B. EXISTING APPROACHES IN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES

B. 当前欧洲各国的处理方式

Although PPP stands for an attractive alternative in service provision for governments across Europe, research has not yet really focused on the implications of taxes and charges. A reason for that might be the fact that taxes and charges do have influence but normally do not represent a “knock-out” criterion for or against a PPP. Nevertheless, voices have been raised criticizing the incalculable situation and obvious problems regarding existent tax structures (in Germany e.g. Schenke andGebhardt, 2005: 215 etseq.).

In Germany, for example, PPP are widely used for the construction of schools and also for the refurbishment of highways.Focusing on the public sector’s perspective the question arises whether PPP are inhibited compared to the traditional service provision by public sector entities under the existing tax structure. Especially concerning the value-added tax PPP are confronted with problems resulting from putting the public partner in a worse situation (e.g. Schenke and Gebhardt, 2007: 6 etseq.).

When trying to analyze whether the approach of integration in the existing tax structure or the approach of a special treatment is dominant in Germany, no definite result can be provided. Instead of the creation of a “special” tax structure for PPP, there is a tendency of trying to solve obvious problems by providing exceptions. Depending on the number of exceptions and on the aligned consequences this may lead to the establishment of a kind of “shadow tax structure”.Regarding the property transfer tax in Germany, a special treatment for PPP has already been created by implementing the  “?PP-Beschleunigungsgesetz”.

而当试图分析整合现行税制或提供特殊性税务处理两种方式在德国的地位时，无从得知哪一种更据主导地位。当前一个趋势是，通过税收例外（”tax exceptions”）的方式来解决 PPP 业务中常见的问题，而不是考虑特殊性税务处理。根据税收例外的数量和相关的影响，我们推测可能会形成“影子税制”。德国在资产转让的税务处理方面，已经通过并实施“PPP促进法(?PP-Beschleunigungsgesetz)”，对 PPP 业务提供了特殊性处理。

Assuming the double-transfer of property in a PPP’s life cycle, for example, property is transferred from the public partner to the private partner at an early stage and the other way round at the end of the cooperation, the premises for property transfer tax were accomplished twice. The therewith arising burden is now cancelled if theses transfers of property are within a PPP (e.g. Weitemeyer, 2006: 1376). This approach is questionable insofar as for example the interaction with the public sector via PPP is fiscally favoured compared to a “normal” business relationship between a private enterprise and a public sector entity.

假设在PPP项目周期内，相关资产进行了双向转移，比如资产在初始阶段从公共合作伙伴转移到私营合作伙伴，在项目结束后又反方向转移，则在此过程中形成了两次纳税义务。如果是PPP项目中的资产转移，那么与之相关的税负现在会被免除(Weitemeyer，2006：1376)。这种方式是值得商榷的，因为与私营部门和公共部门之间进行的“正常”的商业关系相比，私营部门通过PPP模式与公共部门开展合作在财务上更加优惠。

Analyzing the question of the taken approach regarding the tax treatment of PPP in the United Kingdom there are indicators referring to a special fiscal treatment. Especially at the start of the Private Finance Initiative there have been made huge subsidies also in terms of tax exemptions to attract the private partner(Terry, 1996: 10). In the meantime, changes have been applied to this flat-rate subsidies approach by focusing on the kind of PFI-project, for example, health, defense or education. One ulterior motive is to allow tax allowances for a PFIon condition that the advantages are at least indirectly shared between the public and the private partner (Sherwood, 2003: 4).

当分析英国对于 PPP 模式所采取的税务处理时，不难看出英国采取的是特殊性税务处理。尤其是在私人主动融资(“PFI”) 模式刚刚启动时，英国发放了大量的补贴并实行了免税，从而吸引私营合作伙伴(Terry,1996: 10)。同时，对于部分类型的 PFI 项目（例如，医疗、国防或者教育类项目），以往采用固定比率的补贴形式也发生了变化。目的之一是，对那些能够证明令公私双方均有利的 PFI 项目实行税收减免 (Sherwood, 2003: 4)。

In various other countries in Europe (e.g.France, Switzerland, Greece, Portugal, Spain, etc.) governments have also recognized the need to reconsider the tax treatment of PPP as well as their general role in the legal framework. Considering taxation and charges especially the value-added tax and different indirect taxes and charges should be reviewed regarding existing tax exemptions and their justification(Bingisser et al., 2005: 25).

欧洲其他国家的政府 （例如法国、 瑞士、 希腊、 葡萄牙、 西班牙等）也开始意识到有必要重新考虑PPP业务的税务处理，以及他们在法律框架中的一般职能，从税费角度，特别是增值税和其他的间接税角度，再次复核现有的免税政策以及其合理性(Bingisser等，2005：25）。

V. CONCLUSION 

V. 结论

Taxes and charges at least indirectly influence the decision of a private sector enterprise and of a public sector entity whether to join in a PPP or not. For the private partner tax, allowances or tax exemptions represent an incentive and make a business relationship via a PPP more attractive. Regarding the public sector advantages of a PPP in terms of quality or discharge might become less important if costs increase because of a disadvantaging fiscal situation.

税费因素对于私营部门和公共部门参与PPP项目或多或少有影响。对私营合作伙伴来说，税收减免或提供免税额的政策释放出激励的信号，从而令PPP业务更具吸引力。如果融资形势严峻导致成本增加，则对于公共部门来说 PPP 模式在服务质量或合约履行方面的优势也就不那么重要了。

At first sight, a preferred fiscal treatment of PPP seems to be the favourable solution ignoring the negative consequences and the missing justification for a special treatment. The main problem, which causes distortion of competition, in the end, derives from the public partner’s position. In this context, it has to be kept in mind that regarding the tax treatment of the public sector, similar problems have already existed before the emergence of PPP. However - doubts about distortion of competition have become more serious because private sector enterprises are involved in a PPP and therefore a possible misuse by a private sector enterprise is even worse.

暂且撇开可能引发的消极后果和造成公平的缺失，特殊性处理乍一看是 PPP 业务最佳的处理方式。但引起竞争扭曲的主要原因在于公共部门的观点和看法。虽然在PPP模式出现之前，公共部门在税务处理上已经遇到过类似的问题。然而，由于私营企业参与到 PPP 项目，愈发可能导致项目被私营企业滥用，对PPP 模式造成竞争扭曲的担忧也愈发强烈。

Although the tax treatment of a PPP is never the main argument for or against such cooperation the governments across Europe are aware that changes of the tax structure should be considered at least to provide planning reliability and legal certainty. Depending on the approach of the taxation of PPP it might be necessary to rethink special legal requirements in order to institutionalize PPP in a positive and encouraging microeconomic as well as macroeconomic manner.

虽然 PPP 模式的税务处理不是此类合作形式的争论重点，但欧洲各国政府确实意识到有必要对当前税制进行调整，至少确保计划的可靠性和法律上的确定性。为确保 PPP 模式法制化能够对宏微观经济的运行起到积极的促进作用，有必要重新考虑 PPP 模式在不同税务处理下特殊的法律要件。

END

完结

版权声明：本文著作权归新newPPP平台所有，NewPPP小编欢迎分享本文，您的收藏是对我们的信任，newppp谢谢大家支持！