|
The Proper Taxation of Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) An Analysis of the Treatment in Tax Structures of European Countries 浅析PPP模式的税务处理 ——基于欧洲各国对PPP业务税务处理的分析 编译团队： Andrew（现任职于某四大） 大丹 （现任职于黑龙江省国家税务局） 章玉莹 （中南财经政法大学财政税务学院） 潘晓丽（中南财经政法大学财政税务学院） 唐颖（中南财经政法大学财政税务学院）
本文作者为奥地利维也纳经济大学博士生 Mag. Gerald Posautz，文章发布于2007年全球商务发展学会第四届国际学术会议。译文仅供学习交流使用，未经作者授权，严禁用于商业用途。 CONTENTS 目录 I. INTRODUCTION I. 引言 A. REFLECTING THE CHANGING ROLE OF THE PUBLIC SECTOR A. 公共部门的角色转变 C. ADVANTAGES OF PPP C. PPP模式的优势 III. TAXES AND CHARGES WITHIN PPP III. PPP 模式中的相关税费 IV. PPP 模式的税务处理 A. PROBLEM ASSIGNMENT AND ARISING DIFFICULTIES A. 主要问题与困难 ABSTRACT 摘要
PPP are defined as tailored long-term cooperation between the public sector and private sector enterprises. First developed in the U.S.A. these partnerships have been used by governments across Europe to improve quality and efficiency of services and to counteract public debt. PPP模式是指依照约定在公共部门和私营企业间建立的定制化长期合作伙伴关系。这种模式起源于美国，后被欧洲各国政府相继采用，主要目的是提高公共服务的质量及效率，并降低公债水平。
The main aspect of a PPP is the public authorities’ shift from offering services to demanding fulfillment of public sector duties by private enterprises. Independent of the specific PPP- model the private and the public partner are both subject to various taxes and charges during the lifecycle of the partnership. PPP模式的主要特征是，公共管理部门从主动提供服务转变为由私营企业履行公共部门的职责。除特定的几种合作方式外，在项目合作期间内，私营企业和公共部门双方均需承担各种不同的税费。
The paper focuses on two different approaches to the tax treatment of PPP in Europe: 本文关注的重点是PPP业务在欧洲实践中才采取的如下两种税务处理方式： 1) The integration in the existent tax structure. 整合现行税制。 2) A special treatment, e.g. via tax exemptions. 特殊性税务处理，例如免税。
Results indicate negative consequences for both approaches - a potential cost increase for public authorities in the first case and a distortion of competition in the second case. 结果表明，两种方法都会导致不利影响。前者将导致公共管理部门潜在的成本的上升，后者将导致竞争行为的扭曲。
KEYWORDS 关键词
Public-Private Partnership, New Public Management, Private Finance Initiative, Public Sector Management
公私合作模式；新公共管理；私人主动融资；公共部门管理 I. INTRODUCTION I. 引言 A Public-Private Partnership represents a promising and highly developed form of cooperation between private enterprises and the public sector.Governments around the world are considering or already have considered the implementation of PPP to achieve a better provision of services compared to the traditional way. The fundamental idea is insofar simple and convincing as a private sector enterprises substitute or support the public sector in the provision of services that can be better managed by the private sector and don't absolutely have to be provided by a public sector entity (e.g. sovereign duties). Notionally this approach can lead to advantages for the public sector, for private sector enterprises, and for the public. PPP模式是私营企业和公共部门之间一种前景广泛、发展成熟高的合作形式。世界各国政府都在考虑或已经考虑推行PPP模式。相比于传统方式，PPP模式有助于更好地提供公共服务。这一模式的基本原理是简单且无可争议的，该模式认为，部分公共服务可以由私营企业直接提供，或者协助公共部门提供。通常来看在此模式下公共服务且能更好地被管理。简而言之，上述公共服务不一定非要由公共部门提供。理论上，PPP 模式能同时为公共部门、私营企业和社会公众带来好处。
In practice the institutionalization of PPP raises various problems in different domains of law, economy or administration, questioning the often exaggerated advantages. Apart from the U.S.A. and as a consequence of the long-term character of a PPP European countries lack experience values. The evaluation and quantification whether a certain service should be provided via a PPP are difficult even if highly complex average return methods have been introduced. PPP模式的法制化引发了法律、经济和行政管理等领域的种种问题，令人质疑PPP模式的优势有被夸大的嫌疑。与美国不同的是，由于PPP模式普遍周期较长，欧洲国家缺乏对此模式的相关经验。即使已经采取高度复杂的平均回报率的方法，评估和量化某一服务是否可以通过PPP模式提供仍旧是困难重重。
This paper focuses on the implications of taxes and charges within public-private partnerships. Concentrating on the situation in Europe the aim is to point out that the existing tax structures might be inadequate and therefore the treatment may result in microeconomic and macroeconomic disadvantages (e.g. the distortion of competition). Although this paper is work in progress the basic message should come through and stimulates further research. In practice, the public and the private sector are aware of these problems and drooling over reasonable solutions. 本文重点关注PPP模式下各类税费的潜在影响。基于欧洲的具体情况，本文旨在说明欧洲现行的税制结构仍旧不完善，因此实践中对 PPP 的税务处理可能在对宏微观经济的运行带来不利影响（例如，造成竞争行为的扭曲）。尽管研究仍在进行中，部分基本信息将在本文作相应阐述，并促进接下去的研究。在实践中，公共部门和私营企业都意识到这些问题，并希望可以得到合理的解决方案。
II. PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS(PPP) II. 公私合作模式
A. REFLECTING THE CHANGING ROLE OF THE PUBLIC SECTOR A. 反映了公共部门的角色转变
There has been a long tradition with various forms of cooperation between public authorities and private sector enterprises(e.g. Torres and Pina, 2001: 603). The range is dependent on the historic period and the country (e.g. Newman and Verpraet,1999: 487) and varies between the extremes service provision by public authorities (fully public) and total privatization (fully private) (e.g. De Luca, 2000: 15).Regarding successful catchwords like outsourcing, sale and lease back or privatization it comes clear that a PPP may be a practical variation of public-private cooperation but definitely not a new phenomenon. The ulterior motive for a PPP is similar to a basic goal of cooperation as a whole – to achieve a surplus by combining different strengths and competencies. In terms of public-private cooperation better output (e.g. lower costs, higher quality, higher efficiency, etc.)can result from input representing the special skills of the private sector and of the public sector. 政府部门和私营企业(e.g. Torres and Pina, 2001: 603)之间各种形式的合作由来已久。合作的范围取决于不同的历史时期和国家(e.g. Newman and Verpraet, 1999: 487), 在由公共部门提供（完全公共）和彻底私人提供（完全私有）的两极之间变化(e.g. De Luca, 2000: 15)。随着“外包、售后回租或私有化”等流行语的风靡，可以明确的是，PPP模式很可能是实现公私合作切实有效的变形，但这绝对不是一个新现象。整体来看，PPP模式的潜在动机与合作的基本目标是一致的，即通过对不同主体的优势和能力的组合来实现盈余。在公共部门和私营部门合作方面，体现私营部门和公共部门的专业技术的输入可能会引起更好的输出（例如成本更低、质量更优、效率更高等）。
Nevertheless certain aspects highlight PPP from other forms of cooperation. PPP, in general, represent long-term cooperation (with contracts up to 30 years) designed for solving complex problems and to provide services tailored to the specific needs. Special attention is paid to the appropriate apportionment of the risks as well as of the duties and responsibilities between the partners. A particular kind of risk is shifted to the partner who is best able to manage it(e.g. Broadbent andLaughlin, 2004: 57) and getting an adequate remuneration in return. Consequential very public-oriented arguments for a PPP (e.g. easier project funding and the decrease of the public sector borrowing) do not cover all advantages of a PPP. This also shows the very fact that it is extremely difficult for private sector sources to offer funding at a cheaper rate than the government (e.g. Terry,1996: 10). 然而PPP模式在某些方面与其他形式的合作仍有明显区别。 PPP模式一般代表了长期合作关系（合约长达30年），专为解决复杂问题和特定需求提供定制化服务。我们应该特别关注合作伙伴之间的风险以及义务和责任的合理分配。在PPP模式下，特定风险被转移给管理水平最优的(e.g. Broadbent and Laughlin, 2004: 57)一方。作为回报，该合作方可以得到与承担的风险相匹配的回报。公众对PPP模式的讨论，例如更容易获取项目资金和减少公共部门借债，并没涵盖其全部优点。这也说明，私营部门以比政府(e.g. Terry, 1996: 10)更低的价格提供资金是非常困难的。
Almost fifty years ago PPP was first used in the U.S.A. in urban renewal partnerships.Compared to the nowadays comprehension of PPP the relationship between the public and the private sector was different. Public authorities tried to stimulate investments of private sector enterprises by granting subsidies for building and investing in certain project areas (Reuschke, 2001: 10). Over decades the intensity and complexity of PPP-suitable projects have emerged from the U.S.A. over a large part of the world. Nowadays PPP is a catchword in Europe and an attractive way of constructing/refurbishing infrastructure or providing services in a new manner. 将近五十年前，PPP模式在美国市区改建项目中首次被使用。当时的PPP模式中关于公共部门和私营部门之间的关系与时下的概念完全不同。公共部门试图通过对特定项目区域进行开发和投资给予补贴，以刺激私营部门的投资力度。几十年来，适用PPP模式的项目已经从美国扩展至世界大部分地区，强度和复杂程度也有了明显变化。如今，PPP模式在欧洲十分流行，是建造和整修基础设施，或提供公共服务最具吸引力的方式。
Typical projects include the construction (and maintenance) of hospitals, airports, prisons, schools, highways, etc. First adopted in the UK (named Private FinanceInitiative (PFI) instead of PPP) the governments of many European countries have considered and already tried the shift from offering a service to delivering it in cooperation with private partners or even to demanding the fulfillment by a private sector enterprise. 典型的PPP项目包括医院、机场、监狱、学校、公路等的建设和维护。PPP模式首先在英国被采用，并被称为私人主动融资（PFI）。许多欧洲国家的政府已考虑或已经尝试由主动提供公共服务转变到与私营部门合作，甚至完全由私营部门企业提供公共服务。
B. DIFFERENT TYPES OFPPP-MODELS B. PPP模式的种类 As PPP represent large-scale individual projects it is difficult to define prototypes of PPP even though this is indispensable for scientific research.There are diverse approaches to classification, reflecting, for example, the kind of responsibilities and duties that are transferred to the private partner or the legal relationship between the private and the public partner. In theAnglophone countries, the classification is predominated by the tasks which are transferred to the private partner. Regarding the construction (and maintenance) of a large-scale infrastructure facility, these duties vary from building (B), operating (O), financing (F), owning (O), developing (D), transferring (T), leasing (L), refurbishing (R), etc. A widely used model representing the life cycle approach of PPP is, for example, BFOT (build, finance, operate, transfer). In doing so the private partner (e.g. a consortium of private sector enterprises) builds and finances, for example, a hospital at the early stage of the life cycle. During the operating phase, the private partner takes over responsibility for the cleaning, the maintenance, security patrols etc. while the public partner is focusing on the intended usage, for example, the provision of medical treatment in a hospital. Finally, the ownership and the risk of exploitation of the infrastructure facility is transferred (back) to the public sector. Over the life cycle, the private partner is rewarded for the provided services whereas in most cases the amount is dependent on quantitative terms (e.g. capacity utilization) or ex-ante defined values. PPP项目的体量通常都很庞大，往往难以对PPP模式界定原型，即使这在科研活动中是必不可少的。目前我们可以看到有多种不同的分类方式，相应的依据包括转移到私营企业的责任和义务的类型，以及私营企业和公共部门之间的法律关系。在英语区国家，主流的分类标准依据的是被转移到私营企业的职责。对于那些大型基础设施建设或维修类的项目，职责包括建造(Build)、运营(Operate)、融资(Finance)、所有(Owning)、开发(Developing)、移交(transferring)、租赁(leasing)和翻新(refurbishing)等。BFOT（建设、融资、运营、移交）是一种主流的PPP模式。以医院为例，在项目的早期阶段，私营合作伙伴（如由私营企业组成的财团）承担了包括建造和融资在内的工作。在项目的运营阶段，私营合作伙伴则主要负责清洁、维护、治安巡逻等工作，而公共合作伙伴则更关注项目如何达到预期的目的，例如制定医院就医的相关规定。项目期届满，所有权和基础设施开发的风险一并转移到公共部门。在项目周期内，私营伙伴依据所提供的服务获取相应的回报，而在大多数情况下，回报取决于定量术语（例如产能利用率）或事前约定的标准。
Another approach to classifying PPP which is widely used in Continental Europe and especially in German-speaking countries is based on the legal relationship between the private partner, the public partner and the end-user. The above described BFOT-model is in German referred to as “Betreibermodell” and representing a distinct shift of the public sector from offer to demand. From the end-user’ perspective the involvement of the private partner has probably marginal consequences because there is (still) interaction with the public partner regarding the main services (e.g. medical treatment)and potential fees. 在欧洲大陆，特别是德语区，还广泛运用了另一种PPP模式的分类方式。这种方式主要基于私营合作伙伴、公共合作伙伴和最终用户之间的法律关系。上文中提到的BFOT模式在德语中被称为“特许模式(Betreibermodell)”，这个词体现公共部门从服务提供方到服务需求方的明显转变。从最终用户的角度来看，由于和公共合作伙伴在主要服务（如，医疗服务）和潜在费用间的相互影响，私营合作伙伴的介入可能具有边际效果。
Continuing the classification in German-speaking countries the “Konzessionsmodell” implicates different legal relationships as the service is directly provided to the end-user by the private partner. The interaction between the public and the private partner focuses on supervision rights of the public partner, for example concerning the pricing, and on remuneration aspects. The latter does matter in practice for example when a PPPis operated on the construction and maintenance of a highway. Although the remuneration is based on end-user fees (tolls) there might exist the obligation of the public partner to ensure an appropriate remuneration by paying a “shadow toll” to the private partner. 继续说回德语区国家对PPP模式的分类，由于服务是由私营合作伙伴直接提供给最终用户，“特许模式(Konzessionsmodell)”涉及了不同的法律关系。公私双方之间的合作侧重于公共合作伙伴的监督权，例如定价和报酬。后者的监督权在实践中非常重要。比如在高速公路建设和维护工作采用了PPP模式，虽然报酬是基于对最终用户的收费（通行费），公共合作伙伴仍可能通过支付“影子收费”给私营合作伙伴的方式，以确保其获得相适当的报酬。
Finally, the “Kooperationsmodell” is characterized by the founding of a legal entity in which the public and the private partner participate. Depending on the distribution of ownership and on the legal embodiment this type of PPP-model may offer even more flexibility as well as advantages resulting from the public law and the private law. 最后，“特许模式(Kooperationsmodell)”的特征是公私双方合资建立的法律实体。根据所有权的划分和法律体现，此类型PPP模式可以提供更大的灵活性，在公法和私法方面也有明显的优势。 C. ADVANTAGES OF PPP C. PPP模式的优势 In general, PPP may offer advantages to the public partner, to the private partner, and to the end-user. Main advantages for the public partner in the form of federal and municipal entities are the concentration on the core competences, the cutback in public borrowing and the transfer of risk. Shifting the fulfillment of certain tasks to specialized private sector enterprises enables the public authority to retrench on output specification, compensation, and supervision. At a closer look the public sector entity is –depending on the particular project - still responsible for a variety of duties including for example the authorization of contracts, the evaluation of infrastructure needs, the payment for services, the monitoring of business and financial viability, etc. (Grimseyand Lewis, 2004:94). 总体来看，PPP模式对公共合作伙伴、私营合作伙伴和最终用户均有积极作用。对联邦和地方政府来说，PPP模式的主要优势是增强核心竞争力、削减公共债务和转移相关风险。将部分工作交给专业的私营企业完成，有助于行政管理机构降低在规范、补偿和监督等方面的支出。细细来看，根据具体项目的不同，公共部门的主要职责包括批准合约、基建需求评估、支付服务款项、检查业务及财务可行性等(Grimsey andLewis, 2004: 94).。
The adoption of PPP for large-scale infrastructure facilities like the construction of highways, hospitals, prisons, etc. is also a response to increasing budget problems of local authorities and a measure to substitute private investment for public spending.The tense situation has even got worse regarding the criteria of the EuropeanUnion’s Stability and Growth pact. As the existing public debt is a restriction to new infrastructure projects, PPP present a solution by offering a different, budget sparing financing. Generally, high launching costs are transformed to anticipated, constant and smaller cash-flows over a long period of time (e.g.Hall, 1998: 123). Moreover, PPP is treated off-balance and do not influence the criteria for the Stability and Growth pact negatively (Clarke and Healy, 2003:20).Especially when the end-users remunerate the private partner directly in terms of fees or tolls the public partner is able to implement infrastructure facilities almost without increasing public spending because of the direct financing from the ultimate addressees (e.g. Kyvelou and Karaiskou, 2006:601). 在大型基建项目，例如公路、医院、监狱等的建设中采用PPP模式是对地方政府提高预算问题的回应，也是私人投资替代公共支出一种措施。当前，关于欧盟《稳定与增长公约》标准的矛盾日益激烈。现有公共债务的规模限制了新的基础设施项目的实施，而PPP模式则提供了不同的解决方案，在该方案下融资成本得到进一步节约。通常而言，项目的启动成本较高，则处理思路是将其转化至较长的项目周期，而项目周期内的现金流是能够预期、稳定且相对来说较小的 (e.g. Hall, 1998: 123)。此外PPP模式采用表外融资，不会对《稳定与增长公约》标准有负面影响(Clarke andHealy, 2003: 20)。尤其是当最终用户向私营合作伙伴直接支付费用或者通行费，即通过端对端直接融资的方式，公共合作伙伴便能够在几乎不增加公共开支的前提下扩建基础设施 (e.g. Kyvelou and Karaiskou,2006: 601)。
The transfer of risk is a very often stressed advantage of PPP. Although the risk taking is not for free because of the probably higher remuneration there do exist advantageous situations for the public partner. The crucial factor is whether the private partner can manage the specific risk easily for example because of special skills and therefore charges a remuneration that is lower compared to the cost arising from the assumption of risk by the public partner. PPP模式的一个经常被强调的优势是风险转移。考虑到可能存在更高的补偿，很难说私营合作伙伴承担风险是完全免费的，但对于公共合作伙伴来说确实存在着有利情况。关键在于，私营合作伙伴是否可以有效管理风险，例如依赖于专业技术，从而导致要求的报酬低于由公共合作伙伴独自承担风险所付出的成本。
There are several other effects of PPP which also may have a positive impact on the public partner. If for example, private sector enterprises enter into competition to become partner in a PPP there is a chance for the public partner to provide a service at even lower cost. Moreover, the level of quality of the provided services between the private and the public sector can be higher compared to the traditional contractor-consignee relationship because of the private partner’s responsibility not only for the construction of the facility but also for the maintenance. In the long run, poor quality and dowdy construction can result in higher costs for maintenance and reparation for the private partner (Nisar,2007: 154). Altogether the public sector may (also) benefit from an improved delivery of projects in terms of time, costs and quality, from the elimination of over-specification as well as from an improved maintenance of public infrastructure (Dixon and Pottinger and Jordan, 2005:414). PPP模式还会对公共合作伙伴产生其他的积极影响。例如，如果私营部门企业参与到PPP合作伙伴的竞争，那么公共合作伙伴能有机会以更低的成本提供公共服务。此外相比于传统的“承包商-受托人”的关系，通过公私合作模式提供的公共服务质量可以更高，因为私营合作伙伴不仅负责设施建设，也包括相应的维护。从长远来看，施工质量差、设计样式过时的建筑可能令私营合作伙伴花费更高的维护和修复成本(Nisar, 2007: 154)。由于过度规范的消除和公共设施后期维护的提高，完工项目在工期、成本和质量等方面都能令公共部门获益(Dixon and Pottinger andJordan, 2005: 414)。
Private sector enterprises take share in PPP for various reasons. Public authorities generally represent secure contractors with good payment behaviour and low risk of insolvency. Furthermore, this cooperation can offer access to new business segments or even to a kind of monopoly.Depending on the particular service a private partner may expand business by offering the service to different public sector entities, for example, a private sector enterprise is leading in the surveillance and maintenance of school buildings and therefore offering this service to various communities. 私营企业参与 PPP 项目的动机多种多样。通常而言，公共部门意味着良好的付款行为和较低的破产风险，被视作是理想的承包商。此外，这种合作还有助于进入新的细分领域，或甚至形成垄断。为某一公共机构提供服务，有助于私营企业将服务拓展至其他公共机构。比如，某一私营企业在学校设施监视和后期维护市场处于领先地位，那么就可以自然而言地把这类服务拓展至更多的社区。
The end-users (e.g. the citizens, society as a whole) may benefit from PPP insofar as services are improving in terms of quality, cost, diversity, innovation and speed. Besides this infrastructure facilities are refurbished or built although there is discipline in public spending. PPP 模式令公共服务在质量、成本、多样性、创新和速度等方面均有提升，使得最终用户（例如，公民或整体社会）获益。另外也使得基础设施得到了翻新或重建，尽管对这类的公共支出存在约束。 TO BE CONTINUED 未完待续  【译税】是由一群热爱公益的财税学子发起、运营和维护的非营利项目，致力于学习和交流各类国际税收资讯。 如果您对我们的内容感兴趣，欢迎订阅关注我们的公众号。谢谢！ 快，关注这个公众号，一起涨姿势～  |
|
|
