【摘要】：近來,為了穩(wěn)定物價(jià)和抑制通貨膨脹,國(guó)務(wù)院和一些地方政府陸續(xù)頒布了針對(duì)某些商品的價(jià)格調(diào)控措施。最典型的例子是國(guó)務(wù)院和一些地方政府為抑制房?jī)r(jià)過快上漲,于2011年初出臺(tái)的一系列調(diào)控房地產(chǎn)市場(chǎng)的措施,這些措施主要表現(xiàn)為"限購(gòu)令"、"限貸令"和"限價(jià)令"。這些價(jià)格調(diào)控措施是各級(jí)政府為了穩(wěn)定物價(jià)而出臺(tái)的臨時(shí)性調(diào)控措施,其在維護(hù)市場(chǎng)秩序和消費(fèi)者權(quán)益方面有其合理性,但也引起了學(xué)者的不少爭(zhēng)議。爭(zhēng)議的焦點(diǎn)主要是這種臨時(shí)性調(diào)控措施的合法性和正當(dāng)性問題,具體體現(xiàn)為這些調(diào)控措施在調(diào)控主體、調(diào)控途徑、調(diào)控效力等方面與相關(guān)法律規(guī)定尚有較大差距,有異于我國(guó)法律規(guī)定的調(diào)控措施,因而有與憲法、立法法、價(jià)格法、稅收征收管理法等法律相抵觸之嫌。這些調(diào)控措施具有臨時(shí)性、應(yīng)急性、強(qiáng)制性等特征,更接近于緊急狀態(tài)下的應(yīng)對(duì)措施。從法治的角度考慮,這種臨時(shí)性的調(diào)控措施應(yīng)當(dāng)適時(shí)退出,讓位于規(guī)范的、作用相對(duì)持久的法定調(diào)控措施�；�于此,本刊特組織一些學(xué)者對(duì)這些調(diào)控措施予以探討。
[Abstract]:Recently, in order to stabilize prices and curb inflation, the State Council and some local governments have promulgated price control measures for certain commodities. The most typical example is a series of measures introduced by the State Council and some local governments in early 2011 to curb the excessive rise in house prices, mainly through "purchase restrictions", "loan restrictions" and "price limits". These price control measures are temporary measures introduced by governments at all levels in order to stabilize prices. They are reasonable in maintaining market order and consumers' rights and interests, but have also aroused many controversies among scholars. The focus of the dispute is mainly on the legitimacy and legitimacy of this temporary control measure, which is embodied in the fact that there is still a big gap between these measures and the relevant laws and regulations in the aspects of the subject, the way and the effectiveness of the regulation and control. There are some regulation measures which are different from the laws of our country, so they conflict with the constitution, legislative law, price law, tax collection and management law and so on. These measures have the characteristics of temporary, acute and compulsory, and are closer to the emergency response. From the point of view of the rule of law, this temporary control measure should withdraw in due course and give way to the normative and relatively lasting legal control measures. Based on this, this journal specially organized some scholars to discuss these control measures.
【作者單位】： 上海財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)法學(xué)院;
【基金】：筆者主持的國(guó)家社科基金青年項(xiàng)目《和諧社會(huì)與理性制度選擇》(2005年)的階段性成果(項(xiàng)目編號(hào):05CFX001)
【分類號(hào)】：F293.3
，

本文編號(hào)：2300878