한국 부가가치세와 중국 증치세(增值税)의 비교 연구 ―재화·용역의 공급(销售货物·服务)을 중심으로―

This study compares the Value Added Tax(‘VAT’) of Korea and China, and extracts the features and implications of the two systems. This comparisons were limited to the supply of goods and service, and were largely divided into fields of substantive taxation requirements and fields of procedures such as filing, payment, collection and refund. The differences in the VAT system between Korea and China are as follows. First, person liable to pay VAT in Korea is entrepreneur. but in China is not limited to the entrepreneur. Second, Korea's taxable objects of VAT are all the supply of goods and service, in principle. China’s taxable objects of VAT are limited to those listed. In particular, the provision of services, intangible assets and real estate were not taxable initially. Notwithstanding the reforms of VAT system, VAT is not taxed on all the supply of services. On the other hand, the taxable period and the tax rate of Korean VAT are single, but those of China are various. Third, both in Korea and China, input tax amounts are to be deducted from output tax amounts. However, if a tax invoice is not issued, if all or any of the requisite entry items on a tax invoice issued are omitted or mistakenly entered, the relevant input tax amount shall not be deducted. China has set up a scheme to secure strict tax invoice order in comparison with Korea, such as anti-tax invoice counterfeiting system(included in Golden Tax Project) and the limitation on the issuance of tax invoices. Fourth, in case of Korea, if input tax amount is greater than output tax amount, input tax amount over output tax amount shall be refunded. In China, the refund is not a principle. In China, the refunds are limited to the exports, and the refunds for exports are granted at a limited rate and scope. Comprehensive evaluation of the VAT system in Korea and China leads to the following conclusions. China's VAT system is too complicated. China’s VAT system fails to provide legal stability to taxpayers. It is good to make the tax objects comprehensive and tax rate simple. The anti-tax invoice counterfeiting system under the Golden Tax project and VAT on financial services in China's system is noticeable. Regulation by the Golden Tax project is likely to lead to excessive interference with taxpayers' economic activities. The VAT levied on financial services will not help secure the competitiveness of the financial industry. There are many problems in introducing them into Korean VAT system. However, looking at the Chinese system from a long-term perspective will help Korean VAT system’s improvement. I hope that this comparative study will contribute to the improvement of the Korean and Chinese VAT system.