(2) Policy discussion
As can be seen from the above document provisions, the building area law and the floor area law is a parallel relationship.

Building area method refers to taking the marketable area of a certain type of real estate as the numerator and the total marketable area of a project as the denominator, calculating the proportion of the building area of this type of real estate, and multiplying the proportion by the total land cost to determine the land cost that should be shared by this type of real estate.

The land area method means that the actual land area of a certain type of real estate (available for sale) is taken as the numerator and the total land area of all types of real estate (available for sale) is taken as the denominator to calculate the land area proportion of this type of real estate. The land cost of this type of real estate should be divided by the proportion multiplied by the total land cost.

The author thinks that floor area method is a land cost allocation method with serious defects. When a project has independent villa area, independent commercial area (low-rise buildings) and ordinary residential area (high-rise buildings) at the same time, if the construction area method is adopted to apportion land cost, the land cost will be mostly concentrated in the ordinary residential area with large construction area, while the villa and business with small construction area can only be apportioned to a small amount of land cost. To resolve this contradiction,1Document No. 1 clearly requires that, for the real estate that occupies a relatively independent land (note that it is not absolutely independent, as long as it is divided by roads or walls, it is relatively independent, and only "mixed-construction" property does not constitute relatively independent property), the land cost should be allocated by using the land area method first, and the remaining land cost should be allocated by using the building area method. The so-called mixed construction refers to the existence of two or more types of real estate in the same building, such as, the second floor is commercial, the third floor is residential, such as residential buildings in both ordinary residential, and non-ordinary residential.

Obviously, the floor area method is more complicated than the building area method, but the calculation results are more detailed and reasonable. The apportionment results of the floor area method and the warrant area method should be very close. Therefore, in practice should establish the first principle of floor area law, only when there is no contradiction in the use of building area law (such as there is no independent villa and independent business), can first use the building area law. The author believes that, from a fair point of view, the floor area law should not be allowed when there are independent villas and independent businesses, even if it is more beneficial to the taxpayer.

To be clear,1The number file although is8File number is abolished, but1The spirit of the document of the bulletin is continued use,8File number is just in1Instead of negating it entirely, "other reasonable methods" are added1Number file.

for8The "direct collection method" (understood as direct collection of accounting) in document No. 1 is not appropriate for the following reasons: First, accounting should follow the accounting standards, rather than direct collection if you want to direct collection, do not direct collection if you do not want to direct collection; Second, if the accounting is collected directly, and the result of the collection is unreasonable, the tax authorities should not be recognized, otherwise there will be too much randomness, unfair tax burden and tax avoidance problems; Third, the direct collection of accounting should still adopt the building area method, occupied area method and other reasonable methods, so the direct collection method and the building area method, occupied area method should not be a parallel relationship.

for8Tax authorities in Document No. "Other reasonable methods recognized by tax authorities" have different understandings in practice. One opinion is that tax authorities at all levels have the right to recognize the new land cost allocation method. Another view is that only the State Administration of Taxation should have the right to approve the new land cost-sharing method. The author believes that the second opinion is correct. Only the State Administration of Taxation has the right to explain the detailed rules of the land value-added tax regulations, and other tax authorities at all levels should not have the right to explain (except those approved by the administration through seeking instructions), otherwise it will cause confusion in policy implementation. for2017The author has reservations about "other reasonable methods recognized by competent tax authorities" in the White Paper in 2005. In practice, it seems that tax authorities at all levels below the city and prefecture have not yet innovated land cost allocation methods.

In the previous interpretation of Taxpayer Perspective, the author has stated such a point of view: "Land cost allocation is a combination of land area method and building area method, rather than a choice of the two methods". Here make some supplement and amendment: reasonable land cost apportionment should be the combination of land area method and building area method, but in the final analysis is the land area method. The use of building area method is to calculate the land area of each type of real estate in the mixed building, and the land area method should be used to calculate the land cost apportionment. Only under specific circumstances, when there is no conflict in collection and payment, and it will not lead to unfair and unjust results, can we directly use the building area method to apportion the land cost.

CycloseThe company is committed to providing domestic and foreign customers in Hong Kong, Singapore, Dubai and other areas of the company account audit, registration annual inspection and domestic and foreign tax planning business. Efficient, rigorous, intimate service has been favored by many private enterprises, listed companies and large state-owned enterprises.