我国当前面临的财政收支压力，与此前大量的建设性负债紧密 相关，而非来自企业和居民部门的"福利增加"。未来，提高支 出效率以及优化支出结构至关重要，在此基础上进行增收，才 能更好地实现财政的可持续性。 作者： 杜涛 封图：图虫创意 近一段时间来，部分专家学者提出了提高财政收入占国内生产总值（GDP）比重（下称"财政收入 占比"）的建议。 财政部原部长楼继伟在其2025年发表的《做好逆周期财政政策研究服务新一轮财税体制改革》一 文中提出七点建议，其中第一条即"合理提高财政收入占GDP的比重"。此外，多位财政政策研究 者也在不同场合提出了合理提高财政收入占GDP的比重的建议。 财政收入占比反映了政府从经济总量中集中财力的程度和宏观调控能力。 中国财政收入主要包括"四本账"，即一般公共预算、政府性基金预算、国有资本经营预算和社会保 险基金预算。20世纪90年代以来，中国财政收入占比经历了一个"先升后降"的过程。 在关注提高财政收入占比的同时，也有一些问题不能忽略。比如，是否应该在这个时期提高财政收 入占比？提高财政收入占比是否意味着要多收税？除了提高税收，还有哪些提高财政收入占比的途 径？ 辽宁大学地方财政研究院院长 ...

财政收支 记者 杜涛 近一段时间来，部分专家学者提出了提高财政收入占国内生产总值（GDP）比重（下称"财政收入占比"）的建议。 财政部原部长楼继伟在其2025年发表的《做好逆周期财政政策研究服务新一轮财税体制改革》一文中提出七点建议，其中第一条即"合理提高财政收入占 GDP的比重"。此外，多位财政政策研究者也在不同场合提出了合理提高财政收入占GDP的比重的建议。 财政收入占比反映了政府从经济总量中集中财力的程度和宏观调控能力。 中国财政收入主要包括"四本账"，即一般公共预算、政府性基金预算、国有资本经营预算和社会保险基金预算。20世纪90年代以来，中国财政收入占比经历 了一个"先升后降"的过程。 在关注提高财政收入占比的同时，也有一些问题不能忽略。比如，是否应该在这个时期提高财政收入占比？提高财政收入占比是否意味着要多收税？除了提 高税收，还有哪些提高财政收入占比的途径？ 辽宁大学地方财政研究院院长王振宇表示，2024年大口径的宏观税负为28.2%，与国际通行数值相比，一般认为我国宏观税负"30%"比较合理，超过35%就 会产生挤出效应。由此看来，我国尚存提高占比的空间。 宏观税负分为三种口径：小口径宏观税负 ...

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article emphasizes the need for a transformation and optimization of China's active fiscal policy after 17 years of implementation, highlighting its effectiveness in promoting economic stability, quality growth, and social welfare, while also addressing existing shortcomings and future directions for fiscal policy [2][3][4][5][6]. Group 2 - Active fiscal policy has effectively responded to external shocks, maintaining economic stability with an average growth rate of 9.9% from 2008 to 2010, compared to the global average of 1.7%, and a growth rate of 4.7% from 2020 to 2023, significantly higher than the global average of 2.3% [3][4]. - The policy has shifted focus towards technology innovation and green development, enhancing the potential for long-term high-quality economic growth [4]. - Social welfare has improved, with rural minimum living standards increasing by 73.3% and urban low-income standards by 45.4% from 2017 to 2023, while the share of public budget for social welfare rose from 35.1% in 2013 to 40.7% in 2023 [5]. Group 3 - Current fiscal policy faces challenges, including an overemphasis on short-term fiscal balance, which may hinder long-term economic stability and increase hidden government debt risks [8][9]. - The effectiveness of large-scale tax reductions is diminishing, with the macro tax burden decreasing to 16.3% of GDP in 2024, down 5.1 percentage points from 2013, which may threaten fiscal sustainability [12]. - The structure of fiscal spending needs optimization, as there is a tendency to focus more on supply-side and enterprise support rather than on demand and household needs [13][24]. Group 4 - Future fiscal policy should transition from a balanced approach to a functional one, allowing for a potential breach of the 3% deficit limit to better support economic stability and growth [16][17]. - Systematic responses to long-term challenges such as aging population and digital economy risks are necessary, including enhancing social security systems and adapting tax policies to new economic realities [18][20]. - The focus should shift from income policies to expenditure policies, emphasizing direct government spending to stimulate demand and support households [22][25]. Group 5 - The article suggests that the term "active fiscal policy" should be reconsidered to "expansionary fiscal policy" to better convey the intended signals to the market and stabilize expectations [26][27].

Group 1: Implementation Effects of Active Fiscal Policy - Active fiscal policy has effectively responded to external shocks, maintaining an average economic growth rate of 9.9% from 2008 to 2010, compared to the global average of 1.7% during the same period[7] - From 2020 to 2023, China's average economic growth rate was 4.7%, significantly higher than the global average of 2.3%[7] - Social welfare spending has increased, with rural minimum living standards rising by 73.3% and urban low-income support increasing by 45.4% from 2017 to 2023[9] Group 2: Challenges of Active Fiscal Policy - The emphasis on current fiscal balance may impact long-term fiscal risks, with a consistent deficit rate below 3% reflecting a balanced fiscal approach[11] - The effectiveness of large-scale tax cuts is diminishing, with the macro tax burden needing stabilization as general public budget revenue as a percentage of GDP fell to 16.3% in 2024, down 5.1 percentage points since 2013[17] - The fiscal expenditure structure requires optimization, with a tendency to focus more on supply-side measures rather than demand-side support, leading to potential demand deficiencies[19] Group 3: Directions for Fiscal Policy Transformation - Transition from a balanced fiscal approach to a functional fiscal policy, potentially breaking the 3% deficit constraint to better support economic stability[21] - Fiscal policy objectives should balance short-term economic stability with long-term systemic challenges, addressing issues like population aging and digital economy risks[23] - Shift focus from income policies to expenditure policies, enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of fiscal measures[28]