臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

所得稅是目前我國政府稅收的主要來源，其在財政上所扮演的角色，除用以融通政府支出之所需外，更因其所具有的累進課徵特性，而成為政府進行所得重分配重要政策工具。然而，即令所得稅是如此重要，但近十餘年來我國所得分配情形所呈現出的逐年惡化趨勢，是無可否認的事實。根據行政院主計處歷年所公佈的家庭收支調查報告顯示，我國家庭所得最高與最低五等分位的比值，由民國八十年的4.97倍逐年上升至民國九十年的6.4倍。此一變化趨勢，是否代表我國現行所得稅制已經逐漸喪失所得重分配的功能呢？這是一個值得探討的課題。
本文以Duclos(2000)所發表之「吉尼指標與所得重分配」一文為基礎，首次利用社會哲學家Runciman (1966)所提出的相對剝奪概念，就我國現行綜合所得稅所具有的所得重分配效果加以剖析。文中利用行政院主計處所提供之民國八十年至民國九十年之家庭收支調查原始資料，將家庭之間對稅前、稅後所得及稅負高低的相互比較所產生相互剝奪感，透過財政嚴苛性、財政鬆弛性及個人命運好壞等定義變數建構Ｓ-Gini指標，進而探討我國現行綜合所得稅制的租稅累進性與所得重分配效果。
實證結果顯示，在累進稅率的設計下，現行綜合所得稅制的確具有累進性，使家庭間的相對剝奪程度減少，進而達到縮小貧富差距的目的。惟就所得重分配的長期變化趨勢觀察可發現，民國八十至九十年間，綜合所得稅所具有的重分配效果均呈現負的分配狀況，其中以八十一、八十八及八十九等三年為最。此顯示我國現行所得稅制雖具有改善所得分配之效果，但此效果長期呈現減弱的趨勢。

The income tax in Taiwan is a major source of revenue for the government. In addition to finance the need of public expenditure, it is also an important policy instrument for income redistribution with its progressive feature. However, given this fact, the distribution of income across households in Taiwan continued to get worse during the last decade. According to the Survey of Family Income and Expenditure in Taiwan, the ratio of annual personal income in the top quintile households to that in the bottom quintile households significantly rose from 4.97 in 1991 to 6.4 in 2001. Whether or not this signifies that the redistribution effects of Taiwan’s income tax had decline in recent years is an important issue to be investigated.
This study follows Duclos’ (2000) research on S-Gini index and adopts the concept of relative deprivation proposed by Runciman(1966) to analyze the redistribution effects of Taiwan’s individual income tax. Just as the Gini inequality index captures people’s relative deprivation (Yitzhaki 1979), this paper shows that Gini-based progressivity index captures individual perceptions of relative fiscal harshness, fiscal looseness, and ill-fortune.
Using data from the Survey of Family Income and Expenditure in Taiwan during 1991 to 2001, this study finds that the individual income tax system in Taiwan is progressive, and has effect on reducing the relative deprivation among households. However, according the long-term trend, it shows that all the redistribution indexes of Taiwan’s individual income tax were negative during 1991-2001 periods; particularly, the years 1992, 1999 and 2000 were the worst. It evidences that the redistribution effect of the progressive individual income tax in Taiwan has declined in the long run.

章節目錄
第一章 緒論 01
第一節 研究動機及目的 01
第二節 研究方法 03
第三節 研究範圍與限制 04
第四節 本文架構 05
第二章 文獻回顧 06
第一節 相對剝奪之定義 06
第二節 Atkinson基礎之社會福利函數 06
第三節 吉尼係數與相對剝奪之結合 08
第四節 影響所得重分配的因素 12
第五節 租稅的累進指標 20
第三章 理論架構 25
第一節 吉尼係數介紹 25
第二節 模型介紹 27
第四章 實証方法及資料特性 35
第一節 實證方法 35
第二節 資料來源及研究範圍 37
第三節 研究對象 39
第四節 資料特性 41
第五章 實証結果 46
第一節 剝奪感受之個體指標分析 43
第二節 所得重分配效果分析 50
第六章 結論 54
附錄 56
參考文獻 64
表次
表１.1 戶數五等分位組之所得分配比與所得差距（1991年至2001年） 02
表2.1 運用吉尼係數之重分配分解表 18
表2.2 租稅累進指標 24
表5.1 1991年至2001年相對剝奪、財政嚴刻性、財政鬆弛性之個體指標 48
表5.2 1991年至2001年S-Gini係數、重分配效果 51
圖次
圖2.1 Atkinson基礎之社會福利函數 07
圖2.2 Suits曲線介紹 22
圖3.1 Lorenz 曲線介紹 27
圖4.1 十等分之平均毛所得趨勢圖 44
圖4.2 十等分之平均稅負趨勢圖 44
圖4.3 十等分之平均淨所得趨勢圖 45
圖5.3 1991年至2001年重分配效果分析 52

參考文獻
一、 中文部份
中華民國九十年賦稅統計年報（2001），財政部統計處編印。
倪麗心（2000），「台灣地區綜合所得稅稅率結構演變之研究」，國立政治大學財政研究所碩士論文。
葉金標（1995），「租稅負擔與所得分配：轉嫁與歸宿之分析」，國立中興大學財政學研究所碩士論文。
張淑惠（1996），「家戶相當規模與所得稅水平公平程度－台灣地區的實證估計」，國立中興大學財政學研究所碩士論文。
黃衍添（1997），「我國租稅累進度變化之趨勢－1983至1994」，國立中興大學財政學研究所碩士論文。
二、 英文部份
Aronson, J.R., P. Johnson and P.J. Lambert (1994)，“ Redistributive Effect and Unequal Income Tax Treatment.” Economic Journal, vol. 104, 262-270.
Baum, S. R.,(1987) “On the measurement of tax progressivity: relative share adjustment , ”public finance quartery, vol. 15 no. 2, 166-187
Buhmann, B. (1988) “ Equivalence Scales, Well-Being, Inequality, and Poverty: Sensitivity Estimates Across Ten Countries Using the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS) Database,” The Review of Income and Wealth, 115-142.
Duclos, J.-Y, (1993). “Progressivity, Redistribution and Equity, with Application to the British Tax and Benefit System.” Public Finance vol.48, no.3, 350-365.
Duclos, J.-Y, (1997). “The Asymptotic Distribution of Linear Indices of Inequality, Progressivity and Redistribution.” Economics Letters vol.54 no.1, 51-57.
Duclos, J.-Y, (2000). “Gini Indices and the Redistribution of Income.”,International tax and Public Finance vol.7, no.2, 141-162.
Feldstein, M. (1976). “On the Theory of Tax Reform.” Journal of Public Economics vol.6, 77-104.
John, C. （1996）Fiscal Policy and Social Welfare. Edward Elgar Publishing Company, 4-22.
Kakwani, N. C, (1977).“Measurement of Tax Progressivity: An International Comparison.”Economic Journal vol.87, 71-80.
Kakwani, N. C,(1984).“On the Measurement of Tax Progressivity and Redistributive Effect of Taxes with Applications to Horizontal and Vertical Equity .”Advances In Econometrics vol.3, 149-168.
Kuznets, Simon(1976), “Demographic Aspects of the Size Distribution of Income: A Exploratory Essay,” Economic Development and Cultural Changes, vol.25, 1-94.
Lambert, P. J. (1993). “Inequality Decomposition Analysis and The Gini Coefficient Revisited.”Economic Journal vol.103, 1221-1227.
Lambert, P. J. (1993). The Distribution and Redistribution of Income: A Mathematical Analysis, Second Edition. Manchester University Press.
Lerman, R.I. and S. Yitzhaki (1995).“Changing Ranks and the Inequality Impacts of Taxes and Transfers.”　National Tax Journal vol.48, 45-59.
“Redistribution Effects of Tax Progressivity: Evaluating a General Class of Aggregate Measure.” Public Finance 42(3),1-31.
Reynolds, M. and E. Smolensky (1977). “ Post-Fisc Distributions of Income In 1950,1961and 1970.” Public Finance Quarterly vol.5, 419-438
Runciman. W. G. (1966). Relative Deprivation and Social Justice: A Study of Attitudes to Social Inequality Twentieth-Century England. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University Of California Press.
Yitzhaki, Shlomo, (1979). “Relative Deprivation and The Gini Coefficient.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol.93, no.2, 321-324