是 ___

在客观规律面前，人的主观能动性表现在___

事物的联系和运动之间的关系___

唯物辩证法的总特征是___

___

“割下来的手就不再是人手”这句话体现了___

唯物辩证法认为发展的实质是___

区分新事物和旧事物的标志在于看它们___

质量互变规律揭示了___

质和事物的存在是___

在实际工作中，要注意掌握分寸，防止“过”或“不及”，其关键在于___

区分量变和质变的根本标志是看___

量变的复杂性是指___

量变中的阶段性部分质变表现了___

量变中的局部性部分质变是___

揭示事物发展的趋势和道路的规律是___

“肯定和否定相互渗透，在一定意义上，肯定就是否定。”这是一种___

事物的否定方面是指___

作为辩证的否定的“扬弃”是___

辩证的否定是事物发展的环节,因为辩证的否定___

否定之否定规律___

事物发展的周期性体现了___

直线论的错误在于只看到___

循环论的错误在于___

对立统一规律揭示了___

唯物辩证法的实质和核心是___

辩证法所说的矛盾是指___

矛盾的基本属性是___

依据是___

矛盾问题的精髓是___

题的方法都是___

“任何个别（无论怎样）都是一般”。这句话的正确含义是___

在唯物辩证法看来，水果同苹果、梨、香蕉、桔子等的关系是___

“是就是是，不是就是不是，除此之外都是鬼话。”这是一种___

真象和假象的区别在于___

有的哲学家说，在大风扬起的尘土中，每一粒尘土的运动状况都是纯粹必然的。这是种___

“或然率”是指___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What does the author think of the 2015 report by the Census Bureau?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What does the author say about the Jones-Klenow method?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What do Jones and Klenow think of the comparison between France and the U.S. in terms of real consumption per person?___

对职工个人以股份形式取得的拥有所有权的企业量化资产，暂缓征收个人所得税；待个人将股份转让时，就其转让收入额，减除个人取得该股份时实际支付的费用支出和合理转让费用后的余额，按“工资、薪金所得”项目计征个人所得税。

员工取得该股票期权支付的每股施权价”，一般是指员工行使股票期权购买股票实际支付的每股价格。如果员工以折价购入方式取得股票期权的，上述施权价可包括员工折价购入股票期权时实际支付的价格。

律师以个人名义再聘请其他人员为其工作而支付的报酬，应由该律师按“工资、薪金所得”应税项目负责代扣代缴个人所得税。

个人通过非营利性的社会团体和政府部门向福利性、非营利性的老年服务机构的捐赠，在缴纳企业所得税和个人所得税前准予全额扣除。

个人通过非营利性的社会团体和国家机关(包括中国红十字会)向红十字事业的捐赠,按扣除捐赠额之前的应纳税所得额30%准予按扣除。

从2001年1月1日起，职工个人从中国职工保险互助会取得的红利所得应依法缴纳个人所得税;中国职工保险互助会应严格履行扣缴会员红利所得个人所得税的义务。

员工因公在城区、郊区工作，不能在工作单位或返回就餐，根据实际误餐顿数，按规定标准领取的误餐费，需扣缴个人所得税

员工出差发生的餐费、工作餐，在标准内领取差旅费补贴，需扣缴个人所得税。。

直接给员工发放伙食补贴，除误餐补助属于免税情形外，不扣缴个人所得税。

505以现金形式发放住房补贴，不扣缴个人所得税。

非居民个人需同时达到两个条件：一是在境内没有住所，二是在境内居住时间不满183天。

在中国境内无住所的个人，在一个纳税年度内在中国境内居住累计不超过90天的，其来源于中国境内的所得（仅限于工资薪金所得），由境外雇主支付并且不由该雇主在中国境内的机构、场所负担的部分，免予缴纳个人所得税。

非居民个人取得工资、薪金所得；劳务报酬所得；稿酬所得；特许权使用费所得称综合所得。综合所得按纳税年度合并计算个人所得税。

个人所得税纳税年度，自公历一月一日起至十二月三十一日止。

从福利费和工会经费中支付给单位职工的人人有份的补贴、补助，应当并入纳税人的工资、薪金收入计征个人所得税。

不是所有取得综合所得的纳税人都需要汇算清缴，需补退税的或调整税款计算结果的需要汇算清缴。

高管人员取得由境内居民企业支付或负担的报酬，不论其是否在境内履行职务，均属于来源于境内的所得，应在境内缴税。

无住所个人在境内履职或者执行职务时，收到的数月奖金或者股权激励所得，如果是归属于境外工作期间的所得，为来源于境外的工资薪金所得。

无住所个人停止在境内履约或执行职务离境后，收到归属于其在境内工作期间的数月奖金或股权激励所得，为来源于境内的所得。

无住所个人未在境外单位任职的，无论其是否在境外停留，都不计算境外工作天数。

个人所得税法修改后，无住所居民个人的工资薪金所得计税方法调整为“先分后税”，即先根据境内外工作时间及境内外收入支付比例，对工资薪金收入额进行划分，计算在境内应计税的工资薪金收入额，再据此计算应纳税额。

纳税人通过填写电子模板直接报送扣缴义务人的，《个人所得税专项附加扣除信息表》一式两份，纳税人和扣缴义务人应签字（章）后分别留存备查。

新个人所得税法规定的专项附加扣除，在2018年10月1日后就可以依照规定申报扣除。

个人所得税一律不可以延期缴纳税款。

小王每月工资薪金收入扣除三险一金后的金额为4995元，可无需填报专项附加扣除信息。

同一子女、同一受教育阶段需要细化填写《个人所得税专项附加扣除信息表》

子女教育支出，不同的子女，父母间可以有不同的扣除方式.

专项附加扣除模板可以重复多次导入。

个人所得税”APP登录账号有手机号码、证件号码（外国护照除外）二种。

子女满3周岁，但未入幼儿园的，需要填写就读学校或者就读国家（地区）。

非货币性资产投资个人所得税由纳税人向主管税务机关自行申报缴纳。

对扣缴义务人按照规定扣缴的税款，包括税务机责令补扣的税款,按年付给百分之二的手续费。

个人因与用人单位解除劳动关系而取得的一次性补偿收入，其收入在当地上年职工平均工资3倍数额以内的部分，免征个人所得税。

企业对累积消费达到一定额度的顾客，给予额外抽奖机会，个人的获奖所得，按照“偶然所得”项目，全额适用20%的税率缴纳个人所得税。

个人参加有奖储蓄取得的各种形式的中奖所得，应按照个人所得税法中“利息、股息、红利”应税项目的规定征收个人所得税。

个人在境外取得博彩所得应按照个人所得税法中“偶然所得”应税项目征收个人所得税。

个人取得单张有奖发票奖金所得不超过1000元（含1000元）的，暂免征收个人所得税；个人取得单张有奖发票奖金所得超过1000元的，应全额按照个人所得税法规定的“偶然所得”目征收个人所得税。

对外商投资企业在购买内资企业经营资产过程中向内资企业自然人股东支付的不竞争款项，应按“偶然所得”项目计算缴纳个人所得税

对个人投资者买卖基金单位获得的差价收入，在对个人买卖股票的差价收入未恢复征收个人所得税以前，暂不征收个人所得税

对投资者从基金分配中获得的股票的股息、红利收入以及企业债券的利息收入，由基金向个人投资者分配股息、红利、利息时，代扣代缴个人所得税。