Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the optimization of the Qualified Foreign Limited Partner (QFLP) policy in Guangzhou, focusing on tax treatment for QFLP fund management enterprises and their personnel, in line with the financial system reform outlined in the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China [4]. Tax Policies for QFLP Fund Management Enterprises - QFLP fund management enterprises are subject to Value Added Tax (VAT) on management and consulting fees at rates of 6% for general taxpayers and 3% for small-scale taxpayers [5]. - Corporate QFLP fund management enterprises are taxed at a corporate income tax rate of 25% [5]. - Common structures for QFLP funds include corporate, limited partnership, and contractual forms, with operations divided into fundraising, investment, management, and exit stages [5]. Tax Policies for Individual Partners and Fund Personnel - Individual partners and fund personnel working in Nansha, Guangzhou, who are Hong Kong residents can have their personal income tax burden exceeding that of Hong Kong exempted; similar provisions apply to Macau residents [7]. - High-end and scarce talent from overseas working in Nansha may qualify for personal income tax subsidies under the Greater Bay Area tax incentive policies [7][8].

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the importance of establishing a comprehensive financial law in China to support high-quality financial development, enhance financial stability, and align with the country's modernization goals [1][14][16]. Summary by Sections Financial Law Development Timeline - The evolution of China's financial legal system can be divided into five stages, starting from the establishment of a centralized financial system (1949-1978) to the current phase focused on high-quality development (2022-present) [3][4][5][6][8]. Current Financial Legal System Limitations - The existing financial legal framework has blind spots and conflicts due to its segmented nature, necessitating better coordination among various financial regulations [10][11]. - The current legal system struggles to adapt to new financial business models and risks, highlighting the need for timely legislative updates [11]. Legislative Pathways for Financial Law - The establishment of a financial law is seen as a critical step in addressing governance, security, and openness in the financial sector, requiring a stable logical framework [15][16]. - The financial law should integrate existing regulations and establish a unified regulatory principle to enhance the legal foundation for financial stability [14][15]. Future Directions for Financial Legislation - Future financial legislation should focus on efficiency, systemic safety, and public interest, serving as a key driver for resource allocation and innovation [16][17]. - The financial law should be developed with a focus on risk identification and management, accommodating emerging financial activities while ensuring stability [16][17].

习近平总书记多次强调金融和实体经济的关系，指出"金融要把为实体经 济服务作为出发点和落脚点" "金融是实体经济的血脉，为实体经济服务是 金融的天职"。党的二十届三中全会对深化金融体制改革作出一系列系统 性部署，提出"完善金融机构定位和治理，健全服务实体经济的激励约束 机制"的要求。深化金融体制改革，必须建立健全分工协作的金融机构体 系，坚持把金融服务实体经济作为根本宗旨，全力提升服务质效，以金融 高质量发展助力中国式现代化。 深刻理解完善金融机构定位和治理，健全服务实体经济的激励约束机制的内在要求 建设金融强国的必然要求。 强大的金融机构是建设金融强国的六大关键核心金融要素之一，完善金融 机构定位和治理是建设强大的金融机构的关键步骤。习近平总书记指出，金融机构健康既包括资产负债 表健康，也包括公司治理、内控体系、复杂金融产品交易清算以及重要金融基础设施健康。如果金融机 构处于病态，就很难为实体经济服务好。当前我国金融机构总体运行稳健，但在内控管理、服务水平等 方面还存在与实体经济发展不适应的问题，需要抓紧采取有效措施解决。 经济和金融高质量发展的必然要求。 完善金融机构定位和治理是提升我国金融机构服务质效的关 ...