Through the positive interaction between public opinion, legislation and law, we are more likely and hope to usher in the spring of democratic and scientific legislation, and more likely to further improve and ensure the quality of legislation, truly realize good law and good governance, and effectively promote the process of building a socialist country under the rule of law.

On July 28, the 30 day public consultation on the Individual Income Tax Law Amendment (Draft) ended. According to the website of the National People's Congress of China, more than 130000 comments were solicited on this draft, which is much more popular than the other three draft laws solicited in the same period.

This popularity is not uncommon, after all, it is a law related to almost everyone and every family's money bag. Looking at the reports of CCTV, Beijing Daily and other media, it is not difficult to find that these suggestions are not only in large quantity, but also in high quality. First, these recommendations represent the voices of different groups. For example, some singles noticed that deductions such as "children's education" were more inclined to care for married people, which was considered unfair; Some "middle class" with senior citizens and junior citizens suggested that "expenses for supporting the elderly and caring for infants and young children" should be included in the deduction.

Secondly, these suggestions involve many aspects and directions of individual income tax reform, how appropriate the threshold is, how to adjust it, how to calculate special additional deductions, what procedures are there, how to prove these expenditures, and whether it is more reasonable to collect by family, etc. In addition, many insiders also put forward some institutionalized suggestions. For example, with regard to the adjustment of the threshold, some experts proposed that a dynamic adjustment mechanism should be established, that is, the threshold should be adjusted year by year with the changes in basic living costs, prices and consumption structure. Some also suggested that the threshold should be linked to the level of economic development in various regions.

Although some suggestions may not be mature, and it is unknown whether they will be adopted in the end, it must be recognized that this solicitation of opinions has driven a passion and atmosphere for all people to participate in discussions and offer suggestions. This collision and game of different ideas and views has also completed a popularization of law.

In fact, it is no stranger to ask for public opinions on the revision of individual tax laws. The last revision of the law was in 2011, when more than 230000 pieces of public comments were solicited, creating the largest number of single legislative comments solicited. It was also driven by these 230000 comments that the threshold was raised from the originally proposed 3000 yuan to 3500 yuan. In 2005, it was also a tax law amendment, and the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress held a legislative hearing for the first time... The amendment of the tax laws has always aroused the initiative and enthusiasm of people to participate in legislation, offer advice and suggestions, and the relevant legislative organs are also trying to respect and respond to this concern and public opinion, so as to do a good job.

From closed door legislation to open door legislation, and then to the gradual improvement of open door legislation, this process has witnessed the growth and perfection of China's legislative system, and even the progress of the rule of law.

To this day, the draft laws that the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress first deliberated and continues to deliberate on have been released to the public for comments in a timely manner, which has become a legislative "prescriptive action". At the same time, the Decision of the State Council on Amending the Regulations on the Procedures for the Formulation of Administrative Regulations issued in January this year clearly states that "the drafting department shall publish the draft administrative regulations and their explanations to the public for comments, except for those that the State Council has decided not to publish." From "may" to "should", The change reflects that soliciting opinions is becoming more "rigid"; From soliciting opinions when drafting laws to soliciting opinions when drafting administrative regulations, the expansion of the scope reflects the continuous strengthening of the awareness of legislative norms and procedures.

The report of the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China pointed out that "promoting scientific legislation, democratic legislation and legislation in accordance with the law, promoting development with good laws and ensuring good governance." Opening the door to legislation and soliciting public opinions is an important way and carrier to listen to the public opinion, pool the wisdom of the people, let laws and regulations more reflect the interests of the people, better meet the needs of the people, and realize democratic legislation; Before each law and regulation is passed, it is an important prerequisite and guarantee for more scientific and careful legislation, and for laws and regulations to be tenable, workable and effective to conduct more careful evaluation and deliberation on specific provisions and allow different groups to fully discuss and debate.

More importantly, through the positive interaction between public opinion, legislation and law, we are more likely and hope to usher in the spring of democratic and scientific legislation, and more likely to further improve and ensure the quality of legislation, truly realize good law and good governance, and effectively promote the process of building a socialist law governed country.

Of course, we still have to face up to the fact that there are still some aspects to be improved in the current open door legislation. For example, are all organs and departments with legislative authority firmly implementing the requirements of open door legislation? Is there any suspicion that some open door legislation has gone through the motions? Is there a situation where regulations "fall from the sky" and make the public unprepared? Can you give a more detailed explanation of the basis and reasons for adopting or not adopting the opinions of all parties?

Good suggestions promote good systems, and good systems promote good governance and new development. This is a virtuous circle that people like to see.