|
|
|
| Public-Private Consultation and Dividend Payment under the “Four-sectors Sharing Profits” Approach: Taking Public-Private Joint Enterprises in Hangzhou as an Example |
| Wang Yi |
| School of Marxism, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou310058, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract “Four-sectors Sharing Profits” （sima fenfei） was a new approach to the distribution of surpluses for private enterprises and public-private joint ventures in 1953 after China entered the period of planned economic construction. As early as in the “Five-anti” campaign, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China had considered using the “Four-sectors Sharing Profits” method to redefine the amount of profits for enterprises in order to balance the interests of all parties. The promulgation of the “Interim Regulations on Public-Private Joint Ventures in Industry” in 1954 signified that the “Four-sectors Sharing Profits” approach formed a complete and unified regulation and was established in the form of law.The overall requirement of the “Four-sectors Sharing Profits” approach was to conduct the distribution on the basis of paying the national income tax and making up for the losses of the enterprises in the previous period. It should neither affect the normal production and operation of the enterprise while also ensuring that the capitalists obtained certain profits. At the same time, it should be conducive to the socialist transformation of the enterprise. Based on this distribution spirit, the attitudes of grassroots organizations and both the public and private sides towards the “Four-sectors Sharing Profits” were different. Therefore, how to effectively carry out the consultation work on surplus distribution and coordinate all parties to promote the implementation of the “Four-sectors Sharing Profits” approach became the key to the smooth implementation of this approach. The consultation between the public and private sectors under the “Four-sectors Sharing Profits” approach was carried out relying on the board of directors under the premise that the public side mastered the internal plan. The investigation of the actual situation of the enterprise by the public side and the understanding of the opinions of the private sectors were the keys to the smooth holding of the consultation meeting and also an important basis for the formulation and adjustment of the internal plan. The nature of the board of directors was a deliberative body for both the public and private sectors, but it did not have the final decision-making power. The uploading and releasing of enterprise resolutions and the operation and management still required the responsibility of the public side. This also indicates that the transfer of the leadership of the enterprise under the “Four-sectors Sharing Profits” approach should not be based on the proportion of the public side’s equity or the number of seats or positions on the board of directors.The distribution share of the “Four-sectors Sharing Profits” was a dynamic adjustment process based on the proportion of income tax, and the proportions of the other three aspects were adjusted accordingly as the share of income tax changed. The content of the “one horse (ma)” of dividends and bonuses roughly changed from “25% for capitalists during the private period” to “dividends and bonuses could account for 25%” and then to “about 25% was distributed according to equity between the public and private sectors after the public-private joint venture”. This reflects that the income of the private side was gradually restricted. In public-private joint venture enterprises, the “one horse” of dividends and bonuses could be subdivided into income from public shares, remuneration, and income from private shares. The income of private shares included government bonds and actual cash disbursements. Due to the lag in the payment of government bonds, what the private side actually received was the remuneration for private shares and actual cash. It can be said that in the case of the “Four-sectors Sharing Profits”, where the working class was the better beneficiaries”, the income of the public side in the distribution of dividends and bonuses were also the main beneficiaries. This is also a manifestation of the growth of socialist elements in joint ventures and the gradual restriction of the income of the private side.The study of the “Four-sectors Sharing Profits” plays an important role in correctly understanding the transfer process of leadership rights in joint ventures under the “utilization, restriction, and transformation”, the changes in the relationship between the public and private sectors, and the specific measures to restrict capitalist exploitation. It also provides a new perspective for in-depth understanding of the practical implementation process of the Communist Party of China’s policy of peaceful redemption.
|
|
Received: 11 July 2024
|
|
|
|
1 方思桐：《资本主义工商业社会主义改造问答》，北京：中国青年出版社，1956年。
2 倩华、梁思达、毛信萃编：《七年来我国私营工商业的变化（1949—1956年）》，北京：财政经济出版社，1957年。
3 中共中央文献研究室编：《毛泽东年谱（1949—1976）》第1卷，北京：中央文献出版社，2013年。
4 周恩来：《关于中国的民族资产阶级问题》（1952年6月19日），见中共中央文献研究室编：《建国以来重要文献选编》第3册，北京：中央文献出版社，1992年，第229-240页。
5 张忠民：《“公私合营”研究（1949—1956）：以上海工业企业为中心的分析》，上海：上海社会科学院出版社，2016年。
6 河南省地方史志编纂委员会编：《河南省志：工商行政管理志》，郑州：河南人民出版社，1995年。
7 李维汉：《回忆与研究》下册，北京：中共党史资料出版社，1986年。
8 李维汉：《关于〈资本主义工业中的公私关系问题〉给中央并主席的报告》（1953年5月27日），见中共中央文献研究室编：《建国以来重要文献选编》第4册，北京：中央文献出版社，1993年，第212-232页。
9 毛泽东：《经过国家资本主义完成由资本主义到社会主义的改造》（1953年9月7日），见中共中央文献研究室编：《建国以来毛泽东文稿》第4册，北京：中央文献出版社，1990年，第324-327页。
10 周恩来：《过渡时期的总路线》（1953年9月8日），见中共中央文献编辑委员会编：《周恩来选集》下卷，北京：人民出版社，1984年，第104-117页。
11 陈云：《目前的财经情况和工作要点》（1953年9月8日），见中共中央文献研究室编：《陈云文集》第2卷，北京：中央文献出版社，2005年，第433-456页。
12 中共中央文献研究室编：《毛泽东传》第3册，北京：中央文献出版社，2011年。
13 《中共中央转发天津市委〈关于公私合营工厂利润分配和建立与健全董事会的报告〉的指示》（1954年3月3日），见中共中央文献研究室编：《建国以来重要文献选编》第5册，北京：中央文献出版社，1993年，第132-140页。
14 《中财委（劳）、（资）关于1953年度私营企业盈余分配问题的指示》（1954年3月2日），见陈文斌、邵纬生主编：《中国资本主义工商业的社会主义改造（中央卷）》（上），北京：中共党史出版社，1992年，第560-561页。
15 《公私合营工业企业暂行条例》（1954年9月2日），见中共中央文献研究室编：《建国以来重要文献选编》第5册，北京：中央文献出版社，1993年，第449-454页。
16 《中共中央统战部关于一九五三年度私营企业盈余分配情况给中央的报告》（1954年10月18日），见陈文斌、邵纬生主编：《中国资本主义工商业的社会主义改造（中央卷）》（下），北京：中共党史出版社，1992年，第712-790页。
17 《中共浙江省委批转省财委（资）关于全省第一次公私合营工业会议的报告》（1954年7月10日），见中共浙江省委党史研究室、中共浙江省委统战部编：《中国资本主义工商业的社会主义改造（浙江卷）》（上），北京：中共党史出版社，1991年，第212-217页。
18 徐斌、陈明鑫、洪洁等编著：《杭商口述史：原工商业者卷》，北京：商务印书馆，2014年。
19 《中财委通知：关于公私合营企业的定义》（1953年2月24日），见中国社会科学院、中央档案馆编：《1953—1957中华人民共和国经济档案资料选编：综合卷》，北京：中国物价出版社，2000年，第63-64页。
20 王毅：《全行业公私合营后定息息率统一过程探析》，《中共党史研究》2023年第3期，第92-104页。
21 吴江：《中国资本主义经济改造问题》，北京：人民出版社，1958年。
22 汝仁编著：《赎买政策的几个问题》，上海：上海人民出版社，1958年。 |
|
|
|
2024, Vol. 54 
