농업 관련 소득세제의 경제적 함의와 개선과제

Abstract

2010년 농업소득세 폐지와 함께 비과세로 전환되었던 작물재배업 소득은 2016년부터 식량작물재배업을 제외하고 2015년도 수입액이 10억 원 이상인 경우 소득세가 부과된다. 이에 농업과 타 산업 간 그리고 농업 내에서도 과세, 비과세 품목이 구분되면서 과세 형평성 문제가 제기되고 있다. 형평성 문제 외에도 소득신고 의무가 없는 농가의 경영기록 작성 유인이 줄고, 개인소득증빙자료 부재로 투자자금 조달에 한계가 된다. 또한 소득증빙자료를 활용한 소득안정 및 복지정책의 효율적 추진의 제약 등 농업과 농정 차원의 문제점도 야기하고 있다. 따라서 현재 비과세인 식량작물재배업과 10억 원 이하의 작물재배업의 과세 전환 방안의 검토가 필요하다. 그러나 조세제도 개편은 농업인의 조세저항, 납세 행정비용의 증가, 농가의 세부담 증가에 따른 농업생산 위축과 같이, 과세로 유발되는 사회경제적 비용도 적지 않을 것이다. 따라서 이 연구는 사회경제적 비용과 편익을 종합 평가하여 작물재배업에 대한 소득세 과세 확대 시 나타날 수 있는 쟁점과 이에 대한 보완책을 제시하고자 한다.

Background of Research Crop income has not been taxable since 2005. Though farmers with income more than one billion won from crop farming other than food crops should declare their income and be subject to income tax from year of 2016, an argument continues regarding on the taxation equity between farmers with tax exemption and those without tax exemption as well as between agriculture and other industries. Moreover, tax exemption on income from crop farming is a factor hindering efficient agricultural administration from three reasons. First, because farmers are not obliged to declare their income, they have weak motivation to keep books and records, which result in limited application of management techniques in their farming. Second, no income declaration record can be an obstacle to farmer’s more opportunities for investment because of uneasy access to the funds of banks. Third, income stabilization programs and welfare programs for farmers are used for all farmers regardless of recipients’ income level. Being acknowledged that the amount of public money transferred should be different according to recipient’s income level for efficiency of policy, the fact that there is no reliable record to prove applicant’s income is one of factors to deteriorate efficiency of government policy. Therefore, it is necessary to reconsider if tax exemption on crop income should be maintained. However, there are socio-economic costs such as farmer’s tax resistance, an increase in the costs of tax administration, increased tax burden among farmers as well as benefits if tax exemption is canceled and crop income starts to be taxable income. Thus a balanced examination should be done on the continuation of tax exemption. Hence, this study comprehensively assessed the socio-economic costs and benefits of the continuation of tax exemption and drew a conclusion. Method of Research Four approaches were applied in this study. First, an estimation of farmer’s tax burden was done by using the Household Economic Survey, National Tax Statistics, and Household Survey Data. Second, a scenario analysis was conducted to examine the impact of taxation on crop income. Third, taxation on agricultural income in France, Japan, the U.S. and Canada was introduced to bring out lessons from other countries. Moreover, meetings with experts on tax and agriculture were held on a regular basis to discuss several issues related to taxation on crop income so insightful comments on the study were obtained. Research Results and Implications The results of scenario analysis showed that the number of farmers who pay income tax will increase no matter what scenario is applied. Moreover, the average amount of paid tax also increased which indicates that the tax burden clearly increased among farmers. This can bring out farmer’s bigger tax resistance. Conflicts between farmers who pay income tax (forestry and livestock income earners) and farmers who do not pay income tax (crop farmers) can cause social cost. The last cost is an increase in administrative costs required for tax collection, which can be divided into tax collection costs and tax compliance costs. In the end, an increase in the cost of taxation administration can be affected by the increase in the tax compliance costs rather than administrative cost for national tax. The benefits of taxation on crop income are divided into the benefits from taxation itself and the benefits from income declaration made for tax payment. The former includes an increase in tax revenues, and an increase in social welfare resulting from improved social equity. The latter includes farmers’ efficient management of their business, more opportunities for investment, and expanded sales channels by ensuring the base for business registration, and development of agricultural administration. This study does not provide money metric measures of all the cost and benefit of taxation on crop income because some of costs and benefits are nontangible. However, this study concludes that the benefit of taxation on crop income can exceed the cost and tax exemption on crop income should not continue. The benefit of taxation on crop income can expand to the whole society beyond the agricultural sector while the major costs are to be borne by farmers who were not income taxpayers. Especially, the change in taxation can cause bigger economic burden to low income farmers compared to high income farmers. Thus it is necessary to devise ways to reduce tax burden for low income farm households. Furthermore, the transition to taxation on crop income should be carried out as long-term and in stages. The agreement among farmers on taxation on crop income should be preceded to minimize social conflict caused from tax policy changes. Researchers: Lim Soyeong, Kim Yunjin, and Lee ShilResearch period: 2016. 1. ~ 2016. 10.E-mail address: sylim@krei.re.kr