【正文】 個無法適應(yīng)主管稅務(wù)機關(guān)管理風(fēng)格的酒店企業(yè)，或者稅收籌劃方案無法得到當(dāng)?shù)刂鞴芏悇?wù)部門認(rèn)可的酒店企業(yè)，想要體現(xiàn)應(yīng)有收益就會變得極其困難。 積極遵循稅收籌劃的原則酒店企業(yè)開展稅收籌劃需要遵循一定的原則，其中包括合法性、規(guī)范性及綜合利益最大化等，無數(shù)事實已經(jīng)證明，只有嚴(yán)格遵循原則才能為酒店取得籌劃成功打下堅實的基石。合法性是指稅收籌劃不能違反現(xiàn)行國家稅收法律法規(guī)、規(guī)章，如果酒店企業(yè)無法準(zhǔn)確把握稅收籌劃的行動邊界，一旦觸犯相關(guān)稅法，就會受到相應(yīng)的懲罰并承擔(dān)法律責(zé)任。稅收籌劃在為企業(yè)帶來利益的同時，也需要耗費一定的人力、物力和財力來支撐整個稅收籌劃的順利開展。通過評估稅收籌劃能夠帶給企業(yè)的效益，將其與稅收籌劃過程中產(chǎn)生的成本費用進(jìn)行對比，如果效益大于成本，那么稅收籌劃即可實施，否則就需要重新審視所做的稅收籌劃。酒店在進(jìn)行稅收籌劃時，必須對酒店整體財務(wù)管理目標(biāo)負(fù)責(zé)，從整體出發(fā)，對酒店所有的經(jīng)營活動進(jìn)行整體籌劃，全面考量。關(guān)注于降低某一稅種稅收負(fù)擔(dān)并不意味著會使酒店總體成本下降，酒店整體收益水平的提高需要權(quán)衡各方，只有將稅收負(fù)擔(dān)的變化情況與酒店經(jīng)營活動的變化綜合起來考慮，才能保證稅收籌劃方案的有效性。7 結(jié)論稅收籌劃已經(jīng)成為企業(yè)鞏固經(jīng)濟(jì)主體地位，追求經(jīng)濟(jì)效益的必然選擇。在成熟市場經(jīng)濟(jì)中，稅收籌劃體現(xiàn)了市場主體行為的自主性，也是納稅人基于理性分析后的戰(zhàn)略選擇。本文結(jié)合企業(yè)的經(jīng)營現(xiàn)狀，結(jié)合稅收籌劃的實際案例，反思其問題與不足，提出初步解決方案。本課題在實踐中的意義有：首先，稅收籌劃可以為企業(yè)帶來更多附加值。稅收籌劃能優(yōu)化企業(yè)稅收行為，完善企業(yè)管理制度，實現(xiàn)企業(yè)利益最大化。其次，通過華天酒店稅收籌劃的實例，為其他企業(yè)實施稅務(wù)籌劃提供一定的理論與實踐經(jīng)驗。最后，稅收籌劃能夠不斷規(guī)范企業(yè)的涉稅行為，加強對稅收政策的研讀，規(guī)避稅務(wù)風(fēng)險，從而降低企業(yè)經(jīng)營風(fēng)險。也可以說稅收籌劃有利于企業(yè)和稅務(wù)機關(guān)實現(xiàn)“雙贏”。針對稅收籌劃的探討，本文闡述還不夠全面、透徹。希望此研究能為我國酒店業(yè)稅收籌劃制度的完善盡一些綿薄之力。隨著我國酒店業(yè)的不斷發(fā)展，稅收籌劃將會為酒店企業(yè)帶來更多的實際價值。致 謝從論文手冊到正式論文的完成，離不開老師的指導(dǎo)和同學(xué)的幫助。非常感謝我的畢業(yè)論文導(dǎo)師馮茜老師，在完成整個論文的過程中為我提出了寶貴的思路和論文修改意見，嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)闹螌W(xué)態(tài)度、對事業(yè)孜孜不倦的追求精神以及平易近人的為人風(fēng)格給我留下了難以忘懷的記憶，這一切都使我受益匪淺。在此，本人對導(dǎo)師致以最誠摯的感謝。另外，在信息搜集等方面，幸得同學(xué)之間的方法分享，才讓我有了更多的參考。感謝這篇論文所涉及到的各位學(xué)者。本文引用了數(shù)位學(xué)者的研究文獻(xiàn)，得到了許多幫助和啟發(fā)。感謝同學(xué)和朋友，在論文的撰寫和排版過程中提供了熱情的幫助。由于我的學(xué)術(shù)水平有限，所寫論文難免有不足之處，懇請各位老師和學(xué)友批評和指正！參考文獻(xiàn)[1] Sale J Tmothyamp。Carroll Karen B Tax Planning Tools for The Multinational Crporation [M]. In:Management Accounting, 1979: 6569.[2] Michael Porter The Competitive Advantage of Nations [M]. In:London Mae Milan Press, 2008: 112256.[3] Roy Rohatgi Tax Planning Under the New Law [J]. In:USA Today, 2006, (9) : 4041.[4] 王羽佳. AA酒店稅收籌劃方案設(shè)計[D]．內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué), 2013.[5] 葉喬浩. K酒店稅收籌劃研究[D]．廣東工業(yè)大學(xué)，2007.[6] 周婷. 我國酒店企業(yè)稅收籌劃問題探討[D]．昆明理工大學(xué)，2011.[7] 高金平. 稅收籌劃謀略百篇[M]．北京: 中國財政經(jīng)濟(jì)出版社，2002. 23.[8] 張中秀. 公司避稅節(jié)稅轉(zhuǎn)嫁籌劃[M]．北京中: 華工商聯(lián)合出版社，2001. 67.[9] 蔡昌. 稅收籌劃：策略、技巧與運作[M]．北京: 海天出版社，2003. 14.[10] 計金標(biāo). 稅收籌劃[M]．: 中國人民大學(xué)出版社，2012. 172212.[11] 林雪. 關(guān)于中小企業(yè)納稅籌劃的探討[J]．中小企業(yè)管理與科技，2009, 21(08)：7273.[12] 解宏. 企業(yè)納稅籌劃策略與案例解讀[M]．北京: 化工工業(yè)出版社，2009. 7691.[13] 魏震. 探析中小企業(yè)的稅收籌劃[J]．中國商界, 2009, 26(06)：19.[14] 范強強. 中小企業(yè)的納稅籌劃問題與管理[J]．大眾商務(wù)，2010, 24(03)：130.[15] 張中秀, 汪吳. 為納稅人保駕護(hù)航[M]．北京: 企業(yè)管理出版社，2004. 9599.外文翻譯及譯文Corporate Tax Planning:A Study On Corporate Effective Tax Rates of Malaysian Listed CompaniesRohaya Md Noor 1, Nur Syazwani M. Fadzillah and Nor’Azam Mastuki1ABSTRACTThis study attempts to examine corporate effective tax rates (ETRs) of Malaysian public panies listed on Bursa Malaysia during official assessment system and self assessment system tax regimes. The objective is to examine the level of corporate ETRs during official assessment system and self assessment system tax regime and. To achieve the objective, this study uses pooled sample data of 316 panies for the years 1993 to 2006. In determining the two tax regime, the investigation period is classified into two, where the period from 1993 to 2000 represents the official assessment system tax regime whereas the period from 2001 to 2006 represents the self assessment system tax regime. This study finds that corporate ETRs are below the statutory tax rate (STR) in both tax regimes. Moreover, this study reveals that ETRs during the self assessment system tax regime is lower than the official assessment system tax regime. Additionally, this study also examines the determinants of corporate ETRs during both tax regimes. The result supports political cost theory which suggests that larger panies endure higher ETRs. Besides that, lower ETRs are significantly related to highly leverage panies, greater investment in fixed assets and lower investment in inventory. This study also finds that panies with higher return on assets face lower ETRs. Further, sector analysis are carried out to provide the evidence for the variability of ETRs across sectors. The results indicate that panies from trading and services, properties and construction sectors face higher ETRs. Overall, this study explains the impacts of tax incentives to corporate ETRs and determinants of corporate ETRs.KEY WORDS: Tax Planning, Corporate Effective Tax Rates, Statutory Tax Rate and Malaysian Listed Companies I. INTRODUCTIONMost panies are involved in tax planning extensively with the purpose of reducing their ine taxes since the ine tax expenses will reduce their profits. In fact,panies likely choose to hire a tax agent with the intention of minimising the taxes they are required to pay (Murphy, 2004). Initially, tax planning is allowed within the tax laws as it is considered as a legal tax avoidance scheme. However, not all panies have the same opportunities to carry out tax planning. That is why only some panies are involved greatly in tax planning, while others are involved moderately. This is due to the factors such as the size of the panies and the capabilities of the panies to undertake tax planning activities. Besides that, the nature of the also influences the opportunity for the panies to be involved in tax planning. Thus, panies within different sectors may be involved differently in tax planning.In this study, tax planning is proxied by effective tax rates (ETRs). ETR provides a basic summary statistic of tax performance which describes the amount of taxes paid by a pany relative to its gross profit (Harris amp。 Feeny, 2000). In broad terms, ETR is actually a measure of the pany’s tax burden because it expresses the rate of tax paid on the pany ine. “ETR has long been used by policy makers and interest groups in tax reform debates, especially those related to corporate tax provisions” (Gupta amp。 Newberry, 1997, p. 1). ETR bees a concern in these debates because it summarizes the cumulative effects of various tax incentives. Since there is proof that corporate ETR varies across panies and over time, thus, it has been used as a tool to identify the level of neutrality of the tax system and the characteristics of panies with higher and lower tax burdens. Hence, ETR has also been used as a justification for instituting reform (Harris amp。 Feeny, 20