partnership enterprises and judge the economic interests of partners in partnership enterprises by taking economic ability as a clue to identify the true tax affordability of partners.Therefore,in order to improve the legal system of partnership against tax avoidance in China,we should first respect the autonomous characteristics of partnership distribution,and help tax authorities to carry out anti-tax avoidance work by focusing on the identification of tax bearing capacity of taxpayers.On the basis of this,China can consider to establish an anti-tax avoidance legal system composed of general anti-tax avoidance clauses and special anti-tax avoidance clauses based on the existing tax laws and policies of partnership enterprises.Specifically,it can be implemented from four aspects to further optimize the anti-avoidance stance in the partnership income tax rules:First,we should perfect the income tax rules of partnership enterprises,construct the double tax declaration system of partnership enterprises,optimize the tax deduction rules and accounting treatment methods of partnership enterprises,adjust the loss sharing mechanism of partnership enterprises,and clarify the principle of independent transaction between partners and partnership enterprises.Second,add general anti-tax avoidance clauses of partnership enterprises,or integrate the existing general anti-tax avoidance system resources based on the autonomy of partnership enterprises;Third,integrate the domestic tax law and international tax law,combine the tax status of the mixed entity of the partnership,construct the income tax rule system suitable for the partnership;Fourth,perfect partnership anti-avoidance rules of administrative law enforcement,adhere to the unity of subjective and objective anti-avoidance standards,from the perspective of objective economic real grasp of the partnership is reasonable business purposes,to establish a hierarchical partnership tax certificate standard,to regulate the rights of the partnership enterprise,at the discretion of the checks and balances anti tax avoidance tax authorities.更多还原