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

    COVID-19 감염병 확산사태에 대응한 조세정책 동향 및 평가 = Tax Policy Trends and Evaluation in Response to COVID-19

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A108062264

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
      • URL 복사
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak in Wuhan, China in December 2019 and spread rapidly around the world. The lockdowns brought a major disruption to world trade and lowered the utilization rate of companies, which dampened corporate investment and consumer sentiment of households. Accordingly, countries have implemented economic recovery and stimulus policies along with health and quarantine responses to COVID-19. The purpose of this study is to analyze the tax policies implemented by each country related to COVID-19 response and provide policy implications. In detail, this study provides policy implications by analyzing the current status of tax support measures in a total of 123 countries compiled by the OECD as of May 29, 2020.
    The analysis results can be summarized as follows. First, as a tax item active in the tax policy, corporate tax support was the most frequently used at 17.21%, followed by VAT at 11.59% and income tax at 10.58%. Second, as a result of analysis by policy purpose, the tax support for immediate response to the damage caused by COVID-19 was the highest at 95%, and only 4.2% for the purpose of economic recovery. Third, the timing of tax policy announcement is concentrated in mid-March 2020 to the end of March 2020 when 66.7% of tax support policies were announced. Fourth, the types of tax policies were classified into tax administration measures, tax reduction and exemption, tax support for economic recovery, and tax support for health and medical care. Fifth, tax expenditure and liquidity support in countries around the world, announced by September 11, 2020, is estimated at about $11.7 trillion, accounting for about 12% of the world’s average GDP.
    Therefore, the policy implications of this study are as follows. First, it is necessary to selectively provide additional support to directly affected industries. As in other countries, active support is required for industries that have been directly affected by national lock-down policies (e.g., tourism and aviation-related industries). Second, it is necessary to implement a tax policy centered on employment and investment promotion. Tax experts say it is necessary to set the direction of tax policy for job creation and maintenance, corporate investment promotion and liquidity support for economic recovery. In addition, it is necessary to consider cases from other countries, such as Australia’s accelerated depreciation of depreciable assets, tax cuts and exemptions for education and training institutions for unemployed in Portugal, and the expansion of loss carry-back and carry-over implemented in United States and seven other countries. Third, in a situation where there is great concern about the increase in national debt due to fiscal expansion, a policy to expand tax base and tax source transparency should be accompanied to prevent adverse effects on tax policy. Lastly, it is necessary to consider overseas cases such as reduction of income tax for medical workers, accelerated depreciation of medical equipment, and consumption tax exemption on imported products such as medicines and medical equipment.
    번역하기

    Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak in Wuhan, China in December 2019 and spread rapidly around the world. The lockdowns brought a major disruption to world trade and lowered the utilization rate of companies, which dampened corporate investment and cons...

    Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak in Wuhan, China in December 2019 and spread rapidly around the world. The lockdowns brought a major disruption to world trade and lowered the utilization rate of companies, which dampened corporate investment and consumer sentiment of households. Accordingly, countries have implemented economic recovery and stimulus policies along with health and quarantine responses to COVID-19. The purpose of this study is to analyze the tax policies implemented by each country related to COVID-19 response and provide policy implications. In detail, this study provides policy implications by analyzing the current status of tax support measures in a total of 123 countries compiled by the OECD as of May 29, 2020.
    The analysis results can be summarized as follows. First, as a tax item active in the tax policy, corporate tax support was the most frequently used at 17.21%, followed by VAT at 11.59% and income tax at 10.58%. Second, as a result of analysis by policy purpose, the tax support for immediate response to the damage caused by COVID-19 was the highest at 95%, and only 4.2% for the purpose of economic recovery. Third, the timing of tax policy announcement is concentrated in mid-March 2020 to the end of March 2020 when 66.7% of tax support policies were announced. Fourth, the types of tax policies were classified into tax administration measures, tax reduction and exemption, tax support for economic recovery, and tax support for health and medical care. Fifth, tax expenditure and liquidity support in countries around the world, announced by September 11, 2020, is estimated at about $11.7 trillion, accounting for about 12% of the world’s average GDP.
    Therefore, the policy implications of this study are as follows. First, it is necessary to selectively provide additional support to directly affected industries. As in other countries, active support is required for industries that have been directly affected by national lock-down policies (e.g., tourism and aviation-related industries). Second, it is necessary to implement a tax policy centered on employment and investment promotion. Tax experts say it is necessary to set the direction of tax policy for job creation and maintenance, corporate investment promotion and liquidity support for economic recovery. In addition, it is necessary to consider cases from other countries, such as Australia’s accelerated depreciation of depreciable assets, tax cuts and exemptions for education and training institutions for unemployed in Portugal, and the expansion of loss carry-back and carry-over implemented in United States and seven other countries. Third, in a situation where there is great concern about the increase in national debt due to fiscal expansion, a policy to expand tax base and tax source transparency should be accompanied to prevent adverse effects on tax policy. Lastly, it is necessary to consider overseas cases such as reduction of income tax for medical workers, accelerated depreciation of medical equipment, and consumption tax exemption on imported products such as medicines and medical equipment.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 이영한, "포스트 코로나 시대의 조세정책 동향:국제적 비교와 조세전문가의 평가를 중심으로" 2020

    2 정성희, "코로나19를 통해 살펴보는 조세지원제도" (40) : 106-107, 2020

    3 기획재정부, "코로나19 파급영향 최소화와 조기극복을 위한 2020년 추가경정예산안 국회확정"

    4 기획재정부, "코로나19 파급영향 최소화와 조기 극복을 위한 조세특례제한법 개정안 국회기재위 의결"

    5 허경선, "아시아 국가의 코로나19 재정정책" 한국조세재정연구원 아태재정협력센터 2020

    6 정재현, "긴급재난 발생에 따른 국제기구와 주요국의 관세와 통관제도 관련 지원정책 비교 연구:코로나19를 중심으로" 한국조세재정연구원 세법연구센터 2020

    7 최영문, "관광숙박업의 조세지원제도의 고찰과 제도 개선에 관한 연구" (사)한국관광레저학회 32 (32): 207-225, 2020

    8 심혜정, "각국의 코로나19 대응 조세지원 현황 및 정책적 시사점" (16) : 2020

    9 OECD, "Tax and Fiscal Policy in Response to the Coronavirus Crisis:Strengthening Confidence and Resilience"

    10 "OECD Economic Outlook, Volume 2020 Issue 2"

    1 이영한, "포스트 코로나 시대의 조세정책 동향:국제적 비교와 조세전문가의 평가를 중심으로" 2020

    2 정성희, "코로나19를 통해 살펴보는 조세지원제도" (40) : 106-107, 2020

    3 기획재정부, "코로나19 파급영향 최소화와 조기극복을 위한 2020년 추가경정예산안 국회확정"

    4 기획재정부, "코로나19 파급영향 최소화와 조기 극복을 위한 조세특례제한법 개정안 국회기재위 의결"

    5 허경선, "아시아 국가의 코로나19 재정정책" 한국조세재정연구원 아태재정협력센터 2020

    6 정재현, "긴급재난 발생에 따른 국제기구와 주요국의 관세와 통관제도 관련 지원정책 비교 연구:코로나19를 중심으로" 한국조세재정연구원 세법연구센터 2020

    7 최영문, "관광숙박업의 조세지원제도의 고찰과 제도 개선에 관한 연구" (사)한국관광레저학회 32 (32): 207-225, 2020

    8 심혜정, "각국의 코로나19 대응 조세지원 현황 및 정책적 시사점" (16) : 2020

    9 OECD, "Tax and Fiscal Policy in Response to the Coronavirus Crisis:Strengthening Confidence and Resilience"

    10 "OECD Economic Outlook, Volume 2020 Issue 2"

    11 "OECD"

    12 IMF, "Fiscal Monitor"

    13 OECD, "Economic Outlook, Volume 2020 Issue 2 Note 2. Insolvency and debt overhang following the COVID-19 outbreak:Assessment of risks and policy responses"

    14 World Health Organization, "Coronavirus Disease(COVID-19)Situation Reports" 2020

    15 Brondolo. J., "Collecting Taxes During an Economic Crisis:Challenges and Policy Options"

    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
    2026 평가 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
    2020-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
    2017-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
    2013-01-01 등재 등재 1차 FAIL (등재유지) KCI등재
    2010-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2007-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2006-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2004-07-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 1.23 1.23 1.14
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    1.29 1.2 2.08 0.23
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼