世界工業化國家和地區在其工業化過程中無一不靠對外貿易的超常規發展來牽動國民經濟的發展。鑑於對外貿易特別是出口對一國產業成長的貢獻，出口鼓勵政策就成為世界各國普遍採用的政策。而在出口鼓勵政策中，出口退稅是廣泛採用而又行之有效的政策。 由本論文的研究發現，出口退稅制度在促進中共對外開放、對內經濟發展、完善外貿體制及儘快加入世界貿易組織等方面有很大的貢獻，並且出口退稅制度本身亦隨著中國大陸市場經濟的發展和外貿體制的改革有了進一步的完善和規範。尤其是在亞洲金融危機時，中國大陸的出口企業經營發生困難，對中共外貿出口造成影響，當時，面對這一形勢，中共可採取的策略有調整人民幣匯率或降低利率、提高出口退稅率，但是，當時中共已經多次明確指出人民幣匯率不貶值，調整匯率已不可能；利率在連續降低四次之後，1998年7月1日又第五次下調，下調空間有限；而出口退稅率在數次降低之後，採取出口退稅率某種程度調高的可能性增加，故當時便採取調高出口退稅率的方式來刺激出口，截至目前為止已多次調高出口退稅率來挽救大陸的外貿企業，由此可見出口退稅制度在中國大陸的重要地位。 出口退稅制度的推行，首要工作，就是對出口退稅適用的對象作一規範，舉凡適用的企業及貨物等。中共核准辦理出口退稅的企業可劃分為兩大類，即有進出口經營權的企業與特准出口退免稅企業；至於可辦理出口退免稅的貨物，則須同時具備以下三個條件，即屬於增值稅與消費稅徵收範圍內的貨物、必須報關離境、必須在財務上作銷售處理。其次，與申請退稅企業息息相關的程序與規定，則屬出口退稅的計算、出口企業的登記、退稅的申報、稽核、審核、退稅，以及出口企業違法的處置。 中共出口退稅制度實行至今，所面臨到最主要的問題有徵稅與退稅脫節、中央財政負荷過重、出口騙退稅，以及出口退稅進度緩慢進而佔壓企業資金，形成企業經營壓力，並影響企業出口積極性。中共對於這些問題可採取的措施有：改革財稅制度、嚴厲打擊騙稅活動、加快退稅進度等。 至於針對中共出口退稅制度中的徵退脫節與出口騙稅等問題，法國的做法可作為借鏡。首先，法國出口貨物零稅率機制的一個重要特徵就是將出口貨物零稅率納入該國增值稅的常規管理之中，實現徵稅、免稅、抵扣稅、退稅一體化，這就從機制本身封住了徵退脫節問題的缺口。而中共現行出口退稅辦法最大的弊端正是出口退稅脫離了增值稅的常規管理，人為地造成了徵退稅環節的脫節。其次，中共現行出口退稅機制中徵稅和退稅分別由兩套機構來運作，退稅款全部由中央財政負擔，並且只需審核幾張單證就可以從國庫中提取巨額退稅款，如此巨大的利益驅動使出口退稅成為滋生出口騙稅的溫床。而法國實行的免稅購買辦法則無稅可騙，採用免、抵、退辦法需從國庫中直接退款的金額則相當有限。 就整體而論，大陸在出口退稅制度之下滋生甚多流弊，似乎應儘速予以改革或廢除，但因出口退稅制度對於商品的外銷能力及經濟成長的貢獻，確有不可忽視的效益，尤其對一般廠商之經營心理，具有莫大的鼓勵作用，況且在今日國際社會間，保護主義抬頭之時，各國為保護本國之產業，無不殫精竭慮，利用各種措施，以善盡保育之責，故中共為保護其產業的繼續成長與發展，應善加運用出口退稅制度所具有之精神。

由於近年來東南亞金融風暴，各國匯率紛紛走貶，大陸維持匯率固定下，對出口產生不利影響。當出口形勢艱難時，採取貨幣貶值是提振出口競爭力最簡單直接的方式，但由於人民幣貶值將對世界經濟產生嚴重衝擊，而中共今年初以來也多次重申人民幣不貶值承諾，在出口競爭力衰退，人民幣確又不能貶值的情況下，提高出口退稅就成為中國大陸最佳的選擇。因此大陸自去年始至今年初數度提高外銷退稅率，以鼓勵出口。 中共多次且大幅提昇出口退稅率，期望紓緩出口壓力，同時化解人民幣貶值的壓力。因此我們質疑，提高外銷退稅率以振出口是否真的有效？若是從全國福利極大的角度出發，在金融風暴（各國匯率走貶）的影響下，為達成出口擴張並捍衛人民幣而數度大幅調高出口退稅率是否合宜？本研究之主要目的乃嘗試建構一理論模型以探討以上所提之問題。

外銷品沖退稅制度於民國四十四年全面實施之後，外銷品之成長與日俱增，同時帶動經濟之發展，終於創造所謂台灣奇蹟。1960年代，美援停止時期，外匯不足仍為其政治經濟問題，因此政府採高關稅和嚴厲管制進口以促進國內以出口導向產業發展。此時期外銷品沖退稅制度便成了主要的關稅政策，使國內出口工業得以降低生產成本，有利國際市場上競爭。民國七十年代，是沖退稅最高峰的時期，當時外銷品之數量急驟增加，但是關稅稅率仍處在高檔，所以沖退稅的案件非常多。以民國七十三年為例，申請沖退稅案件有六十萬件，沖退稅金額高達新台幣二八六億元，幾乎占全年進口稅總額新台幣九一七億元的三分之一，早期可見廠商對沖退稅的依賴非常的深，也因此衍生一些弊端及困擾。 首先就發生查核人手不足的困擾，譬如要處理六十萬件的沖退稅案件，在進出口方面要投入很多的人力處理，引起人力調動之困擾。其次，發現一些假出口真退稅之弊病等等，包括以內銷國產原料冒充進口原料或在出口虛報原料用量來退稅，第三，妨礙到業者產業升級之意願與浪費資源。 財政部有所謂的「取消外銷品沖退稅方案」之構想，在當時的環境是不太可能的，我們的出口非常多，但是原料的關稅稅率也很高，而基礎原料工業未建立，若取消退稅，會大大影響到我們的外銷品競爭能力。而另有一替代方案，就是採取逐步漸進的方式取消退稅與簡化退稅行政業務。 這些措施實施之後，對退稅業務之改進，有很大的幫助。申請退稅案件從民國七十三年的六十萬件，降低到九十二年的十一萬件，減少了約四分之三還多，在沖退稅金額方面，也從民國七十三年的新台幣二八六億，降低到九十二年的四十二點五億元，沖退稅案件辦理時間也從七十三年的兩個多月到現在大約十個工作天就可以辦結完成。沖退稅業務有很大的改善，一方面業者對退稅制度之依賴也減輕，另一方面，海關的人力與物力的負荷方面也減少很多壓力。 外銷品沖退稅制度之取消是我國政府既定的政策，何時取消、如何取消，有待財政部的長官作政策性的決定，但在還沒有完全取消沖退稅制度之前，海關會持續地簡化退稅業務，加強行政效率以為民服務。 我國已加入世界貿易組織（WTO），為了堅持貿易自由化、公平化原則，穩定貿易發展，進口原料關稅免稅或分段逐步調降稅率已為必然之趨勢，目前外銷品退稅案件辦理情形及其對外銷廠商之影響又如何？勢必有深入探討的必要。 目前辦理外銷品進口原料關稅及貨物退稅之貨品，據統計，主要為鋼鐵、交通器材、電視機、機械、及非鐵卑金屬製品等原料。其中退稅金額最高之鋼鐵產品，根據我國加入世貿組織（WTO）之入會談判，將執行零對零關稅方案，屆時大部份鋼鐵製品將不再有沖退稅優惠，於九十三年元月一日起，關稅稅率已降為零，沖退稅案件將相對逐漸減少。 為了配合關務現代化的趨勢，以緩和漸進的方式，機動調降關稅，逐步取消外銷品沖退稅乃財政部既定政策，惟為提昇我國外銷品競爭力，研究如何配合財政部慎重考量全面取消沖退稅之時機？以降低或減少國內經濟之衝擊。 業經財政部以公告取消退稅無法辦理退稅之貨品項數為5,144，占稅則總貨品項數之六成。但根據「外銷品沖退原料稅辦法」第十八條規定「外銷品沖退之原料稅，應於進口放行之翌日起一年六個月內辦理退稅，得於期限屆滿前一個月向財政部申請展延，其展延以一年為限。」，故沖退稅業務在實務上尚需有二年六個月的緩衝期限，俾免影響廠商權益。 由於國內經濟不景氣，企業經營日益艱困，此時若驟然全取消退稅，將影響我國外銷產品之競爭力，對我國貿易之拓展及國內經濟之發展均為不利之因素，且嚴重影響景氣，不利 陳總統「拼經濟」之政策，況且根據京都公約亦允許退稅制度存在。故財政部將彙整經濟部農委會、工業局等農工主管單位意見後，再慎重考慮全面取消退稅之時程，以降低對廠商之不利影響程度。 / Duty Drawback for Export Products carried out completely in 1955 facilitated the growth of export products, the development of economy, and the establishment of so-called Taiwan miracles. In the 1960’s during the termination of American financial aid , our political and financial issue was still in the state of insufficient foreign currencies; therefore ,the government tried to encourage the development of export-orientated industries using high customs duties and strict import control. Duty Drawback for Export Products, the main customs duty policy at that time, caused local export industries to reduce production costs for competing with the international market. During the peak time of Duty Drawback, 1980’s, application for Duty Drawback came a lot since export products increased considerably and customs duty rate were still in the climax. For example, application for Duty Drawback was about 600,000 cases in 1984. The amount of Duty Drawback reached up to NT$28.6 billion, almost occupying 1/3 of the total annual import duty, NTD$91.7 billion. It is obvious that manufacturers depended on Duty Drawback badly and that some abuses and troubles were caused. First, reviewers were insufficient and labor dispatch was difficult. A lot of labor was required to handle import and export affairs about those 600,000 cases of Duty Drawback. Second, abuses in fake export and true tax refunds were found. Some manufacturers passed local materials off as import materials or make an untrue report on material amount for tax refund. Third, manufacturers were not willing to upgrade their industries and resources were wasted. It was impossible at that time for the Ministry of Finance to cancel Duty Drawback for Export Products. If tax refunds were canceled, our competitiveness of the export products would be influenced substantially because of considerable imports, high customs duty rate of materials, and unfounded basic material industries. Another substitute solution is to cancel tax refunds step by step and simplify the administrations of tax refunds. These measures after carried out helped a lot to improve the tax refund business. Application was reduced to about ¾ cases from 600,000 in 1984 to 110,000 in 2003. The amount of Duty Drawback was reduced greatly form NT$28.6 billion in 1984 to NT$4.25 billion in 2003. The administrative time was shortened from two months in 1984 to ten working days now. The tax refund business was improved considerably. Manufacturers reduced their dependence on the tax refund system; on the other hand, Customs’ burdens on labor and material resources were decreased a lot. The cancellation of Duty Drawback for Export Products is our government’s fixed policy, but “when and how” will be decided strategically by senior officials of the Ministry of Finance. The Customs will continue simplifying the business of tax refund and enforcing administrative efficiency to serve people before Duty Drawback for Export Products is not completely canceled. We have already participated in the World Trade Organization (WTO). To insist in the freedom and fairness of trade and stabilize the trade development, the necessary trend is to exempt from import material customs or reduce the rate step by step. How are the regulating status of the Duty Drawback for Export Products and the influences upon export manufacturers? It should be discussed deeply. According to statistics, export products required for import material customs and tax refund are as follows: steel, traffic devices, TV, machines, nonferrous base metals, etc. According to our WTO negotiations, 0-to-0 customs duty solution is applied and most steelworks are not included in this preferential Duty Drawback. The customs duty rate has been reduced to zero and application for Duty Drawback will gradually decreased relatively since January 1st, 2004. To coordinate with the modernization of customs affairs and reduce customs duties randomly in an easeful and gradual manner, the Ministry of Finance’s fixed policy is to cancel Duty Drawback for Export Products step by step. Now we have to focus on the right time to completely cancel Duty Drawback in coordination with the Ministry of Finance in order to reduce or decrease the influence upon our local economy. There are 5,144 items that the Ministry of Finance announced to cancel Duty Drawback, occupying 60% of total product items of the tax regulations. According to Article 18 specified in the “Regulations Governing the Duty Drawback on Raw Materials for Export Products”, “An application for refund of duties and taxes on export products shall be submitted for export within one year and six months from the date following the day on which the said raw materials were released after import. Manufacturers may apply to the Ministry of Finance for extension within one month after the expiry of the time limit. Each extension shall not exceed the maximum period of one year.” The buffer time limit for two years and six months is practically required for the tax refund business to ensure the manufacturers’ rights and interests. Due to local economic depression and waning business management, the competitiveness of our export products will be influenced if the Duty Drawback is cancelled completely and suddenly. The expansion of our trade, development of local economy, and prosperity will be influenced seriously. President Chen’s policy on “Strive for Economy” may not be succeeded. The Kyoto Convention also allows the existence of the tax refund system. The Ministry of Finance will gather opinions from the Ministry of Economic Affairs, Council of Agriculture, Industrial Development Bureau, and other agricultural or industrial units and then consider the cancellation schedule of the overall tax refund affairs to reduce unfavorable influence upon manufacturers.

按保稅制度具有免征、緩繳及保證繳納稅捐的激勵作用，糾正退稅辦法積壓資金的缺 失，且能加速配合外銷事業之發展。但自五十八年三月核准飛砍公司為第一家保稅工 廠起，距今已十四寒暑，截至七十一年十二月底止，徹銷登記者除外，只有三百廿一 家保稅工廠，施行成效很不理想，廠商加入之意願也不踴躍。本文之目的，即在探討 保稅工廠未能大力推行之原因，希望藉由保稅廠商意見之反應，綜合海關在操作技術 上之限制，並參考、日韓兩國有關保稅工廠之規定，找出一合理的解決方向，提供政 府作為擬定政策之參考。

觀光產業為現在世界主要產業之一，稱之為「無煙囪產業」，因其汙染少且外部成本相較許多工業產業來的低，許多國家都致力於發展觀光業，投入許多政策吸引觀光客到訪。我國政府近年來也推動許多政策是針對外籍旅客觀光計畫。如民國92年的「觀光客倍增計畫」預期於2008年達成目標，於是在同年於「觀光發展條例」中增訂的「外籍旅客購物退稅」，外籍旅客購物退稅的實施更是發展觀光產業的重要措施之一，觀光產業在觀光較為發達的已開發國家中，都十分重視旅客購物退稅這項措施，臺灣政府於民國92年實施政策至今，經歷了幾次重大改制，本文致力於研究於民國100年7月實施的「現場小額退稅」措施，是否對來臺外籍旅客的消費行為有顯著影響，並對今年實施的新制退稅措施是否再次影響旅客消費意願作出預期。 本研究以外籍旅客國籍及其消費金額之追蹤資料進行迴歸分析，蒐集位於臺北市區的某特定營業人2009年8月至2015年12月的外籍旅客退稅資料，針對來自七個國家及地區的外籍遊客消費行為建立來臺觀光需求模型。以政府實施的「現場小額退稅」措施當作主要的政策變數，並選取幾個影響旅客需求的重要變數為控制變數，建立以旅客總消費量、平均消費量、特定營業人之營業額為因變數的三個模型，觀察政策變數及其他控制變數對於外籍旅客消費行為的影響。 以全體樣本實證結果發現，本政策變動對於旅客總消費量、商店之營業額均有顯著正向影響，對於旅客平均消費量也是正面的影響；本文也將七個國家及地區分別討論，以美國、日本及中國旅客對於政策效果的影響最為顯著且正向，其他國家雖不顯著但多為正向關係。顯見政策的推動確實有助於提升外籍旅客來臺及消費意願，對發展臺灣觀光旅遊產業是一項助益。 / According to UNWTO, tourism industry has experienced continuous growth and become one of the fastest growing economic sectors in the world. Many countries have committed themselves to developing tourism industry nowadays due to lower externality. Taiwanese government also has some implemented plans on tourism industry of which foreigners are allowed to apply for “VAT Refund”, hoping that the increase in international tourist may give the economy a boost. Our study has conducted an empirical analysis on the policy of On-Site Small Amount Tax Refund, which is mainly concentrated in panel data estimation. The purpose of this thesis is to find out the effect of this policy. First, we use Dummy variable as a main variable to capture the influence of the policy. Second, we introduce both the demand factors and the supply factors to explain tourism spending in Taiwan. The span of the data is from August 2009 to December 2015, using Tax Refund data of foreigners from 7 countries and districts. Our empirical analysis show that the Tax Refund policy has had significantly positive effect on both dependent variables, including total consumption and store revenue, especially these from U.S.A., Japan and China. These three countries show the strongest response to the dependent variables. It also shows that implementation of this Tax Refund policy really contributes to our tourism industry by increasing international tourism receipts of Taiwan.

一般經濟發展中國家，為求保證本國幼稚工業之發展，而採行高度保護關稅，故進口 貨物之稅負偏重，內銷價格自相當高昂。外銷退稅之施行，將加工式製造成品輸出時 所需原料或中間品所負擔之稅捐等退還，因而減輕外銷廠商之生產成本，藉以增加對 外競爭能力，對外銷廠商而言，實佔有重要之地位。 在第二資次世界大戰后之初期，中、韓兩國均為相當貧窮落後的國家，但由於兩國政 府之積極開發其經濟，引入各種制度，遂使其短短三十五年間之經濟成就，由低度開 發而一躍進入開了中國家。在中、韓兩國經濟方面，其發展十分相似，兩國之境內資 源貧乏，國內市場狹小，必須大力拓展對外貿易，始能維持兩國經濟之快速發展。故 兩國均採用外銷退稅制度來鼓勵輸出廠商而擴增對外貿易。 本論文係以中、韓兩國現行外銷退稅制度為範圍，探討兩國目前施行之有關外銷退稅 法規，而分析、比較其法規之內容，導引出兩國外銷退稅制度上之差異。 本論文分為共計六章，各章內容要點如次： 第一章為「緒言」，本章說明研究動機及目的、研究範圍及方法。 第二章「外銷退稅制度之理論及其淵源；本章說明外銷制度之意義、理論根據、淵源 及法令依據。 第三章為「中華民國之外銷退稅制度」；本章第一節說明中華民國外銷退稅制度之實 施背景、沿革、法令依據及歷次修正之經濟，第二節闡術現行外銷品沖退原料稅捐辦 法之主要內容。 第四章為「韓國之外銷退稅制度」；本章一節說明韓國外銷退稅制度之實施背景、目 的、法令依據及歷次修正之經過，第二節闡術有關現行外銷退稅制度法規之主要內容 。 第五章為「中、韓兩國制度上差異」；本章依據第三、第四章內容，分析、比較兩國 制度之差異。 第六章為「結論」；本章說明中華民國將取外銷退稅制度之主要理由探討韓國外銷退 稅制度之改善方案。

歐盟廣泛地與世界各國簽訂優惠貿易協定，透過優惠貿易待遇的給予來促進與各國間政治與經貿的緊密連繫。而對於生產者而言，要適用這些貿易優惠的前提就是透過遵循歐盟優惠性原產地規則而使產品取得原產產品身分，無論是以完全取得或是經過充分作業或加工而產生實質轉型的方式。 本論文主要的研究目的，在於分析個別歐盟優惠貿易協定下關於累積規定、微量條款、出口退稅禁止等關鍵條文，與附錄清單就產品「實質轉型」標準規定的法律義涵，以及其隱含的政經意義；並就該意義進一步推衍出對於台灣的生產者，在眾多的歐盟優惠性協定法律架構下，存在個別規則適用難易程度具有差別且該差別將對生產成本有所影響之事實。而本論文另一重點則是就法規與生產稟賦搭配後得推衍出原則性之評估方法來評比出個別優惠性原產地規則在適用上之優劣順序，以協助台灣廠商未來考慮使用此項貿易優惠來進軍歐盟市場時，在國際投資之佈局上可以納入考量或作為參考，以選擇出最有利的受惠國或區域作為生產資源配置之基礎。 為使法律層面與實務上之運作加以結合，本論文進一步以台灣的成鞋廠商做為研究觀察之對象，檢視其是否會因為適用歐盟優惠性原產地規則而改變投資模式，另亦將與鞋廠商實際訪談所得之結論與推演出原則性評估方法加以比較，進一步檢討該評估方法之適用能力與情形，並提出應隨不同情況而加以修正相關假設之注意。 關鍵詞：歐盟優惠性原產地規則；原產地規則；原產產品；實質轉型；累積規定；微量條款；出口退稅禁止；附錄清單；生產稟賦；國際投資；成鞋。 / Europe Union (EU) broadly sign the preferential trade agreements with the other countries in the globe, and through the conferring of the preferential trade treatments, EU attempts to build up the tight political and economic bonds worldwide. The premise for producers who want to enjoy these trade preferences is to make sure that their product are qualified and recognized as “original product” in those beneficiary countries either by following the regulation of standard of “wholly obtained” or “sufficiently working or processing” stipulated in each preferential Rule of Origin (ROO). The main subject of this thesis is to analyze the legal meaning and the underlined policy purpose of the critical provisions in each EU preferential ROO, such as “cumulation”, “general tolerance rule”, “no-drawback rule”, and the standard of “sufficiently working or processing” of a product (substantial transformation) stipulated in the List Rules (in the Annex part) attached in each preferential trade agreement. And from those meaning Author reasons out the fact that the level of difficulty concerning applying and using these preferential ROO are different and the difference has its influence on cost of producing. Author also infers the basic method to assess the level of difficulty of these ROO while combining analyzing the ROO provisions and endowment in the beneficiary countries. This method is to assist those Taiwanese producers who have willing to use the EU preferential ROO to make their product qualified as “original product” with the minimized producing cost when entering into EU market, that is, to help producers cherry pick the beneficial countries (or area) for making investments distribution and deploying concerned producing resources and still have their the products entitled as “original product”. To combine the legal dimension and the producer’s operation in practice, Author further chooses Taiwanese footwear producers as observed subject of using the ROO and see if they would change their mode of investment thereafter. Author compares the conclusion derived from interviewing footwear producers with the basic assessment method, and further examines the applicability of the method and the potential correction of hypothesis under certained situations. Key words: EU preferential Rule of Origin, Rule of Origin, original product, substantial transformation, cumulation, general tolerance rule, no-drawback rule, List Rules, endowment, international investment, footwear.