The Rationality of the Integration of Real Estate Income in the Taxation System

[[abstract]]本研究旨在探討房地合一課徵所得稅制之修法意旨與目的、對租稅公平及居住正義之影響、政策施行之利弊得失，並根據研究結果提出政策及實務上之參考建議。本研究訪談對象係涉及房地交易之稅務人員、專業人士、不動產經紀人及不動產移轉買賣雙方之相關人員等，進行質性研究中的深度訪談。 研究結果顯示，房地合一課徵所得稅政策，矯正以往房地交易分離課稅所造成稅制不公且對自住者給予免稅或退稅之優惠，可實現租稅公平及居住正義，但房地交易採分離差別稅率課徵、個人及營利事業房地交易採不同標準稅率課稅、舊制之虧損不能於新制所得中扣抵及新制盈虧互抵年限僅限3年等與公平正義、政府鼓勵長期持有、抑制短期炒作之目標相違背。就此觀之，房地合一課徵所得稅政策之施行結果與修法意旨間產生實質落差。 依據研究發現，本研究提出二方面建議，其一為政策方面：1.對房地交易所得納入綜合所得稅採累進稅率課徵；2.營利事業持有二年內房地交易追加課徵所得稅；3.舊制之交易損失可於新制交易所得中減除；4.房地交易虧損互抵年限應延長。另一為其他配套措施方面：1.廣建社會住宅等以解決住宅需求問題；2.透過住宅補貼以落實居住正義；3.持有稅一併檢討更臻完善；4.落實公告現值逐步調整至市價以健全稅制。[[abstract]]The aim of this study is to investigate the principle and purpose of legal amendments to laws governing integration of real estate income in the taxation system, the resulting impact to tax fairness and residential justice, and advantages and disadvantages for enforcing the policy. Another aim is to provide, by referring to the results of this study, recommendations for policy and actual practice for future reference. In-depth interviews for qualitative research were implemented for this study. Interview subjects include personnel involved with the taxation of land and housing transactions, professionals, real estate agents, and parties engaged in the transfer, sales, and purchase of real estate. Results of the study reveal that the integration of real estate income in the taxation system corrected issues of unfair taxation caused by separate taxation on real estate transactions, and provided tax exemptions or tax benefits to self-occupied property. The policy is therefore able to improve tax fairness and residential justice. Nevertheless, aspects such as separate taxation on housing and land transaction, adoption of different taxation standards for real estate transactions by individuals and by profit-seeking enterprises, inability to carryforward tax losses under the old system to offset income from the new system, and a 3-year limit on loss carryforward for the new system contradicted the goals of achieving fairness, government encouragement for long-term home owning, and suppression of short-term speculation. These observations revealed material gaps between the results from enforcing the integration of real estate income in the taxation system and the original aims of the legal revisions. This study proposes, according to the findings, two categories of recommendations. The first category is based on policy: 1. using progressive tax rates for housing and land transaction income when determining the integrated income tax; 2. levying additional income tax for housing and land transaction of profit-seeking enterprises for property held for less than 2 years; 3. allowing tax deductions for transaction income under the new system to offset transaction losses under the old system; and 4. extending the time limit for carryforward of housing and land transaction losses. The other category is based on package measures: 1. building more social housing to address housing demands 2. provide housing subsidies to achieve residential justice; 3. review and update property taxes; and 4. enforce policies governing publicly announced current value of property and gradually adjust said value to the market price to perfect the system.[[note]]碩