RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    세계화, 조세경쟁, 그리고 한국사회의 분배갈등구조

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A75962166

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    There are two competing hypotheses to explain the impacts of globalization on taxation and welfare spending in national political economy. The efficiency hypothesis suggests that globalization shifts the tax burden from capital to labor by enforcing the state to collect less capital taxes. In contrast, the compensation hypothesis argues that globalization fosters increased welfare spendings because it leads to greater economic instability and social risks, so that the state confronts the increased political demands for welfare provision. This study is designed to assess the relative worth of these competing hypotheses with specific reference to the case of South Korea that has been experienced the increased capital liberalization since the 1997 Asian financial crisis. This study does so by examining the change and continuity in the Korean tax structure, providing a comparative analysis of capital taxation in 7 OECD countries including the United States, Japan, the UK, Sweden, Germany, France, and Switzerland. This study finds that the conventional tax competition argument does not convincingly describe recent results on the evolution associated with corporate income taxes, individual income taxes, and welfare spending in most OECD countries. In particular, the case of South Korea can be considered as a critical case to challenge the efficiency hypothesis in that it has shown an overall trend towards increased reliance on capital taxation accompanied by increased welfare spending since 1997. However, this trend does not imply that the Korean tax structure can be characterized as the labor-oriented and progressive tax structure, contributing to the Korean state’s redistributional function through tax policy. Rather, the Korean tax structure has long retained its nature of a capital-oriented structure with a relatively smaller size of total tax revenue and lower level of capital tax burden compared to other OECD countries. More important, this nature of Korean tax system reflects that the Korean states have long institutionalized its limited public power to civilize the destructive effects of market and instead to prioritize the idea of market efficiency and growth over social equality and distribution.
    번역하기

    There are two competing hypotheses to explain the impacts of globalization on taxation and welfare spending in national political economy. The efficiency hypothesis suggests that globalization shifts the tax burden from capital to labor by enforcing t...

    There are two competing hypotheses to explain the impacts of globalization on taxation and welfare spending in national political economy. The efficiency hypothesis suggests that globalization shifts the tax burden from capital to labor by enforcing the state to collect less capital taxes. In contrast, the compensation hypothesis argues that globalization fosters increased welfare spendings because it leads to greater economic instability and social risks, so that the state confronts the increased political demands for welfare provision. This study is designed to assess the relative worth of these competing hypotheses with specific reference to the case of South Korea that has been experienced the increased capital liberalization since the 1997 Asian financial crisis. This study does so by examining the change and continuity in the Korean tax structure, providing a comparative analysis of capital taxation in 7 OECD countries including the United States, Japan, the UK, Sweden, Germany, France, and Switzerland. This study finds that the conventional tax competition argument does not convincingly describe recent results on the evolution associated with corporate income taxes, individual income taxes, and welfare spending in most OECD countries. In particular, the case of South Korea can be considered as a critical case to challenge the efficiency hypothesis in that it has shown an overall trend towards increased reliance on capital taxation accompanied by increased welfare spending since 1997. However, this trend does not imply that the Korean tax structure can be characterized as the labor-oriented and progressive tax structure, contributing to the Korean state’s redistributional function through tax policy. Rather, the Korean tax structure has long retained its nature of a capital-oriented structure with a relatively smaller size of total tax revenue and lower level of capital tax burden compared to other OECD countries. More important, this nature of Korean tax system reflects that the Korean states have long institutionalized its limited public power to civilize the destructive effects of market and instead to prioritize the idea of market efficiency and growth over social equality and distribution.

    더보기

    목차 (Table of Contents)

    • Ⅰ. 서론
    • Ⅱ. 기존 연구와 논쟁의 현재적 상태
    • Ⅲ. 국제비교를 통한 경험적 사실의 인: 1980년에서 1997년 이전까지
    • Ⅳ. 한국사례 분석: 1997년 이후를 중심으로
    • Ⅴ. 결론
    • Ⅰ. 서론
    • Ⅱ. 기존 연구와 논쟁의 현재적 상태
    • Ⅲ. 국제비교를 통한 경험적 사실의 인: 1980년에서 1997년 이전까지
    • Ⅳ. 한국사례 분석: 1997년 이후를 중심으로
    • Ⅴ. 결론
    • 참고문헌
    • Abstract
    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 조세연구원, "주요국의 조세제도: 미국편" 한국조세연구원 2004

    2 "조세통계 데이터베이스"

    3 재정경제부, "재정금융통계"

    4 현진권, "우리나라 자본소득과세의 정책과제" 한국조세연구원 2001

    5 문형표, "복지정책의 투자우선순위 및 정책개선과제 한국개발연구원" 한국개발연구원 2004

    6 곽태원, "법인소득과세의 이론과 현실" 한국조세연구원 2005

    7 김우철, "법인세부담이 기업의 투자활동에 미치는 효과분석" 한국조세연구원 2005

    8 박기백, "법인세 부담연구: 미시자료를 중심으로" 한국조세연구원 2004

    9 아세아문제연구소, "민주주의에 대한 한국인 의식조사보고서" 고려대학교 아세아문제연구소 2006

    10 국세청, "국세통계연보"

    1 조세연구원, "주요국의 조세제도: 미국편" 한국조세연구원 2004

    2 "조세통계 데이터베이스"

    3 재정경제부, "재정금융통계"

    4 현진권, "우리나라 자본소득과세의 정책과제" 한국조세연구원 2001

    5 문형표, "복지정책의 투자우선순위 및 정책개선과제 한국개발연구원" 한국개발연구원 2004

    6 곽태원, "법인소득과세의 이론과 현실" 한국조세연구원 2005

    7 김우철, "법인세부담이 기업의 투자활동에 미치는 효과분석" 한국조세연구원 2005

    8 박기백, "법인세 부담연구: 미시자료를 중심으로" 한국조세연구원 2004

    9 아세아문제연구소, "민주주의에 대한 한국인 의식조사보고서" 고려대학교 아세아문제연구소 2006

    10 국세청, "국세통계연보"

    11 최준욱, "개방경제하의 조세정책" 한국조세연구원 2002

    12 "World Tax Database" University of Michigan

    13 Gordon, R. H., "Why is There Corporate Taxation in a Small Open Economy?" University Press of Chicago 1995

    14 Rodrik,, "Why Do More Open Economies Have Larger Governments?" 106 : 1998

    15 Esping-anderson, Gosta, "Welfare States in Transition" CA.: Sage. 1996

    16 Hall, Peter, "Varieties of Capitalism: the Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage" New York: Oxford University Press. 2001

    17 Wilson, John D, "Theories of tax competition" 52 (52): 1999

    18 Freeman, Richard,, "The Welfare State in Transition" Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1997

    19 Alesina, Alberto, "The Welfare State and Competitiveness" 87 : 1997

    20 OECD, "The Tax System in Korea: More Fairness and Less Complexity Required" (271) : 2000

    21 Swank Duane, "The New Political Economy of Taxation in Advanced Capitalist Democracies" 46 :

    22 Polanyi,Karl, "The Grate Transformation:the Political and Economic Origins of Our Time" Beacon Press 1944

    23 Cameron,David, "The Expansion of the Public Economy:A Comparative Analysis" 72 (72): 1978

    24 "The Evolution of Policy Ideas Tax Policy in the 20th Century" 5 (5): 2003

    25 Schumpeter,, "The Crisis of the Tax State" (4) : 1954

    26 Fligstein, Neil, "The Architecture of Markets" Princeton: Princeton University Press. 2001

    27 OECD, "Tax Ratio: A Critical Survey" (5) : 2001

    28 OECD, "Social Expenditure Database" OECD

    29 Katzenstein, Peter, "Small States in World Markets" Cornell University Press 1985

    30 Rodrik, Dani, "Sense and Nonsense in the Globalization Debate" 107 : 1997

    31 Kato, Junko, "Regressive Taxation and the Welfare State" New York: Cambridge University Press. 2003

    32 Assaf, "International Tax Competition and Gains from Tax Harmonization" 1991

    33 Ruggie, John G, "International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism and the Postwar Economic Order" 36 (36): 1983

    34 International Monetary Fund, "Government Finance Statistics Yearbook" Washington, D.C.: IMF.

    35 Erik, "Globalization, Taxation, and Burden-Shifting in Latin America" 57 : 2003

    36 Genschel, Philippe, "Globalization, Tax Competition, and the Welfare State" 30 : 2002

    37 Garrett, Geoffrey, "Globalization, Government Spending and Taxation in the OECD" 39 : 2001

    38 Hirst, Paul, "Globalization in Question" Cambridge: Polity Press. 1996

    39 Mishra, Ramesh, "Globalization and the Welfare State" Northampton: Edward Elger. 1999

    40 Tanzi, Vito, "Globalization and the Future of Social Protection" 2000

    41 Atkinson, Anthony, "Globalization and the European Welfare State at the Opening and the Closing of the Twentieth Century: Europe and Globalization." New York: Palgrave-MacMillan. 2002

    42 Steinmo, Sven, "Globalization and Taxation: Challenges to the Swedish Welfare State" 35 (35): 2002

    43 Swank, Duane, "Global Capital, Political Institution, and Policy Change in Developed Welfare State" New York: Cambridge University Press. 2002

    44 Huber, Evelyne, "Development and Crisis of the Welfare State" Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2001

    45 Devereux, P, "Corporate Income Tax Reforms and International Tax Competition" 35 : 2002

    46 Buijink, Willem,, "Corporate Effective Tax Rates in the EU and the OECD: Further Research" 2001

    47 Gordon, "Can Capital Income Taxes Survive in Open Economics?" 47 : 1992

    48 New Haven, "British and American Approaches to Financing the Modern State" Yale University Press 1993

    49 "A Pure theory of Local Expenditures Journal of Political Economy 64" 1956

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

    학술지 이력

    학술지 이력
    연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
    2027 평가 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
    2021-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
    2020-04-22 학회명변경 한글명 : 아세아문제연구소 -> 아세아문제연구원
    영문명 : Asiatic Research Center -> Asiatic Research Institute
    KCI등재
    2018-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2015-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2011-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2009-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2008-10-10 학술지명변경 한글명 : 亞細亞 硏究 -> 아세아연구
    외국어명 : 미등록 -> The Journal of Asiatic Studies
    KCI등재
    2007-01-01 등재 등재 1차 FAIL (등재유지) KCI등재
    2004-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2003-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2001-07-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 0.76 0.76 0.64
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    0.54 0.56 1.013 0.16
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼