Cheng Enfu and Wu Shanlin: Policy Ideas for Promoting Common Prosperity Across All Social Strata
I. Common Prosperity Concerns the Long-term Grand Plan of Socialism
During the period of socialist transformation, Mao Zedong regarded common prosperity as a beautiful prospect. For example, he stated: "We are still an agricultural country. On the basis of an agricultural country, there is no talk of being strong or rich. However, now that we are implementing such a system and such a plan, it is possible to move toward becoming richer and stronger year by year, and one can see this progress year by year. And this wealth is common wealth, and this strength is common strength... this common prosperity is certain, not something where we do not know today what will happen tomorrow."
After the start of Reform and Opening-up, Deng Xiaoping repeatedly emphasized common prosperity. For instance, from the perspective of the essence of socialism, he pointed out: "We persist in taking the socialist road, and the fundamental goal is to achieve common prosperity." "Socialism is not a situation where a few people get rich while the majority remains poor; it is not like that. The greatest superiority of socialism is common prosperity, which is something that embodies the essence of socialism." Furthermore, after Reform and Opening-up, he consistently prioritized this issue and believed that common prosperity would become a central topic at some point in the future. He said: "Commonly getting rich is something we have spoken of since the beginning of reform; one day in the future it must become a central topic." "Taking the socialist road is precisely to gradually realize common prosperity... If the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, polarization [1] will arise, and the socialist system should and can avoid polarization... When to prominently propose and solve this problem, and on what basis to propose and solve it, requires study. It can be imagined that when we reach the level of a moderately prosperous society (xiǎokāng) at the end of this century, we must prominently propose and solve this problem."
Since entering the New Era of socialism with Chinese characteristics, Xi Jinping has attached great importance to the issue of common prosperity. He also views common prosperity from the perspective of the essence of socialism. He has stated, "Common prosperity is an essential requirement of socialism and the common aspiration of the people. In promoting economic and social development, our ultimate goal is to achieve common prosperity for all people." He pointed out that the documents of the Fifth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee provided such an expression for the first time, namely, regarding the 2035 Long-Range Objectives, we must achieve "more obvious and substantial progress in the common prosperity of all people"; regarding the improvement of the quality of people's lives, we must "solidly promote common prosperity." On April 30, 2021, Xi Jinping presided over a meeting of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, which proposed the "formulation of an action plan for promoting common prosperity."
It can be seen that from Mao Zedong’s vision of common prosperity to Deng Xiaoping’s encouragement of "letting some get rich first to achieve common prosperity," [2] and then to Xi Jinping’s advocacy for shared development and common prosperity, the inheritance and development of the concept of common prosperity are fully embodied (Tan Jingsong and Li Sisi, 2017). Viewed from Deng Xiaoping’s discourses, the encouragement for some to get rich first was predicated on the premise of common prosperity, a premise that was firmly upheld; viewed from Xi Jinping’s discourses, shared development requires common prosperity as its manifestation. Therefore, from the present until 2050, promoting common prosperity is not only an important guideline for China's economic work but also a major theme for our academic research. What I wish to discuss here is primarily how we should implement the spirit of common prosperity in policy, specifically by practicing "not forgetting the original aspiration of reform" [3] through promoting common prosperity among all social strata to advance the development of socialism with Chinese characteristics.
II. Policy Principles for Promoting Common Prosperity Across Social Strata
Since the beginning of Reform and Opening-up, China’s economic growth has achieved remarkable success; however, from the perspective of economic development, there are still many areas requiring improvement. In this process, social stratification has emerged in our country, and achieving common prosperity across all social strata remains an arduous task. The primary issue is that the wealth and income gap between the wealthiest and the poorest populations is too large, and the size of the middle-income group is relatively small. Although China has achieved a comprehensive victory in the battle against poverty, the wealth or income of many people remains low, and their distance from the poverty line remains close, while the wealth and income of a tiny minority of tycoons has grown rapidly. Clearly, the various social strata have not yet reached a state of common prosperity, and the continuous widening of the wealth and income gap contradicts common prosperity, which will have an adverse impact on China's future economic growth and high-quality development of the economy and society.
Common prosperity is the essential requirement of socialism. When formulating relevant economic policies, we need to pay attention to certain principles. I will discuss only three points here.
First, we must establish the concepts of common prosperity, shared development, and common well-being (Cheng Enfu, 2021). Common prosperity for all social strata is the only path to realizing the beautiful prospect of common prosperity, shared development, and common happiness; accordingly, economic policies must reflect the spirit of being people-centered and promoting comprehensive socio-economic development. Here, "the people" refers to the people including all social strata; although there are differences between the people of different strata in many aspects, they are all collaborative forces in the process of promoting the national economy toward "higher quality, more efficient, fairer, more sustainable, and more secure" development. Common prosperity across social strata is the basic guarantee and necessary condition for coordinating these forces. From a social perspective, if common prosperity cannot be achieved across all strata and the wealth and income gap is too large—especially if the share of wealth and income held by top owners and high earners is too high—then in the long run, social fracture will be inevitable, eventually evolving into an intractable social malady. From an economic perspective, if common prosperity across social strata is not achieved, the internal circulation [4] will be suppressed from the demand side, and distorted consumption structures and stratified rigidity will coexist, causing the transformation and optimization of the industrial structure to lose part of its internal momentum. From these two aspects alone, we must grasp the promotion of common prosperity across social strata as a focal point of our work and implement it through a policy mix.
Second, we must consider policy arrangements from both material and value perspectives. Transactions in China's domestic market use the Renminbi for pricing and settlement. However, prices have significant regional differences. This is particularly true for housing prices; in first-tier cities, it has long been common to see prices as high as 100,000 RMB per square meter, while in fourth-tier cities, the average housing price may not even reach one-tenth of that in first-tier cities. From a material perspective, the per capita housing area in first-tier cities is smaller; from a value perspective, the market value of housing owned per capita in first-tier cities is much higher. The problem, however, is that physical space is crucial for the living experience. A 20-square-meter house, no matter how it is decorated, cannot provide the feeling of a 200-square-meter house. Generally, this contradiction between material reality and value caused by regional differences must be seriously considered when formulating policies for common prosperity across social strata; otherwise, it will lead to many difficult social problems detrimental to common prosperity and common happiness. The lesson of ordinary workers' housing being too cramped in Hong Kong, China, which triggered a series of economic and social problems, serves as a warning.
Finally, common prosperity must be understood as an institutional advantage and a competitive/emulative advantage. In capitalist societies, the more private capital is allowed to play a decisive role in socio-economic life, the wider the wealth and income gap across social strata becomes. In such societies, even if the government pays a high cost for governance, the majority of people remain in relative misery, and it is difficult for them to have hope for upward social mobility. There, it is a paradise for the rich, characterized by extreme luxury and lust; and a hell for the poor, with no way to escape. Although such societies hold up bourgeois democracy and freedom as high-sounding concepts, the cruel reality constantly strikes those who refuse to "pretend to be asleep." An essential characteristic of socialism is common prosperity; regarding common prosperity, the most important aspect is common prosperity across social strata, followed by common prosperity between urban and rural areas, regions, industries, and ethnic groups. People living in a socialist society can derive satisfaction from common prosperity while also reflecting their different contributions to society through appropriate gaps, thereby incentivizing people to improve their quality, strive for success, and achieve upward mobility. Therefore, socialism can be entirely vibrant. From this perspective, socialist society should be both a harmonious and beautiful society and a society where everyone strives to pursue a better life. It is thus a society full of self-confidence, possessing institutional advantages and competitive/emulative advantages. A market economy where private ownership is the mainstay is simply the survival of the fittest, involving even deception and life-and-death struggle; whereas a market economy where public ownership is the mainstay should feature both fair competition and mutual assistance/emulation (characterized by "comparing with, learning from, catching up with, helping, and surpassing" [5]) (Xu Wenbin and Dong Jinming, 2020). In this regard, using an appropriate policy mix to promote common prosperity across social strata should carry a sense of "time and tide wait for no man" at all times; it should not be treated as a problem to be solved in the distant future (Cheng Enfu, 2021).
III. Promoting Sharing and Common Prosperity Through National Dividend Distributions from State-Owned Asset Returns
In order to better implement the requirement that "well-being of the people reach a new level" proposed in the "Recommendations of the CPC Central Committee for Formulating the 14th Five-Year Plan for National Economic and Social Development and the 2035 Long-Range Objectives," as well as Xi Jinping’s instruction that one "must place the promotion of common prosperity for all people in a more important position, be down-to-earth, persist over the long term, and work more actively and effectively toward this goal," and to implement and improve the "Three-Year Action Plan for Reform of State-Owned Enterprises," we (together with Professor Song Fangmin and Researcher Liang Jun) advocate for the implementation of the reform policy of "strengthening state-owned enterprises and increasing dividend distributions" (Cheng Enfu, 2018).
That is to say, we should innovate the institutional top-level design, using the implementation of a national sharing mechanism—where returns from the operation of state-owned assets are distributed as dividends to the entire people—as a driver. This will realize the socialist public ownership attribute of state-owned assets belonging to the whole people, mobilize the public's attention toward the operation of state-owned assets, and subsequently build a closed loop of rights, responsibilities, and benefits that are owned, supervised, and shared by the whole people in line with market-oriented and law-based requirements by establishing platforms and channels for effective public supervision. Simultaneously, this will achieve the great goals of upholding the principal position of the people, improving socialist democracy and the legal system, and achieving shared common prosperity for all.
The key points of the policy design are as follows: Establish a system for distributing returns from state-owned assets to the whole people. The board of directors of the invested enterprises shall, according to the business conditions and development needs of the enterprise, formulate an annual profit distribution plan that conforms to the interests of shareholders while meeting the requirements of sustainable development. Upon approval by the shareholders' meeting, dividends will be distributed to all shareholders, including the representatives of state-owned asset investors. The portion of profit dividends belonging to the state-owned asset investors shall be fully remitted into a special fiscal account established and supervised by the Standing Committee of the People's Congress at the corresponding level. The Standing Committee of the People's Congress shall discuss and vote to determine the annual national dividend distribution plan from the profit portion, and distribute dividends to the whole people through individual social security cards in a tiered manner.
Implementing national dividends from the returns of state-owned asset operations is a project of theoretical and practical innovation, consistent with the theoretical, historical, and practical logic of socialism with Chinese characteristics. Its basic logic is: following the mechanism where various productive factors are remunerated based on property rights and the market, and using the right to use and the right to earnings of state-owned asset factors as the basis, the returns from state-owned asset operations are treated as factor income and property income to be distributed to the actual owners of state-owned assets—the whole people. This fully reflects the nature of state-owned enterprises as ownership by the whole people. In recent years, China has begun to gradually increase the proportion of state-owned capital gains turned over to public finance. In 2020, China's GDP exceeded 100 trillion RMB, a moderately prosperous society was built in all respects, and economic strength, technological strength, and comprehensive national power leapt to a new height. We already possess the conditions to accomplish great things that we wanted to do in the past but could not. On the occasion of starting the new journey of comprehensively building a modern socialist country, fulfilling our Party's solemn promise of common prosperity for the whole people and implementing national dividends from state-owned asset returns is an inevitable result of historical development. This can help per capita income of urban and rural residents leap to a new height, promote social fairness, increase people's well-being, and make people's lives better, achieving more obvious and substantial progress in the common prosperity of all people. This demonstrates that state-owned enterprises are truly enterprises owned by the whole people, possessing the same market attributes and governance rules as other market entities. This would break through Western designations and regulations concerning China's "non-market economy" or "state capitalism," allowing China to occupy the legal and moral high ground in international economic and trade rules. Therefore, it is suggested that relevant departments organize forces as soon as possible to conduct theoretical demonstrations and empirical simulations to improve the institutional top-level design and implementation rules. Selected provinces or central cities should be used as pilots to summarize experience in a timely manner and promote the policy nationwide when appropriate. We may consider drawing on the experience of "wealth partaking" [6] in Macau.
IV. Fiscal and Taxation Policies to Promote Common Prosperity Across Social Strata
In addition to policies for adjusting the ownership structure, fiscal and taxation policy is the primary means of promoting common prosperity across all social strata. Through a series of fiscal and taxation policies, one can create stable expectations and positive guidance regarding returns for owners of different factors (the so-called "factor contribution" is only accurate when used in the sense of factor ownership) from an ex ante perspective, while also making necessary adjustments to the patterns of wealth and income distribution from an ex post perspective.
The most important of these is income tax policy. Tax systems vary greatly across countries. In the United States, corporate and personal income taxes are the primary tax categories. In China, Value-Added Tax (VAT) and enterprise income tax are the primary categories, but personal income tax is becoming increasingly important. Some argue that income tax only functions within redistribution; such a view requires correction. While income tax certainly plays an important role in redistribution, as part of the institutional system, it also affects factor input and product production—and thus primary distribution—under certain conditions. This must be taken into account when pursuing the goal of "dividing the cake evenly" (Wu Shanlin, 2014). This is the first point. Second, capital is a factor of production, and labor is also a factor of production. Fundamentally speaking, value is created by labor; however, the interpersonal distribution of these two factors—and thus their distribution across social strata—is highly inconsistent. It is particularly noteworthy that within a single human life, the time during which one can truly provide labor is limited; the provision of the labor factor is affected by the worker’s mental and physical health and is difficult to transfer across generations. Capital, however, can continue to function even after the demise of its original owner and can be transferred intergenerationally. Consequently, the primary cause of the failure to achieve common prosperity across social strata is inevitably private capital, which has private profit as its sole objective. After analyzing the logic of private capital, Marx pointed out that in capitalist society, it inevitably results in the "accumulation of wealth" at one pole and the "accumulation of misery, agony of toil, slavery, ignorance, brutality, mental degradation" at the other. Therefore, when determining taxes on capital and labor income, in order to promote common prosperity across all social strata, we should complete the change in the personal income tax filing unit as soon as possible—shifting the unit of taxation from the individual to the household (Cheng Enfu, 2021). On this basis, the following adjustments should be made gradually:
(1) Implement a new progressive income tax based on per capita household income. Drawing on personal income tax laws from various countries, we suggest (see Table 1 for details): First, at the current stage, the tax-exempt allowance [7] could be raised to 10,000 yuan based on monthly per capita household income, with the taxable income being the balance of actual monthly per capita income minus 10,000 yuan. Second, for the portion of monthly per capita household income exceeding 80,000 yuan (or taxable income exceeding 70,000 yuan), a top marginal tax rate of 60% can be implemented. In many countries, the top marginal personal income tax rate is quite high. For example, in individual countries, it has exceeded 60%; countries where it exceeds 50% are very numerous (such as Denmark, the Netherlands, Finland, France, and Japan, which have all reached such high levels). Finally, we assume that regarding the factor of providing labor, a monthly per capita household income of 50,000 yuan (or taxable income of 40,000 yuan) roughly represents a "ceiling" in the market; beyond this level, non-labor factors likely exist in the determination of income. These factors are extremely complex and difficult to identify specifically. For instance, an individual’s image, fame, or advertising effect play an increasingly important role in income determination. Therefore, above this ceiling, four special brackets can be established. Among them, for those whose monthly per capita household income exceeds 80,000 yuan (taxable income over 70,000 yuan), the top marginal rate of 60% applies. This approach balances several aspects: first, the top marginal tax rate for labor income (15%) is no longer higher than the top marginal tax rate for capital factors (25% or 20%). Why set the top marginal rate for labor income at 15%? This is mainly based on the preferential tax rates (15%) formulated for high-end talent in places like Shenzhen and the Greater Bay Area [8], which is also close to the top marginal rate in Hong Kong. Second, it provides a stronger adjustment for "ultra-high income" earners (those whose income determination is primarily driven by non-labor factors while labor factors play only a partial role). Compared to the existing personal income tax system, the corresponding top marginal rate for labor income would decrease, while that for non-labor income would increase. Thus, it can be expected that such taxation will both help achieve common prosperity across all social strata and better reflect the contribution of ultra-high earners to national fiscal revenue; furthermore, even under such a system, the after-tax income of ultra-high earners would remain very high.
Table 1: Proposed Revisions to Personal Income Tax Based on Monthly Per Capita Household Income (Table content omitted in source text)
Two further points require clarification here. First, in China's current personal income tax system, the top marginal rate is 45%. For those whose income is derived purely from providing labor, this marginal rate is clearly too high; yet for ultra-high earners whose income relies primarily on non-labor factors, it is clearly too low. The aforementioned design has another advantage: the vast majority of people who obtain ultra-high income through non-labor factors can only obtain such income within China, so the possibility of (international) tax leakage is relatively small. Meanwhile, high-quality workers could be secured domestically due to tax incentives, which would simultaneously exert an attraction for international talent. Second, it is necessary to have a comprehensive understanding of the taxation of labor and capital income. In this way, when comparing taxes on labor income versus capital income, a clearer concept can be established. Some might argue that capital has high international mobility and that setting the top marginal tax rate high for capital income will lead to capital flight. However, we must recognize that taxation is only one factor determining such mobility. The U.S. sets its top marginal rate on capital gains relatively low (and has historically trended downward) for two main reasons: first, it is a function of the social system—that is, the rulers must give the most consideration to the interests of capitalists. Second, the U.S. can conduct fiscal financing by issuing government bonds to foreign entities (part of which is used to roll over debt). This is equivalent to saying the U.S. utilizes its dollar hegemony to levy less tax on American capital gains. China’s situation is very different.
Some might argue that capital income is unstable and enterprises may suffer losses, and when they do, the government does not provide subsidies; whereas labor income is stable. In fact, this latter point is a misconception, as workers may also face unemployment. Once unemployed, the source of income is interrupted, but life must go on. Additionally, indirect taxes increase the individual tax burden in a hidden manner. In China, VAT is one of the primary tax categories; after paying income tax, individuals must still pay VAT when purchasing goods and services. Under this tax system, the individual tax burden level (the ratio of all taxes to income) is not reflected solely in income tax; one might even see an inversion where the tax burden level correlates inversely with income level. Therefore, when determining tax-exempt allowances and progressive brackets for corporate and personal income tax, comprehensive consideration must be given. The vast majority of urban and rural working people should pay little or no comprehensive labor income tax. This would reflect the "people-centered" new path of development, distinguishing it from the "capital-centered" evil path [9] of Western capitalist countries.
(2) We should as soon as possible introduce a high-rate "Expatriation Tax" [10] (drawing on the U.S., France, Canada, etc., referring to taxpayers who renounce Chinese citizenship), "Inheritance Tax" (drawing on Japan, etc.), and "Capital Gains Tax" (drawing on the U.S., etc., referring to taxpayers not specialized in real estate or securities trading), and seek to prevent and stop the massive transfer of Chinese assets via offshore trusts.
V. Implementing Compulsory Senior High School Education, Free Healthcare, and Housing Policies Conducive to Common Prosperity
To promote common prosperity across all social strata, it is necessary to make policy efforts in areas such as educational equalization and free healthcare. There are three main points: First, fully upgrade compulsory education to the senior high school stage—that is, adopting a 12-year compulsory education system. Within this, China particularly needs to strengthen vocational education. The goal is to create a more equitable human resource foundation at the starting point, promoting common prosperity from the source. Second, promote regional equalization of basic education while accounting for labor mobility. This involves strengthening basic education in rural areas especially, laying the necessary foundation for rural children to achieve upward social mobility in the future. Third, implement a free healthcare system and policy as soon as possible. Both China before the Reform and Opening-up [11] and many capitalist countries implemented free healthcare; to demonstrate the achievements and institutional superiority of socialist Reform and Opening-up, it is necessary to restore the free healthcare system and mechanisms as soon as possible. Currently, when a family member suffers health problems—particularly hospitalization for major illness—it can have a profound, long-term impact on future income, wealth, and even quality of life due to the suspension or loss of labor capacity and the burden of high medical costs. Thus, it is necessary to establish a policy-based insurance mechanism with minimal individual contribution to distribute and smooth such shocks to promote common prosperity.
China implements state ownership for urban land and collective ownership for rural land. In a market economy, both urban and rural land values are influenced by location; however, the ownership of "attachments to the land" (buildings) is often not held by the state or the rural collective. Consequently, a series of problems follow, and many difficulties exist in achieving the goal of "returning value appreciation to the public" [12]. Taking private residences as an example: because owners work, live, and socialize around their housing long-term, certain compensation is required during expropriation. The problem is what standard should be used for compensation. Should it be the market value plus a certain premium? If so, almost all the appreciation is captured by the owner; if the owner has a large residential area, they will become "suddenly wealthy" due to the expropriation. The resulting problem is that those with many houses or those being expropriated become wealthy based on locational factors, creating a special stratum. This runs contrary to common prosperity for all social strata. In secondary property transactions, two further difficulties arise: first, high brokerage fees lead to real estate agencies monopolizing the market and profiting by driving up prices, causing the wealth status of those with no or little housing to shift downward; second, the rising cost of land expropriation by the government adversely affects the renovation of old towns and other construction in old urban areas. It is generally believed that state ownership of land provides an advantage—namely, convenience for construction projects and the avoidance of many troubles in the land acquisition process. However, when there are private attachments to the land, this advantage may cease to exist. Therefore, to eliminate common prosperity challenges caused by locational factors and to remove obstacles to subsequent economic development, proper policy arrangements are needed to control housing prices. Examples include significantly reducing real estate brokerage fees and penalizing related monopolistic and price-manipulating behavior.
Generally speaking, a property tax should be levied. The optimal plan is to determine a certain tax-exempt amount or area for every citizen over the age of 18 (families could choose either) based on the income and housing prices of different regions, ensuring that the majority of residents do not have to pay tax, so as not to affect their quality of life. Naturally, for those exceeding the amount or area, there should be narrow brackets and steeply progressive tax rates. It should be noted that the primary purpose of such taxation is to suppress real estate speculation and the wealth gap in housing. Which specific plan can achieve the objective of property tax should first be discussed by the whole people, and introduced only after the plan is perfected (Cheng Enfu, 2021). To this end, a national housing census should be conducted as soon as possible to clarify China’s housing "family assets." Drawing on the experience of other countries, necessary measures—including taxes and fees—should be immediately applied to vacant and idle housing to encourage their rental or sale, thereby suppressing rising house prices, regulating housing resources, and restoring fairness.
Enhancing the mechanisms for labor competition [13] and improving the material and spiritual incentives for laborers are crucial. Since the inception of the New Era, the CPC Central Committee, with Comrade Xi Jinping as the core, has attached great importance to carrying forward the spirit of model workers and craftsmanship. It has proposed a series of major initiatives regarding the cultivation of a high-quality workforce and the promotion of high-quality development. We must deeply study the new characteristics of labor competition under the conditions of a socialist market economy, giving full play to the leading role of labor competition in improving labor productivity and promoting the comprehensive development of laborers. This requires establishing and improving a spirit-oriented incentive mechanism centered on the titles of "Model Worker" and "May 1st Labor Medal," while simultaneously strengthening material incentives through the reform of the distribution system to ensure that the fruits of labor competition benefit all laborers, thereby promoting common prosperity.
To achieve these goals, we must also focus on the following policy directions:
First, we should improve the primary distribution system that prioritizes labor contribution while also taking efficiency and fairness into account. By increasing the share of labor compensation in the primary distribution and improving the mechanism for stable wage growth, we can ensure that the income of the working class grows in tandem with the increase in productive forces. This is a fundamental requirement for maintaining the socialist nature of our relations of production.
Second, we must strengthen the redistribution mechanism through taxation, social security, and transfer payments. This involves deepening the reform of the personal income tax system and optimizing the structure of public expenditure to ensure that basic public services are shared more equitably among all social strata. This is an essential component of the Five-Sphere Integrated Plan to promote social harmony and justice.
Third, we must persist in the mass line and promote whole-process people's democracy within the economic sphere. By strengthening the democratic management of enterprises and institutions, we ensure that laborers have a voice in the distribution of surplus value [14] and the development of their workplaces. This approach embodies the principle of "people-centered development" and helps resolve the "Four Winds" by curbing bureaucratism and formalism in labor relations.
Finally, we must uphold the fundamentals and break new ground in our theoretical research and policy practice. We must continue to seek truth from facts and advance with the times, integrating the basic tenets of historical materialism and dialectical materialism with the concrete realities of China's current stage of development. Only by doing so can we successfully advance Chinese-path modernization and ultimately realize the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.
[17] Xu Wenbin and Dong Jinming, 2020: "Capitalism, Socialism, and Market Competition: Re-proposing Socialist Labor Competition," Haipai Economics [15], Issue 1, pp. 121–130.
(Authors: Cheng Enfu is a Member of the Academic Division of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS), and a Chief Professor and Doctoral Supervisor at the University of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences; Wu Shanlin is a Professor and Doctoral Supervisor at the School of Economics, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics)
Online Editor: Xinran Source: Research on Political Economy, 2021, Issue 2.