制度創新與工具協同：企業重整中債務重組所得稅困境的體系化解決方案

A Systematic Solution to the Corporate Income Tax Dilemma of Debt Restructuring in Bankruptcy Reorganization

債務重組收益是否徵收企業所得稅，是當前企業重整面臨的突出難題。依照現行稅法對重整收益即時徵稅，往往使剛剛恢復經營能力的重整企業因無力承擔稅負而再度陷入困境，甚至導致重整計畫失敗。這一困境的根源在於：《中華人民共和國企業破產法》所追求的「企業拯救」價值目標，與現行稅法基於正常經營狀態設計的「即時課稅」規則之間，存在根本性的制度衝突。
值得關注的是，《中華人民共和國企業破產法》修訂草案第140條確立了重整中「債權人減免債務人債務，依法屬於不徵稅收入」的核心規則，為破解重整所得稅困境帶來了關鍵性的制度曙光。該條款首次從立法層面確立了破產狀態的稅收例外原則，直擊重整企業痛點，為化解重整所得稅困境奠定了制度基礎。但該條目前僅為原則性規定，債務重組所得免稅所對應的虧損結轉、稅務屬性延續及會計處理銜接等配套規則尚待細化。
本文旨在論證，破解重整中債務重組所得稅困境的核心路徑在於制度突破與實務落地的雙重結合：一方面，推動第140條配套規則的落地，完善司法重整稅收制度體系；另一方面，挖掘現有政策框架下的技術手段與工具價值，為庭外重組提供實操支撐。最終使市場主體能夠基於清晰的稅收規則與專業的工具方法，在庭外重組與司法重整之間做出精準選擇，實現「該程序內則程序內，該庭外則庭外」的靈活適配，真正為有價值的困境企業搭建起全路徑的拯救體系。

Whether debt restructuring income should be subject to corporate income tax constitutes a prominent challenge currently confronting enterprise reorganization. Taxing restructuring income in real time under the existing tax law often renders reorganizing enterprises－having barely regained operational capacity－unable to bear the tax burden, plunging them back into distress and even causing the reorganization plan to fail. The root of this predicament lies in a fundamental institutional conflict between the“enterprise rescue”value pursued by the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law and the“real-time taxation”rules designed under the existing tax law for normal business operations.
Notably, Article 140 of the Draft Revision to the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law establishes a core rule providing that“where creditors reduce or exempt a debtor’s debts, such income shall be treated as non-taxable income,”casting a crucial ray of institutional hope for resolving the reorganization income tax dilemma. This provision, for the first time, establishes at the legislative level a tax exception principle for the bankruptcy context, directly addressing the pain points of reorganizing enterprises and laying the institutional foundation for resolving the income tax predicament in reorganization. However, the article remains a principled provision; the supporting rules－including loss carry　forward, continuity of tax attributes, and coordination of accounting treatment corresponding to the tax exemption for debt restructuring income－have yet to be refined.
This article seeks to demonstrate that the core pathway to resolving the debt restructuring income tax dilemma in reorganization lies in a dual approach combining legislative breakthrough and practical implementation: on the one hand, promoting the implementation of supporting rules for Article 140 to perfect the tax regime for judicial reorganization; on the other hand, exploring the value of technical instruments and tools within the existing policy framework to provide practical support for out-of-court restructuring. The ultimate goal is to enable market entities to make precise choices between out-of-court restructuring and judicial reorganization based on clear tax rules and professional methodologies, achieving flexible adaptation－“in-court where appropriate, out-of-court where appropriate”－and thereby truly building a full-pathway rescue system for viable distressed enterprises.