最高人民法院关于郭廷凤、邱培金房屋典赎案的批复
最高人民法院
最高人民法院关于郭廷凤、邱培金房屋典赎案的批复
1979年1月30日，最高人民法院
四川省高级人民法院：
你院1976年1月15日〔75〕川法民字第259号关于郭廷凤、邱培金房屋典赎案的请示收悉，经研究，同意忠县人民法院的处理意见。
附：四川省高级人民法院请示
最高人民法院：
对我省忠县人民法院关于郭廷凤、邱培金房屋典赎纠纷一案的请示，经我们研究，同意县法院提出的处理意见，但不知这样处理是否妥当，故附上原请示报告，望高院复示。
1976年1月15日
附：四川省忠县人民法院关于郭廷凤与邱培金房屋典赎纠纷案情经过及处理意见的请示报告
四川省高级人民法院：
我院于1974年9月受理我县任家公社郭廷凤与邱培金为房屋典赎纠纷一案，经就地调查后，现将案情经过及处理意见报告你院，请予核示。
案情经过：
本案原告郭廷凤、被告邱培金家庭均系贫农成份，家住我县任家公社。郭廷凤现出国驻索马里援建贝布公路任土木技术员，邱培金现在成都热电厂当工人。
原告人郭廷凤之父郭联三于1949年古历正月初七日将自有的瓦房一间出典给邱培金管业，典价稻谷六石（折2592市斤），郭联三出具的典约载明“赎取期限四年内有效，过期作为出卖处理”。出典后，郭联三因无房居住，就在出典此房的同时，又以每年稻谷两石（折864市斤）向邱培金佃回此房居住，1951年秋，郭退佃交出房屋由邱培金管业居住至今。郭佃居此房近三年，没有向邱交付佃房稻谷。
邱培金本身也无房屋，解放前至1951年是佃居地主邱淑华的房屋。土改期中，邱培金和当时的村干部都征询原告人之父郭联三出典给邱的房屋是否赎取，如要赎取邱培金新分房屋，郭联三当时回复“没有钱取，干脆由邱培金登入土地（房产所有）证，我自己去分得房屋”。事后郭联三分得大公湾地主任德泽的正屋一间，但郭尚未搬去居住前所分得的房屋被失火烧毁，存下的地基、基石、残存的木柱郭于1953年出卖给高树荣，郭仍暂佃别人的房屋居住，1957年才自买房屋一间居住。1953年3月，人民政府填发土地房产所有证时，郭出典给邱的房屋一间双方都填上了所有证，在备考栏内各有注明：郭证注明“此房典与邱培金稻子陆石（老石）”；邱证注明“此房是郭联三典的谷子陆老石”。说明了房屋的演变过程。现双方有证可查。
郭联三于1960年病死。在历次政治运动中，郭廷凤及家庭未提出赎取此房，直至文化大革命中郭始向我县任家公社提出解决此房产权，该公社于1970年3月调解结论此房产权属邱培金，原告不服以致搁下。1972年3月郭廷凤又到邱培金所在工作单位——成都热电厂要求解决，该厂军管会经过调解，双方初步达成协议：郭廷龙（郭廷凤之兄）现住的房屋一间与出典给邱培金的房屋一间互换，由郭廷龙补给邱培金币100元，作为邱多年维修此承典房屋的费用。调解结果尚未执行，邱培金即推翻了此协议，该厂就此撤销原调解，原告人郭廷凤又申诉到成都市中级人民法院，成都市中级人民法院转你院处理，你院又转我院于1974年9月受理了此案。在调查中原告人又陆续向最高人民法院、交通部申诉，这些申诉有由你院直转我院处理的，也有交通部援外办公室转省援外办公室再转你院，由你院转我院处理的。
整个案情经过如上述。我院在弄清案情的基础上进行调解，邱培金坚持不让郭赎取此房，其理由是：出典契约载明赎取期限四年内有效，过期作出卖处理；土改时郭联三已明确表态不赎取此房而另分有房屋。由于郭不赎取，因而邱应分房而未分房，现除承典的此房外，别无他房居住。
不让郭廷凤赎取房，甚至提出，如郭要赎取，必须仍以实物（稻谷）偿清典、佃房价，以此刁难，实质思想是不让郭回赎此房。郭廷凤坚持将典房稻谷按国家收购价折款赎取。双方争执不休。
处理意见：
根据最高人民法院1963年8月28日《关于贯彻执行民事政策几个问题的意见（修正稿》中的第一条二款四项的指示精神，我院认为：原、被告均系贫农，解放前的典、佃关系应予承认，典、佃契约在法律上应视为有效，典期届满不回赎，土改大变革期中出典人郭联三又放弃赎取要求，承典人又仅有此房居住。据此，按契约规定典期届满未赎，和出典人当时的表态，此房已是失典，郭廷凤无权回赎，产权应属邱培金所有；郭欠邱的佃房租金（稻谷）郭不再补付。
以上处理意见是否正确，请指示。
此案的处理，本应逐级请示报告，但鉴于原告人郭廷凤现驻国外，通讯联系须经有关援外机构途径解决，且本案这样处理是否正确，我院尚无完全把握，须待指示。为此，特直接报告你院，如这样处理恰当请你院代为通过援外途径回复郭廷凤，并希对此案这样处理正确与否指示我院，以便回复被告人邱培金。如果由我院直接具函答复（或判决）郭廷凤，但信函又须怎样通过何外事部门寄出，均请一并指示。
1975年10月16日
Interpretation of Circular No.698
Jian Sun
Background
In accordance with provisions of the new Law of Enterprise Income Tax (2008) and Implementing Regulations (2008), whether the income from equity investment asset transfer is derived from PRC shall be classified by the domicile of the invested enterprise, so as to decide whether should pay the income tax in PRC jurisdiction. Whereas, the State Administration of Taxation of PRC (SAT) has not clearly addressed the condition that whether the income from foreign enterprises’ transfer of Chinese domestic enterprises shares they indirectly held by the transfer of offshore holding companies falls into Chinese jurisdiction or should pay income tax in PRC.
The promulgation of Circular No.698 Guoshuihan 2009
On December 10, 2009, the State Administration of Taxation (SAT) promulgated the Circular on Regarding Strengthening the Administration of Income Tax of Sale of Shares by Non-Resident Enterprises, (Guoshuihan [2009] 698) .
Provisions in Circular No.698 clearly addresses that prevent the foreign enterprises from evading income tax obligation by indirect transfer of shares of Chinese resident enterprises through arrangements like abusing the corporate governance.
In accordance with the provisions in Circular No.698, foreign investor whose indirect transfer of Chinese residence enterprises falling into the following two catalogues:
(1) The real tax burden rate of the jurisdiction where the offshore holding company transferred is incorporated is less than 12.5%; or
(2) The jurisdiction where the offshore holding company transferred is incorporated does not acquire income tax from foreign-sourced income.
shall submit the relevant documents as below to the local taxation bureau where the Chinese domestic enterprises being transferred located within 30 days after the execution of Share Transfer Agreement to prove the aforesaid indirect share transfer is for reasonable commercial purpose.
(1) Share Transfer Contract or Agreement.
(2) The relationship between Foreign Investors and Offshore Holding Companies transferred by Foreign Investors regarding finance, operation, purchase and sale, etc;
(3) The situation of the operation, personnel, finance, property of the offshore holding companies transferred by foreign investors;
(4) The relationship of the offshore holding companies transferred by foreign investors and Chinese domestic enterprises regarding finance, operation, purchase and sale, etc.
(5) The Explanations of reasonable commercial objectives of establishment of offshore holding companies by foreign investors.
(6)Other relevant documents required by Taxation Authorities.
Where administrating tax authorities, upon review and examination of the documents submitted by foreign investors, deem such offshore holding company to be a vehicle incorporated for the purpose of tax evasion, it has the power to re-classify the share transfer transaction in according to the nature of economies, deny the existence of offshore holding company and impose 10% income tax to the transfer of shares after the examination by the State Administration of Taxation.
In the second place, when non-resident enterprises transfer Chinese resident enterprises to affiliated parties in the unfair price compared to the fair and independent transaction to reduce the taxable income, tax authorities have the power to adjust the income by proper methods.
In the third place, provisions contained in Circular 698, share transfer income refers to difference between share transfer price and share cost. Share transfer price includes all sum received by share transfer assignors. In the event of invested enterprises have non-allocated profit or various funds after tax profit drawing, the invested enterprises shall not deduct aforesaid income sum from share transfer price. Cost of shares refers to real contribution sum paid by share transfer assignor to Chinese domestic company, or transfer sum paid to original assignors in the time when assignors purchased these shares.
Influence to the Oversea IPO’s and M&A
As the Circular 698 enforced from January 1, 2008, non-resident enterprises shall review the transfer situation of Chinese domestic enterprises to decide the next step whether to calculate and submit the Enterprise Income Tax (direct transfer) or to submit the relevant document to Local Tax Authorities in the place where Chinese domestic enterprises located (indirect transfer).
国税函 2009（698）号解读
Interpretation of Circular No.698
发布背景
