本文通过对全面“营改增”后增值税抵扣链和行业税负衔接的实证研究发现,金融服务业的减税难题是其盈利和人力成本占比高、可抵扣费用占比过低的高净值特性决定的,按目前的税率和贷款服务不能抵扣的设置框架,允许银行业不良贷款核销冲抵计税营业收入是减税的有效通道。由于“营改增”效应,改革后金融业债券、资管、融资租赁、信托基金(含REITS)金融商品等可抵扣中间业务收入占比将相对于贷款服务收入占比提高,息转费渠道依然存在。减税或转嫁渠道更多。建筑服务的减税难在多环节分包后一般与简易计税交叉出现造成抵扣链V形齿合,从而引起税负转嫁不畅、重复征税问题。“营改增”后建筑业和下游房地产业在计税方式选择上有四种博弈组合,因纳税额与计税依据、税率、进项扣除之间存在不连续函数关系,理论上很难有模型化的最优组合,但市场选择机制可以在多轮博弈中找到答案。而生活服务业“营改增”减税症结在对原营业税平移后复杂的征收品目归属上,由于混合服务增值额计算和归属难有清晰界限,跨时空分割难度大,而不同税目之间存在税率和可否抵扣的差异,发票与税收征管风险较大。如酒店服务业就面临一项连续服务在不同征收品目间的划分和混合服务的可抵扣发票开具难题。由于我国增值税实行以票管税基本制度,服务业“营改增”后,起征点的税收征管和发票虚开认定标准问题均面临挑战,税收征收管理法和刑法中发票违法处罚条款的修订显得比增值税立法更为迫切。“营改增”后引起的中央和地方财政收支格局调整还或将引发三次产业结构的逆袭,需要在总体减税的框架下建设地方税体系,避免“营改增”减税、地方税弥补而总量不减的“结构性”改革。 The empirical study of the link between VAT deduction chain and the tax burden of the industry after the comprehensive “VAT reform” shows that the tax concession problem of the financial services industry is that its share of profit and labor costs is high, and the proportion of deductible expenses Too low of the high net worth property, set by the current tax rate and loan services can not be set off, allowing banks to write off non-performing loans against tax revenue revenue tax is an effective channel. As a result of the “business tax reform” effect, the proportion of income from deductible intermediary services such as financial bonds, assets management, financial leasing, trust funds (including REITS) and financial products will be increased relative to the proportion of loan service income after the reform Transfer channels still exist. Tax cuts or pass more channels. The tax relief for construction services is difficult to cross-link in many ways and generally results in cross-V-shaped debit deduction chain, causing the tax burden to be poorly transferred and double taxation. There are four kinds of game combinations in the construction industry and the downstream real estate industry in terms of choice of tax calculation method because there is a discontinuous function relationship between the tax amount and tax base, tax rate, and deduction of input, which is theoretically difficult There is an optimal combination of models, but the market selection mechanism can find answers in multiple rounds of games. However, due to the complex collection of the original service tax, there is no clear boundary for the calculation and attribution of the value-added of the mixed service, so it is very difficult to divide across time and space, and different tax items There are differences between the tax rate and the deduction, invoicing and tax collection risk. For example, the hotel service industry is faced with the problem of deductible invoices for the division of service items and the mixed service of one continuous service. As China’s VAT implementation of the basic system of administration of tax, service industry, “business to increase” after the tax threshold of tax collection and fiduciary standards are found to be challenged, the tax collection and management law and illegal invoices in the criminal penalties The amendment of the clause appears to be more pressing than the VAT legislation. The adjustment of the revenue and expenditure pattern of the central and local governments caused by the “change of battalion and the increase of tax revenues” will also trigger a counterattack on the three industrial structures. The local tax system needs to be built under the framework of the overall tax reduction so as to avoid the “tax reform” Taxes, local taxes make up the total amount of “” structural "reform.