热门站点| 世界资料网 | 专利资料网 | 世界资料网论坛
收藏本站| 设为首页| 首页

青海省实施《失业保险条例》办法

作者:法律资料网 时间:2024-06-17 02:13:25  浏览:9057   来源:法律资料网
下载地址: 点击此处下载

青海省实施《失业保险条例》办法

青海省人民政府


青海省实施《失业保险条例》办法
青海省人民政府
青海省人民政府令第19号


(2001年6月15日第22次青海省政府常务会议审议通过)


第一条 为完善社会保障体系,保障失业人员失业期间的基本生活,促进其再就业,根据国务院《失业保险条例》及国家有关规定,制定本办法。
第二条 本省行政区域内的城镇企业、事业单位、民办非企业单位及其职工;国家机关、依照参照公务员制度管理的事业单位及其签订劳动合同的工人,社会团体及其专职人员按本办法的规定缴纳失业保险费,按规定享受失业保险待遇。
第三条 县级以上人民政府劳动保障行政部门主管本行政区域内的失业保险工作。其所属的失业保险经办机构依照本办法的规定,具体承办失业保险业务。
第四条 失业保险费按照国家和省人民政府的规定征缴。具体征缴工作由各级地方税务部门承担。
第五条 各级人民政府的审计、财政部门依法对失业保险基金的征缴、管理和使用情况进行审计和财务监督。
第六条 失业保险基金由下列各项构成:
(一)用人单位和职工个人缴纳的失业保险费;
(二)失业保险基金的利息收入;
(三)财政补贴;
(四)依法纳入失业保险基金的其他资金。
第七条 失业保险费的缴纳标准:用人单位按照本单位工资总额的2%缴纳失业保险费,国家机关、依照参照公务员制度管理的事业单位、社会团体按纳入失业保险范围的职工工资总额的2%缴纳失业保险费。职工个人按本人工资的1%缴纳失业保险费。无法确定工资总额的用人单位,以统筹地区上年度社会平均工资为基数缴纳失业保险费。
用人单位招用的农民合同制工人本人不缴纳失业保险费,由单位按照农民合同制工人工资总额的2%缴纳失业保险费。
企业缴纳的失业保险费在所得税前列支;国家机关、社会团体、事业单位缴纳的失业保险费从行政费或事业费中列支。职工个人缴纳的失业保险费由所在单位从本人工资中代扣代缴。
第八条 用人单位按月到失业保险经办机构申报应缴纳的失业保险费数额。失业保险经办机构应及时向税务机关提供用人单位失业保险登记、变更登记、注销登记,并按月提供核定的缴费数额情况。税务机关应按月向失业保险经办机构提供用人单位和个人的缴费情况。
第九条 失业保险费不得减免,任何单位和个人不得拒交。用人单位因特殊原因,暂时无法缴纳失业保险费的,可以向地税部门提出书面申请,由税务机关审核,并经同级失业保险经办机构审批,可缓交失业保险费。逾期不缴的、从逾期之日起按日加收欠缴数额千分之二的滞纳金。
第十条 失业保险基金实行州(地、市)统筹。各县(区、市、镇)税务机关将所征缴的失业保险费直接缴入州(地、市)财政在国有商业银行开设的失业保险基金专户,实行收支两条线管理,专款专用,不得挪作他用。税务机关应向当地失业保险经办机构提供登记《缴费台帐》的依据,失业保险经办机构据此登记参保单位的《缴费台帐》。
第十一条 各州(地、市)财政部门,须将每季度征收的失业保险费总额的10%,在季后的20日内上解省财政失业保险专户,作为全省失业保险调剂金。
统筹地区的失业保险基金上年度征缴率达到90%以上,动用历年结余仍不敷使用时,由同级劳动保障行政部门、财政部门共同向上一级申请,经省劳动保障行政部门、财政部门核准,由省失业保险经办机构动用调剂金和统筹地区予以财政补贴共同解决。
第十二条 省人民政府根据本省失业保险基金的收支情况和需要,适时调整调剂金上解比例。
第十三条 失业保险基金的开支范围:
(一)失业保险金;
(二)领取失业保险金期间的医疗补助金;
(三)领取失业保险金期间死亡的失业人员的丧葬补助金,供养的配偶、直系亲属的抚恤金;
(四)在当年实际收缴失业保险基金总额中提取5%,用于失业人员再就业的职业培训、职业介绍。
(五)国务院规定或经省人民政府批准的与失业保险有关的其它费用。
第十四条 存入银行和购买国债的失业保险基金,分别按照城乡居民同期存款利率和国债利息计息。失业保险基金利息并入失业保险基金。
第十五条 用人单位应当及时为失业人员出具终止或者解除劳动关系的证明,告知其按照规定享受失业保险待遇的权利,并将失业人员的名单和档案自终止或者解除劳动关系之日起,10日内移送户籍所在地失业保险经办机构备案。
失业人员凭用人单位终止或者解除劳动关系的证明和本人身份证明,在终止或解除劳动关系后的60日内,到户籍所在地失业保险经办机构申请办理失业登记和失业保险金申领手续,领取省劳动保障部门统一印制的《失业证》。
第十六条 失业保险经办机构自受理失业人员的失业登记申请的10日内,对其失业情况进行审核确认,对具备领取失业保险金条件的失业人员,在核发的《失业证》上审定、记载其领取失业保险金的限期和有关补助标准。失业人员在领取失业保险金期间由失业保险经办机构管理并代管其档案。
第十七条 失业保险金按月发放,失业人员从办理失业登记之日起领取失业保险金。
第十八条 失业保险金标准由省人民政府确定,省劳动和社会保障厅定期公布。
第十九条 失业人员领取失业保险金的期限,根据职工失业前所在单位和本人累计缴费时间确定。
缴费时间满1年不满2年的,发4个月失业保险金;连续缴费时间每增加1年(不足1年按1年计),加发2个月的失业保险金。但领取失业保险金最长期限不超过24个月。
失业人员重新就业后再次失业的,以重新就业后的缴费时间为计算依据,领取失业保险金的期限可以与前次失业应领取但尚未领取的失业保险金的期限合并计算,但最长不得超过24个月。
第二十条 失业人员在领取失业保险金期间按月领取医疗补助金。失业人员在领取失业保险金期间患病需住院治疗的,可以向失业保险经办机构申请领取住院医疗补助费。医疗补助金、住院医疗补助费的标准由省劳动和社会保障厅另行规定。
第二十一条 失业人员在领取失业保险金期间死亡的,丧葬补助金按死者生前6个月的失业保险金计发。对符合供养条件的配偶、直系亲属一次性发给抚恤金,供养一人按失业人员生前6个月的失业保险金计发,供养2人按9个月计发,供养3人以上按12个月计发。参与违法活动致死的,不予发给。
第二十二条 单位招用的农民合同制工人连续工作满1年,劳动合同期满未续订或者提前解除劳动合同的,由失业保险经办机构根据其工作时间,每满1年计发相当于1个月失业保险金的一次性生活补助,但最多不超过12个月。
第二十三条 用人单位不按规定缴纳失业保险费或不按规定及时为失业人员转移档案,致使失业人员不能享受失业保险待遇的,用人单位应当赔偿由此给失业人员造成的直接经济损失。
第二十四条 用人单位成建制跨统筹地区转移、职工个人跨统筹地区流动的,失业保险关系随之转移。
第二十五条 违反本办法的规定应当追究法律责任的,由劳动保障部门和税务部门分别依照《失业保险条例》、《社会保险费征缴暂行条例》的规定,给予行政处罚或行政处分。
第二十六条 本办法由省劳动和社会保障厅负责解释。
第二十七条 本办法自发布之日起施行。1993年8月24日青海省人民政府发布的《青海省国有企业职工待业保险实施细则》同时废止。


2001年6月22日
下载地址: 点击此处下载
Stratic Advice on Intellectual Property Investment in Asia

苏冉


IssueⅠ: Legal framework of protection on software copyright in P.R.C and Singapore
A) P.R.C
In conjunction with China’s astonishing economic growth over the past two decades, especially after the entrance to WTO, China has steadily improved its legal framework on Software Copyright by checking and clearing large-scale regulations both in domestic and international activities.
Frankly speaking, China joined in three vital international treaties relate to copyright: the Berne Convention , TRIPs and Universal Copyright Convention. Moreover, China and US signed MOU especially for software in January 1992. All these Conventions are regarded as a milestone to reflect China’s dramatic promotion and strong determination to build a satisfactory environment for foreign software investors.
Similarly to US, P.R.C has chosen to protect software under copyright law rather than trademark, patent, or contract law. One year after Copyright Law Amendment in 2001, Chinese Council corrected its software-specific “Computer Software Protection Rules” , to deal with new problems prevailing in software protection nowadays. Under the Rule, software is defined as two particular types: computer program and their relevant documentation. Furthermore, since MOU came into force, computer software is protected as a literary work. Third, according to the conditional nation treatment here, foreigners are required to comply with “connecting factor”, to sum up, either first publication or nationality/residence of the author in China or in any of these countries ,between the work and China or a country who is a member of the WTO, or the Berne Convention. So, despite your software products first being published in US, you can still enjoy the original copyright and the legal protection on in China.
Except from the above rules, other laws also have supportive stipulation on the protection of software copyrights as follows:
(a)The General Principle of Civil Law, the country’s current basic civil law, has authorized the author’s copyright in general;
(b)The Criminal Code has a section of articles referring to piracy offences, with “Dual Punishment Principle” in front of copyright encroachment;
(c)The newly amended Foreign Trade Law (adopted in Feb).

B) Singapore
The general legal framework of software copyright protection in Singapore is almost the same as P.R.C, but with some characteristics of its own. Actually, different from P.R.C based on Civil law background, laws and litigations in Singapore are principally modeled on the English system under Common law system till nowadays. Pursuant to certain legal revolutions, modern copyright legislation contains the same international conventions as P.R.C: the Berne Conventions, Universal Copyright Convention, and TRIPs. But, Singapore signed ASEAN Framework on Intellectual Property Cooperation and the WIPO Copyright Treaty as a member of ASEAN. Turning to its domestic laws, the latest Copyright Act 1999(revised edition) is the principle one, with some other relevant regulations for enforcement. And it also definites software program into literary work under protection. In addition, Singapore owes large resources of case laws so as to make its legal conditions more particular than that in P.R.C.
The amended Act is first purposed to address issues arising from the use of copyright materials in a digital environment, especially provide legal certainty for the use of copyright in cyberspace. For instance, the extension of concept “reproduction” .Second, the Act plays another role in enhancing performer’s rights, offering two new defenses to allegations of copyright infringement. Therefore, merely surfing the Web doesn’t constitute software copyright infringement, if it’s necessary to browse. Even , Singapore passed the Electronic Transactions Act 1998 to give statutory protection of Network Service Providers. At these points, Singapore seemingly forwards a step further than P.R.C, declining its attention on encouraging the growth of a knowledge-based economy and promoting E-commerce and creative innovations. Last but the most significant point, Singapore and the United State signed a bilateral free trade agreement (FTA) on May 6th 2003, and entered it into force from January 1st 2004. Virtually, this is the first FTA between US and an Asia country .So it’s doubtlessly the greatest advantage for Singapore to attract US investors, apart from other Asian countries. They would encourage the entrepreneurship, investment, job creation and growth in our own technology, science and creative industries as well as set the stage for Singapore’s emergence as a global IP hub.

Issue Ⅱ: Implementation on Software Copyright Law in P.R.C and Singapore
Sufficient and effective enforcement is more useful and practical than recorded documents, with no exception to P.R.C and Singapore.
(ⅰ)Role of Government
A)P.R.C
Learned from Annual Report on the Protection of Intellectual Property Right in China during the past 5 years by the head officer Jingchuan Wang in TableⅠ , you can see copyright administration at various levels make remarkable progress in encouraging innovation, promoting industrial development, regulating market order, and even improving the opening-up policy.
As a matter of fact, the People’s Courts, the People’s Prosecution Department, National Copyright Administration Centre and Public Security compose the backbone of the implementation of copyright law in China with civil remedies, criminal sensations and administrative punishments, such as fine. And border enforcement assistance to copyright owners by the Customs and Excise Department is also available.
TableⅠ:
The Administration on Software Copyright In P.R.C
Year Registration Prosecute Cases Resolved Cases Resolved Cases Rate Seized Pirates(M) Top 1 Region of Piracy
1999 1,041 1,616 1,515 93.75% 20.14 Shenzhen
2000 3,300 2,457 1,980 95.30% 32.60 Guangdong
2001 4,620 2,683 2,327 97.52% 61.75 Guangdong
2002 4,860 2,740 2,604 99.02% 67.90 Guangdong
2003 5,020 6,120 5,793 97.64% 73.28 Beijing
Statistics from NCAC (National Copyright Administration Centre
Fortunately, China has begun to regard software as an industry with strategic significance while formulating effective policies in areas including anti-piracy and anti-monopoly. To adapt to the legal framework, China has shifted its attention upon educating software users and strengthening the law. “Government departments are being asked to show a good example in using copyrighted software only and make software budget each year”. For example, Beijing, Shanghai, Guangdong buy over 3,000 software products every year through public bidding. What’s more, the National Software Government Procurement Regulation will probably act in the near future. Eventually, Chinese government is trying to treat all software companies equal in P.R.C, no matter domestic or foreign countries.
Nevertheless, given China’s vast geography and population, it would be an awesome task for the central government to manage pirating activities throughout the entire country. On the other hand, due to lack of resources, the lack of judicial expertise, the unpredictability of trial outcomes, and large costs, litigation in Chinese courts remains a risky and expensive response to Chinese copyright violations. Another administrative difficulty arises from the increasing decentralization of the Chinese government. Much of China's copyright enforcement takes place at the provincial and local levels; the national government lacks the resources and control to effectively monitor nationwide pirating activity and to impose national enforcement policies.

B) Singapore
Switching to Singapore, the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) is its senior administration department, and it leads Singapore to the success in copyright infrastructure. Singapore has announced a number of meaningful standards through requirements for tough penalties to combat piracy and counterfeiting, including, in civil cases, procedures for seizure and destruction of pirated and counterfeit products, and a requirement to provide for statutory and actual damages to remedy such practices. There has been a rule in Singapore that government could only allowed to use copyrighted software since 1996. In order to obtain efficiency, Singapore maintain civil remedies and criminal penalties for circumvention of technology protection measures, and it also has in place implementation allowing for border seizures of infringing articles by customs officials. For example, the copyright infringement is punished with a maximum fine of S$100,000 or five years’ imprisonment or both. So, in comparison to P.R.C, the least time for imprisonment is shorter .But due to the judge’s free power under common law system, the court is increasingly harsh in their sentencing in respect of infringement of copyright. In other words, criminal obligation will become heavier with more limitation in Singapore.
In the contrast with Chinese administrative punishments, Singapore has a large scope of interlocutory remedies to fill in the blank area between civil remedies and criminal sensations, and they are three main types:
(a) the interlocutory injunction---It is an injunction obtained before the trail often with the main objective of maintaining the Stats quo between the parties pending the outcome of the trail. The interlocutory injunction may be in a mandatory or prohibitory form.
(b) the Anton Piller Order---It’s developed from Anton Piller KG v.Mfg Processes Ltd as a safeguard system of evidence for avoiding the defendant to destroy and hide the evidence of copyright infringement, if the plaintiff shows an extremely strong prima facie that his right are being interfered with, or the damage, potential or actual are very serious to the plaintiff, or even there must be clear evidence to proof the defendants faults.
(c) the Norwich Pharmacal Order.---The further expansion of Anton Piller Order to raise over the privilege against self-incrimination from Rank Film Distributors Ltd v. Video Information Centre Virtually . However, case law in Singapore has now established that where the privilege against self-incrimination exists, an undertaking from the plaintiff/ applicant not to use the information obtained in criminal proceedings is not an adequate safeguard for the defendant’s privilege against self-crimination. Singapore courts have also held that they don’t have the power to order that the information be inadmissible in any subsequent criminal prosecution.
Relying on common law foundation, people in Singapore prefer to a lawsuit rather than mediation while more mediation in P.R.C, once in the face of a dispute. Consequently, it would like to be more time and energy consuming somehow, for it costs at least one year of a civil procedure in the High Court of Singapore.
Last but not least, along with legsilation changes, Singapore Administration departments are also mounting a public campaign targeting both consumers and businesses to increase their awareness on the benefits and other implications of the new laws. There’s broad-based public awareness initiatives like the HIP Alliance’s year-long anti-piracy campaign? “The Real thing is the Right thing”, and brain Wave, Singapore’s first reality television show on IP.
(ⅱ)Role of Anti- Piracy Organizations
Both P.R.C and Singapore joined in Business Software Alliance (BSA) ,and WIPO several years ago and established domestic anti-piracy alliances at their own respective locality. The alliances played an active part in combating piracy and protecting the interests of right holders. They always declare laws, promulgate routine reports of current protection on TV, newspapers, and Website and show different points between pirate and authorized products. In the contrast with P.R.C, Singapore has other special disputes resolution organs under its common law system, including the small claims tribunals, E-commerce disputes centre. What’s more, Singapore collaborates with other ASAEN countries to harmonize IP rights with international and regional organizations such as the Office of Harmonization of the Internal Market (OHIM), the European Union, the French National Office of Industrial Property, and IP Australia.
(ⅲ)Introduction of Judgments in Precedent Cases
A) P.R.C
In a landmark verdict on April 16, 1996 against Beijing JuRen Computer, the Beijing No.1 Intermediate Court delivered judgment in favor of the Business Software Alliance (BSA) upholding the plaintiffs' intellectual property rights and ordering the defendant to (a) publicly apologize to the plaintiff; (b) pay over RMB600,000 (US$70,000) in damages, including court costs and accounting costs; (c) pay additional fines directly to the court. The court also ordered the defendant to undertake not to infringe intellectual property rights in the future, and the law enforcement officials to confiscate all computers and software seized during the raid on the defendant's premises. In another case, the same court rendered a judgment against Beijing Giant Computer Co. for software copyright infringement. These were the first cases decided in favor of a US plaintiff in a Chinese court.

关于营业税计税依据若干具体问题的通知

国家税务局


关于营业税计税依据若干具体问题的通知
国家税务局



现根据全国营业税税政业务会议的意见,就有关营业税计税依据的若干具体问题规定如下:
一、对于营业税纳税人(以下简称“纳税人”)采取以物易物方式销售商品,凡是纳税人以低于正常价格作价销售的,税务机关应按以下原则核定其营业税计税依据:
1.属于国家统一定价或规定具体作价标准的商品,不得低于国家所定价格或价格标准;
2.属于国家允许企业自行定价的商品,不得低于企业销售同类商品的平均销售价格。
二、对于纳税人采取“以旧换新”方式销售商品,应按照新商品的销售价格(即不剔除旧商品的收购价)计算征收营业税。
纳税人将收回的旧商品再销售的,应按规定征收营业税。
三、对于纳税人采取“还本销售”方式销售商品,应于商品销售时按实际销售收入征收营业税;纳税人“还本销售”的支出,不得冲减商品销售收入。
四、纳税人采取“价格折让”方式销售商品,如果价格折让额在同一张发票上单独注明,对这部分折让额不计征营业税;如果纳税人将这部分折让额另开一张发票,无论其在财务上如何处理,均不得从计税依据中减除。
五、对于纳税人销售带包装的商品,无论包装物是否单独计价,在财务上如何核算,也不分包装物是自制的、还是外购的,均应并入商品销售收入中计征营业税。
对纳税人销售带包装的商品收取的包装物押金,无论包装物是否已作价随同商品销售,也不论这部分押金在财务上如何处理,凡不予退还的,均应并入商品销售收入中计征营业税。



1992年1月7日

版权声明:所有资料均为作者提供或网友推荐收集整理而来,仅供爱好者学习和研究使用,版权归原作者所有。
如本站内容有侵犯您的合法权益,请和我们取得联系,我们将立即改正或删除。
京ICP备14017250号-1