臺灣這幾年的貧負差距有逐漸擴大跡象，以吉尼係數或五等分所得差距倍數來看，2001年是惡化最嚴重的一年，之後呈現緩和改善；以低收入戶占總戶數比例來看，此比例亦逐年提高，分析組成結構，發現落入貧窮線邊緣的家庭有不斷增加的趨勢，但赤貧的情況逐漸減少。與世界各國相比，我國貧富差距程度屬較不嚴重等級，但仍應密切注意。
馬總統在競選2008年總統時提出「對中低收入勞動家庭實施退稅補貼『468方案』」(又稱EITC)的政見，目的是要將落入「新貧」的中產階級家庭，從貧窮邊緣挽救回來。本文主要研究此政策在國外的實施情況，並以美國、英國及韓國為主要研究對象。實證分析部分，以行政院主計處民國95年人力運用調查報告（由中央研究院調查研究專題中心釋出）作為資料庫，以扶養未成年子女家庭為對象，使用Tobit model作迴歸分析，研究若實施EITC是否會增加勞動供給。
比較各國實施情況後發現：我國如要實施EITC政策，建議採用美國的設計模式，有抵減遞增階段、抵減固定階段、抵減遞減階段，且抵減遞增階段的補助比率要高於抵減遞減階段的遞減率，可避免打擊工作意願。補助對象建議為扶養未成年子女的家庭，區分為家庭成員人數2人、3人、4人等3種情況（4人以上者以4人計），且不限制必須全年度投保勞保，並設有防弊規定及排富條款。其他包括單身、沒有扶養未成年子女的家庭、扶養65歲以上一親等直系尊親屬部分、扶養其他親屬部分均不列為補助對象。並應以謹慎保守的態度設計架構，規模不宜過大，因為此一福利政策的支出規模會不斷擴張，難以控制。
實證結果顯示，薪資對數對工作時間對數的影響是非常顯著的正效果，這表示透過EITC提高薪資可能可以增加勞動供給，女性勞動力的彈性為0.183571、男性勞動力的彈性為0.122837，女性勞動力的彈性大於男性。

The gap between rich and poor in Taiwan keeps getting wider over the past few years. According to the Gini Coefficient and the gap between top-20 to bottom-20 of income distribution, the gap became to worsen most seriously in 2001 and gradually to be improved later. Year by year, the percentage of low income families in total families increases gradually. Analyzing the structure between rich and poor, we find that even more and more families fall into the poverty line, but the extremely poor families becomes less. Comparing with other countries of the world, the problem of rich-poor gap in Taiwan is not serious. But we still should pay attention to it.
During the President Campaign in 2008, Mr. Ma proposed the EITC policy to secure the middle-class families from the edge of the poverty line. This study investigates the implementation effect of the EITC policy in United States, United Kingdom, and South Korea respectively. In the empirical analysis, the research data source is from the Manpower Utilization Survey of DGBAS of Executive Yuan. The research object is the household with minor children of Taiwan. In this study, the Tobit model is used to investigate whether the implementation of EITC would raise the labor supply.
Comparing the implementation of EITC among the investigated countries, we suggest that the system in United States is more suitable for Taiwan. The system includes three steps that are the phase-in range, the plateau range, and the phase-out range. Besides, the rate of phase-in range should be higher than that of phase-out. This would encourage people to get a job. The object of supplement is the household whose family member is more than two. The applicants do not need the annual labor insurance for qualification and the anti-corruption clause is included in this system. Some specific households such as the rich people, the single, the household without minor children, the household with parents over 65 years old, or with other relatives should be excluded in the supplement system. The system should be planed in a conservative way to control its budget because this welfare expenditure is possible to expand enormously later.
The empirical result shows that the salary effects the working hour significantly in logarithm. The regression coefficient in the model is positive. That means the implement of EITC may increase the labor supply. The labor elasticity for female is 0.18 that is more than the male’s 0.12.

口試委員會審定書 i
謝辭 ii
中文摘要 iii
英文摘要 iv
目錄 v
表目錄 vii
圖目錄 viii
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的與研究架構 2
第二章 臺灣的貧窮問題 4
第一節 臺灣的貧富差距現況 4
第二節 臺灣的勞動人口貧窮問題 7
第三節 造成工作貧窮的原因 12
第四節 解決工作貧窮的可能方法 14
第三章 負所得稅與薪資所得抵減制度（EITC） 17
第一節 負所得稅的意義 17
第二節 薪資所得抵減制度（EITC）的意義 19
第四章 各國薪資所得抵減制度介紹 21
第一節 美國：薪資所得抵減制度（EITC） 21
第二節 英國：工作家庭租稅抵減（WFTC） 32
第三節 韓國：EITC 40
第五章 臺灣「勞動所得租稅補貼政策」之擬議 43
第一節 468 方案 43
第二節 對勞動所得租稅補貼政策之分析 46
第三節 我國目前對低收入戶所提供之補助 48
第四節 近貧家庭工作所得補貼方案 50
第五節 我國實施勞動所得租稅補貼政策之利弊得失 53
第六節 我國實施勞動所得租稅補貼政策之擬議 57
第六章 勞動所得租稅補貼制度(EITC)對勞動供給之影響 60
第一節 文獻回顧 60
第二節 模型介紹 62
第三節 資料來源 65
第四節 變數說明及設定方式 65
第五節 變數基本統計量 69
第六節 勞動供給線估計結果 72
第七章 結論與建議 76
第一節 結論 76
第二節 建議 78
參考文獻 80
中文部分 80
英文部分 82

中文部分
1.內政部網站http://www.moi.gov.tw/
2.內政部（2008）,工作所得補助方案（核定本）
3.王永慈（2005）, 〈台灣的貧窮問題：相關研究的檢視〉, 《臺大社工學刊》, 10, 1-54。
4.行政院主計處（2006）, 臺灣地區人力運用調查報告
5.行政院主計處網站http://www.dgbas.gov.tw/mp.asp?mp=1
6.行政院經濟建設委員會網站http://www.cepd.gov.tw/
7.李淑伶（2003）, 《薪資所得租稅抵減(EITC)之研究》, 國立政治大學財政研究所碩士論文。
8.李健鴻（2008）, 《脫貧或長貧：「勞動所得租稅補貼制度」真的能幫助工作貧窮者脫貧？》, 台灣新社會智庫。
9.李誠（2001）,〈知識經濟時代的人力資源政策〉, 《「知識經濟與政府施政」學術研討會》, 政治大學公企中心國際會議廳。
10.呂曜志（2007）, 〈淺談最低工資的政策效益---從薪資制度、組織理論與全球化切入〉, 《台灣經濟研究月刊》，30(6)，75-80。
11.香港樂施會（2007）, 《有份工 但貧窮：香港就業人口的貧窮問題》。
12.黃英忠（2003）, 《臺灣中高齡人口的勞動供給分析》, 南華大學經濟研究所碩士論文。
13.梁正德（1985）, 《所得稅與勞動供給》, 國立政治大學財政研究所碩士論文。
14.許穎心（2000）, 《勞動供給、所得稅與超額負擔---台灣的實證研究》, 國立政治大學財政研究所碩士論文。
15.莊慧玲、林世昌（2006）, 〈臺灣婦女勞動供給實證研究之發展〉, 《經濟論文叢刊》, 34(2), 119-172。
16.張清溪、宋皇叡（2000）, 〈失業對產業結構轉變的影響〉, 《台灣的失業問題》, 國立中央大學台灣經濟發展研究中心。
17.蔡吉源（2008）, 〈負所得稅制行得通嗎？〉, 《全球台商e焦點》, 101。

英文部分
1.Azmat, Ghazala Yasmeen (2006),”The incidence of an earned income tax credit: Evaluating the impact on wages in the UK,” Centre for Economic Performance, Discussion Paper 724.
2.Bernstein, Jared (2000),”Two cheers for the earned income tax credit,” American Prospect, 11(15), 64-67.
3.Blundell, R. and H. Hoynes (2004),”Has ‘in-work’ benefit reform helped the labor market? In seeking a premier economy: The economic effects of the British economic reform, 1980-2000,” National Bureau of Economic Research and University of Chicago.
4.Blundell, R. and Andrew Shephard (2008),”Employment, hours of work and the optimal design of earned income tax credits,” The Institute for Fiscal Studies W08/01.
5.Beamer and Rutgers University (2005),”State tax credits and making work pay in post-welfare reform era,” Review of Policy Research, 22(3), 385-395.
6.Blumenthal, Erard and Chih-Chin Ho (2005),”Participation and compliance with the earned income tax credit,” National Tax Journal, 58(2), 189-213.
7.Bargain and Kristian Orsini (2006),”Beans for breakfast? How exportable is the British workfare model?, ” IZA Institute for the Study of Labor.
8.Brown, Dorothy A. （2007）,”Race and class matters in tax policy,” Columbia Law Review Vol. 107. 2007 Washington & Lee Legal Studies Paper, 2006-15.
9.Cahuc and Andre Zylberberg (2004), Labor Economics, The MIT Press.
10.Cancian and Arik Levinson (2006),”Labor supply effects of the earned income tax credit: Evidence from Wisconsin’s supplemental benefit for families with three children,” National Tax Journal, 59(4), 781-800.
11.Dickert, Hauser and John Karl Scholz (1995),”The earned income tax credit and transfer programs: A study of labor market and program participation,” Tax Policy and the Economy, 9.
12.Eissa, Nada and Jeffrey B. Liebman (1996),”The labor supply to the earned income tax credit,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 111(2), 605-637.
13.Eissa, Nada and Hilary Williamson Hoynes (1998),”The earned income tax credit and the labor supply of married couples” NBER Working Paper #6856.
14.Ellwood, David T. (2000), ”The impact of the earned income tax credit and social policy reforms on work, marriage, and living arrangements, ” National Tax Journal, 53, 1063-1105.
15.Eissa and Hilary Williamson Hoynes (2003),”Taxes and the labor market participation of married couples: The earned income tax credit,” Journal of Public Economics, 88, 1931-1958.
16.Edwards, R. D. (2004),”Macroeconomic implications of the earned income tax credit,” National Tax Journal, 57, 45-65.
17.Eissa, Nada and Hilary Williamson Hoynes (2004),”Tax and the labor market participation of married couples: the earned income tax credit,” Journal of Public Economics, 88, 1931-1958.
18.Friedman, Milton (1962), Capitalism and Freedom, ed. M. Friedman and Rose D. Friedman, University of Chicago Press.
19.Greenstein, Robert (2002),”Welfare reform’s hidden ally,” American Prospect, Special Supplement (Summer 2002), A35-A36.
20.Haskell, J. (2006),”The state of the earned income tax credit in Nashville: An analysis of economic impacts and geographic distribution of the working poor tax credit,1997-2004,” Vanderbilt University.
21.Inland Revenue (2003),”Working families’ tax credit statistics summary statistics,”
22.Killingsworth, Mark R. (1983), Labor Supply, Cambridge University Press.
23.Leigh, Andrew (2007),”Earned income tax credits and labor supply: New evidence from a British natural experiment,” National Tax Journal, 60(2), 205-224.
24.Lim, Younghee (2008),”The mid-1990s earned income tax credit expansion: EITC and welfare caseloads,” Social Work Research, 32(1), 46-54.
25.Mundell, Robert Alexander (1960), The Pure Theory of International Trade, American Economic Association.
26.McFate, Smeeding and L. Rainwater (1995),”Markets and states: Poverty trends and transfer system effectiveness in the 1980’s,” McFate, Lawson and W. J. Wilson ed, Poverty, inequality and the future of social policy, New York, NY: Russell Sage, 29-66.
27.Meyer, Bruce (2002),”Labor supply at the extensive and intensive margins: The EITC, welfare, and hours worked,” American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 92, 373-379.
28.Neumark and William Wascher (2001),”Using the EITC to help poor families: new evidence and a comparison with the minimum wage,” National Tax Journal, 54(2), 281-317.
29.Nam, Sherraden, Zou, Han, Kim and Woo-Jae Han (2007),”Asset-based policy in South Korea” Washington University, St. Louis.
30.Owens, Jeffrey (2006),”Fundamental tax reform: An international Perspective,” National Tax Journal, 59(1), 131-150.
31.Rothstein, Jesse (2007),”The uninterested consequences of Encouraging Work: Is the EITC as good as an NIT?,” New Jersey, Princeton University.
32.Seccombe, K. (2007),”Families in poverty,” United States of America, Pearson Education Inc.
33.Ventry Jr., Dennis J. (2000),“The collision of tax and welfare politics: The political history of the earned income tax credit,1969-99,” National Tax Journal, 53(4), 983-1026.
34.Ventry Jr., Dennis J. (2007),”Welfare by any other name: tax transfers and the EITC,” American University Law Review, 56(5), 1269-1280.