公告土地現值制度變遷之分析及其對市價徵收政策之影

Abstract

從民國101 年9 月1 日起所有土地徵收將按市價補償，徵收制度正式與實施近50 年的公告土地現值制度脫鉤。這新舊制度之轉軌，舊制度必遺留一些問題且伴隨新制度所產生的新問題，都將是新制度必須要克服的挑戰。因此，本文以新制度經濟學派中之公共選擇理論的觀點，探討影響公告土地現值制度變遷的制度性結構因素為何？以及其所遺留之舊問題對新制度有何可能的衝擊？ 為本文探討的重點。本文發現公告土地現值制度的變化，確實如公共選擇理論所認為的，乃是以政治市場的邏輯推動其制度演化的方向，尤以政治人物與官僚機構的利益為優先考量。因此，爾後接近市價的改革如兩價分離與估價比率制，不但沒有成功，反而造成一些怪象，如集中調高公告土地現值於免稅地與農地，而高都市化與新興發展潛力之地區，其地價則依然遠低於市價。因此，以政治考量與利益為優先是讓公告土地現值制度無法與市場脈動做連結的主要障礙，公告土地現值演變到最後竟使有些地區土地其加成補償高於市價，而新制之按市價徵收之價格反而可能較舊制低，其所遺留的問題對新制反而造成衝擊。基此，未來如何讓市價徵收制度之設計，其市價認定須能降低政治力之干擾，則新制度才可長久。同樣地，客觀處理舊制度遺留之問題亦是在於避免政治或行政力過度的介入，才可使新舊制度順利轉軌。

The eminent domain system in Taiwan has been transferred to market price basis since September 2012. This significant change means that the government-led Current Assessed Land Value (CALV) system, which has been implemented almost fifty years ago, was no longer the benchmark of compensation for eminent domain. However, during the transiting period of institution change, the new institution has to tackle all problems coming from new and old systems. Thus, the main purpose of this paper intends to explore what is the driving force behind the institutional change of CALV in the perspective of public choice theory, which will let us understand how the old problems were created and how correction might be made. Findings show that the main driving forces influencing the institution changes of CALV was from politicians and bureaucrats’ intervention as public choice suggests. Therefore, the CALV operated by political principle is incapable to keep pace with the fluctuation of marker price. The past institutional reforms of CALV trying to reduce the gap between market transaction prices not only never succeed but also created many unintended consequences. This consequence including the agriculture land and other counterparts were raised up their current assessedland value much more than other types of lands because these lands do not need to pay associated land tax. However, other lands where are located in high density urban area and new developing districts were not adjusted to shorten the gap between the market price. Therefore, these problems are due to the very different nature between political organization and market institution. The corrections for these old problems and new challenges are obviously based on how Market-Price basis Eminent Domain policy can create a system with less political influence but with more impartialness by adding more market practitioners.