自新企税法首次提出“合理商业目的”以来,我国一般反避税规则体系逐步形成。但相关法律规定过于抽象,在实践中存在诸多争议。加之一般反避税规则的税法解释制度至今仍不规范,立法解释、司法解释长期缺位以及行政解释的强势使得对一般反避税规则的税法解释未发挥其应有效果,也使得纳税人在纳税争议行政诉讼中较为被动,不利于其合法权益的保护。对此,荷、英等普通法系国家一般反避税规则的税法解释制度具有一定借鉴意义。 Since the new tax law was first proposed “reasonable commercial purpose ”, our country generally anti-avoidance rules system gradually formed. However, the relevant laws and regulations are too abstract, there are many controversies in practice. Combined with the general anti-avoidance rules tax law interpretation system is still not standardized, legislative interpretation, judicial interpretation of the absence of a long absence and administrative interpretation of the tax avoidance rules of the general tax law does not play its due effect, but also allows taxpayers in the tax dispute Administrative proceedings are more passive, is not conducive to the protection of their legitimate rights and interests. In this regard, the Netherlands, Britain and other common law countries generally anti-avoidance rules tax law interpretation system has some reference.