摘要
住房公积金作为一项具备互助性、福利性和强制性的制度,设计初衷是为了促进我国住房公平,保障劳动者有房可居。但是这项旨在解决公平问题的政策,其有效性和公平性皆受到了质疑。文章利用2013年和2015年中国家庭金融调查(CHFS)数据,实证检验了公积金制度对居民住房拥有和购房计划的影响,并将最低工资作为工具变量引入实证分析。研究结果显示,家庭每月公积金缴存额对居民住房拥有和购房计划均具有显著的正向影响。更为重要的是,公积金制度存在一定程度的“两端补贴中间”的“纺锤”效应。对于中等收入家庭而言,公积金对其住房拥有和购房计划均具有显著的正向影响,对低收入家庭购房计划的影响不显著,而对高收入家庭的住房拥有和购房计划的影响也不显著。公积金制度作为解决老百姓“住有所居”的重要制度安排,初衷是发挥保障功效,让更多人享有住房的制度福利,但在现阶段更应考虑扩大对低收入群体的住房消费支持力度,保证公积金制度的公平性和有效性。
As a mutual aid,welfare,and compulsory system,the housing provident fund(HPF)is designed to promote housing equity and ensure that workers have houses to live in.Since its implementation,it has played an important role in improving the housing consumption of urban residents,and has had a positive impact on promoting the reform of the housing system and the healthy development of housing finance.However,in recent years,with the housing prices in major cities have sky rocketed,the real estate market has increasingly shown irrational prosperity,and the effectiveness and fairness of HPF have gradually been questioned.Can the HPF continue to play its due role?Can it support the housing consumption of low-income people?Until now,there is no consistent conclusion on these issues.This paper uses the panel data of the 2013 and 2015 China Household Finance Survey(CHFS)to analyze the impact of HPF on household housing consumption and group heterogeneity,and innovatively introduces the minimum wage as an instrumental variable to further solve the endogenous problem.The study finds that HPF has a positive impact on residential housing ownership and planned housing purchases.Since the current endogenous problem of the provident fund contribution variables has not been well resolved,this paper carries out a large amount of data collection,introduces the minimum wage as an instrumental variable,and uses the instrumental variable method for regression analysis to reduce estimation errors.The results show that the direction and significance is highly consistent with the basic regression results.The provident fund contribution for low-income families has a significant positive impact on housing ownership,but the impact on the housing purchase plan is not significant.The contribution of the provident fund of middle-income families has a significant positive impact on the housing ownership and purchase plan,while the contribution of the provident fund of high-income families has no significant effect on the housing ownership and purchase plan.It can be seen that the provident fund plays the most important role in supporting the housing consumption of middle-income families.There is a certain degree of“spindle”effect of“subsidy between the two ends”,and there is neither“robbing the rich to help the poor”nor“robbing the poor to help the rich”.The HPF is an important institutional arrangement to solve the problem of people’s housing and its original intention is to provide a guarantee and allow more people to enjoy the benefits of the housing system.However,at this stage,more support for housing consumption for low-income groups should be considered to ensure the fairness and effectiveness.
作者
李丁
何春燕
马双
邵帅
Li Ding;He Chunyan;Ma Shuang;Shao Shuai(Institute of Development,Southwestern University of Finance and Economics,Chengdu 611130,China;Research Institute of Economics and Management,Southwestern University of Finance and Economics,Chengdu 611130,China;School of Economics and Statistics,Guangzhou University,Guangzhou 510006,China;School of Urban and Regional Science,Shanghai University of Finance and Economics,Shanghai 200433,China)
出处
《财经研究》
CSSCI
北大核心
2020年第11期108-122,共15页
Journal of Finance and Economics
基金
高等学校学科创新引智计划资助项目(“111计划”,B16040)
国家自然科学基金项目(71922015,71773075)
国家“万人计划”青年拔尖人才项目。
