国家某项措施对公民财产权构成的限制,究竟属于财产权的社会义务还是管制征收,甚为重要,因为这关乎国家是否需要为此提供某种补偿。通过对德国和美国相关学说与司法判例的考察,二者的区分标准主要分为形式和实质两个方面。形式标准以平等原则为基础,强调是否存在“特别牺牲”;实质标准在形式标准的基础之上,区分管制措施对财产权限制的不同程度。一般而言,在相对人构成特别牺牲的条件下,唯有政府侵占相对人财产或者导致相对人财产价值完全丧失才会被法院判定为管制征收。 It is very important whether a national measure restricts the constitutional rights of citizens, whether it is a social obligation to property rights or whether it is subject to expropriation. This is because the state is in need of some kind of compensation for it. Through the investigation of the relevant doctrines and judicial precedents in Germany and the United States, the distinguishing criteria of the two are mainly divided into two aspects: form and essence. The formal standards are based on the principle of equality, emphasizing the existence of “special sacrifice ”; the substantive standards are based on the formal standards and distinguish between different degrees of restrictions on property rights. Generally speaking, under the condition that the relatives make a special sacrifice, the government will only be judged as the collection of control by the government only if the government misappropriates the relative property or causes the absolute loss of the relative property value.