Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the importance of studying fiscal history to understand the underlying factors that shape modern states and societies, arguing that financial capabilities often determine the outcomes of historical events and conflicts [2][3][12]. Fiscal History Insights - Fiscal history helps to debunk grand narratives about the origins of modern states, highlighting the concept of the "fiscal-military state" as essential [3]. - In the late medieval period, royal finances were limited, relying on unstable sources such as land rents and tariffs, leading to temporary measures for war funding [4]. - The 16th century marked the beginning of a "long war era" in Europe, compelling states to find more stable financing methods [5]. - The Glorious Revolution in England (1688) led to parliamentary control over finances, establishing a national debt system and the Bank of England, which enabled sustained military engagement [6]. - France's fiscal structure was flawed, with tax burdens disproportionately on the common people, leading to high debt costs and eventual state bankruptcy, which contributed to the French Revolution [7]. - During the Napoleonic Wars, Britain leveraged its global capital markets and efficient tax systems to finance prolonged conflicts [8]. Case Studies in Fiscal Capacity - The Crimean War (1853-1856) is framed as a test of fiscal capacity, with Britain and France having established robust debt markets, while Russia's reliance on serfdom and limited domestic capital led to its defeat [9]. - The fiscal crisis in Russia prompted significant reforms, including the abolition of serfdom and the establishment of a modern fiscal and economic system [9]. Broader Implications of Fiscal History - Fiscal history reveals that financial resources directly influence the success of wars and have profound effects on social structures and national identity [12]. - Economic historian Joseph Schumpeter's insights suggest that a nation's fiscal history encapsulates its cultural and social dynamics, providing a clearer understanding of historical developments [12][13]. - Schumpeter posits that modern nations and national identities are shaped by fiscal pressures, indicating that taxation plays a crucial role in state formation [14][15]. Historical Context in China - The early Republic of China faced significant turmoil, attributed to a weak fiscal foundation, with the central government heavily reliant on tariffs and external debts, leading to fragmented political power [16][18]. - The fiscal decentralization trend began in the late Qing dynasty, with local powers retaining tax revenues, which contributed to the political fragmentation observed during the early Republic [17]. - The establishment of the Nationalist government in 1927 aimed to unify fiscal authority, but true fiscal centralization was not achieved until after 1949, with significant reforms occurring in the 1990s [18]. Conclusion - Understanding fiscal history, alongside population history, is crucial for grasping the true pulse of historical developments and societal changes [19].

Core Viewpoint - The concept of "secondary finance" and "tertiary finance" in discussing China's regional economic issues, particularly in Jiangsu, is widely misunderstood and oversimplified [1][4][7]. Group 1: Understanding Jiangsu's Fiscal System - Jiangsu's 13 prefecture-level cities, including Nanjing, are often described as having a "secondary finance" system, directly connecting with the central government without provincial mediation [2][3]. - This perception of Jiangsu's fiscal structure as entirely "secondary finance" is a significant misconception [4]. - To comprehend Jiangsu's fiscal system, a broader understanding of China's fiscal hierarchy is necessary, which consists of five levels: central, provincial, prefectural, county, and township [6]. Group 2: Taxation and Revenue Distribution - China transitioned from a fiscal package system to a tax-sharing system, where the central and local governments share tax revenues, significantly enhancing central government finances while weakening local government finances [8]. - In Jiangsu, the provincial tax revenue is only 23.11 billion, while the total provincial revenue reaches 7642.03 billion, indicating that provincial revenue constitutes a mere 0.3% of the total [12]. - The "lower-level revenue sharing" in Jiangsu is substantial, with 2055.39 billion received from lower-level governments, which is about eight times the provincial revenue [12][13]. Group 3: Unique Fiscal Logic in Jiangsu - Jiangsu's fiscal model operates on a "package logic" where cities retain most of their revenue after meeting provincial obligations, contrasting with the tax-sharing logic seen in other provinces [15]. - The proportion of local fiscal revenue retained at the city level in Jiangsu is 77.02%, higher than in Guangdong and Zhejiang [16]. - Recent government initiatives aim to reform Jiangsu's fiscal system to align more closely with the national tax-sharing model, moving away from the unique "package logic" [16][17].