【正文】 作出實質響應，符合招標文件的所有條款、條件和規(guī)定且無重大偏離與保留，在工程量清單低價中 標的模式下，為獲得中標且經濟效益最大化，有經驗的投標人積累了大量投標策略和報價技巧，不平衡報價作為一種投標取勝的方式和手段，常見于投標競爭中：（ 1）按實際完成工程量或工程進度付款的項目，為盡早取得盡可能多的回籠資金，投標人會適當提高先期施工項目單價。 高價策略 高價策略就是投標人通過加大預期利潤提高投標報價，以最自己的管理、技術、資本等方面的優(yōu)勢來彌補價格的劣勢獲得中標的策略。 總之 ,工程量清單計價模式是真正和市場經濟體制相適應的一種投標報價模式 ,也是社會在不久后的必然趨勢 .工程量清單計價模式真正貫徹了國家當前工程造價體制改革“控制量、指導價、競爭費”的原則 ,實現(xiàn)了“在國家宏觀控制下 ,以市場形成價格為主的價格機制”的工程造價改革目標 .從而為建筑市場步入國際化、標準化、規(guī)范化、簡約化奠定了堅實的基礎。 disdain for this taxation without representation (socalled because the colonies had no voice in the establishment of the taxes) gave rise to revolts such as the Boston Tea Party. However, even after the Revolutionary War and the adoption of the . Constitution, the main source of revenue for the newly created states was money received from customs and excise taxes on items such as carriages, sugar, whiskey, and snuff. Ine tax first appeared in the United States in 1862, during the Civil War. At that time only about one percent of the population was required to pay the tax. A flatrate ine tax was imposed in 1867. The ine tax was repealed in its entirety in 1872. Ine tax was a rallying point for the Populist party in 1892, and had enough support two years later that Congress passed the Ine Tax Act of 1894. The tax at that time was two percent on individual ines in excess of $4,000, which meant that it reached only the wealthiest members of the population. The Supreme Court struck down the tax, holding that it violated the constitutional requirement that direct taxes be apportioned among the states by population (pollock v. farmers39。s new deal, imposed a five percent excise tax on dividend receipts, imposed a capital stock tax and an excess profits tax, and suspended all deductions for losses (June 16, 1933, ch. 90, 48 Stat. 195). The repeal in 1933 of the eighteenth amendment, which had prohibited the manufacture and sale of alcohol, brought in an estimated $90 million in new liquor taxes in 1934. The social security act of 1935 provided for a wage tax, half to be paid by the employee and half by the employer, to establish a federal retirement fund (Old Age Pension Act, Aug. 14, 1935, ch. 531, 49 Stat. 620). The Wealth Tax Act, also known as the Revenue Act of 1935, increased the maximum tax rate to 79 percent, the Revenue Acts of 1940 and 1941 increased it to 81 percent, the Revenue Act of 1942 raised it to 88 percent, and the Individual Ine Tax Act of 1944 raised the individual maximum rate to 94 percent. The postWorld War II Revenue Act of 1945 reduced the individual maximum tax from 94 percent to 91 percent. The Revenue Act of 1950, during the korean war, reduced it to percent, but it was raised the next year to 92 percent (Revenue Act of 1950, Sept. 23, 1950, ch. 994, Stat. 906). It remained at this level until 1964, when it was reduced to 70 percent. The Revenue Act of 1954 revised the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, making major changes that were beneficial to the 15 taxpayer, including providing for child care deductions (later changed to credits), an increase in the charitable contribution limit, a tax credit against taxable retirement ine, employee deductions for business expenses, and liberalized depreciation deductions. From 1954 to 1962, the Internal Revenue Code was amended by 183 separate acts. In 1974 the employee retirement ine security act (ERISA) created protections for employees whose employers promised specified pensions or other retirement contributions (Pub. L. No. 93406, Sept. 2, 1974, 88 Stat. 829). ERISA required that to be tax deductible, the employer3