您的位置: 首页 » 法律资料网 » 法律法规 »

关于印发《中介服务收费管理办法》的通知

作者:法律资料网 时间:2024-05-11 02:02:31  浏览:8155   来源:法律资料网
下载地址: 点击此处下载

关于印发《中介服务收费管理办法》的通知

国家计委


关于印发《中介服务收费管理办法》的通知
计价格〔1999〕2255号
 
 
国务院各部委、各直属机构,各省、自治区、直辖市物价局(委员会)、计经委、财政厅(局)、监察厅(局)、审计厅(局)、纠风办:

  根据《中华人民共和国价格法》的有关规定,特制定《中介服务收费管理办法》。经国务院减轻企业负担部际联席会议批准,现印发给你们,请贯彻执行。

国家计委
国家经贸委
财政部
监察部
审计署
国务院纠风办

一九九九年十二月二十二日



中介服务收费管理办法

第一章 总 则

第一条 为适应建立和完善社会主义市场经济体制的要求,规范中介机构收费行为,维护中介机构和委托人的合法权益,促进中介服务业的健康发展,根据《中华人民共和国价格法》,制定本办法。

第二条 本办法适用于中华人民共和国境内独立执业、依法纳税、承担相应法律责任的中介机构提供中介服务的收费行为。

 根据法律、法规规定代行政府职能强制实施具有垄断性质的仲裁、认证、检验、鉴定收费,不适用本办法。

第三条 本办法所称的中介机构是指依法通过专业知识和技术报务,向委托人提供公证件、代理性、信息技术服务性等中介服务的机构。

(一)公证性中介机构具体指提供土地、房产、物品、无形资产等价格评估和企业资信评估服务,以及提供仲裁、检验、鉴定、认证、公证服务等机构;

(二)代理性中介机构具体指提供律师、会计、收养服务,以及提供专利、商标、企业注册、税务、报关、签证代理服务等机构;

(三)信息技术服务性中介机构具体指提供咨询、招标、拍卖、职业介绍、婚姻介绍、广告设计服务等机构。

第四条 中介机构实施收费必须具备下列条件:

(一)经政府有关部门批准,办理注册登记,取得法人资格证书;

(二)在有关法律、法规和政府规章中规定,须经政府有关部门或行业协会实施执业资格认证,取得相关市场准入资格的,按规定办理;

(三)依法进行税务登记,取得税务登记证书;

(四)未进行企业注册登记的非企业法人需向价格主管部门申领《收费许可证》。

第五条 中介机构提供服务并实施收费应遵循公开、公正、诚实信用的原则和公平竞争、自愿有偿、委托人付费的原则,严格按照业务规程提供质量合格的服务。

按照法律、法规和政府规章规定实施的中介服务,任何部门、单位和个人都不得以任何方式指定中介机构为有关当事人服务。

 第六条 中介服务收费实行在国家价格政策调控、引导下,主要由市场形成价格的制度。

(一)对咨询、拍卖、职业介绍、婚姻介绍、广告设计收费等具备市场充分竞争条件的中介服务收费实行市场调节价;

(二)对评估、代理、认证、招标服务收费等市场竞争不充分或服务双方达不到平等、公开服务条件的中介服务收费实行政府指导价;
(三)对检验、鉴定、公证、仲裁收费等少数具有行业和技术垄断的中介服务收费实行政府定价。

法律、法规另有规定的,从其规定。

第二章 收费管理权限的划分

  第七条 国务院价格主管部门负责研究制定中介服务收费管理的方针政策、收费标准核定的原则,以及制定和调整重要的政府定价或政府指导价的中介服务收费标准。

  国务院其他有关业务主管部门或全国性行业协会等社会团体应根据各自职责,协助国务院价格主管部门做好中介服务收费监督和管理工作。

  第八条 省、自治区、直辖市人民政府价格主管部门负责国家有关中介服务收费管理的方针政策的贯彻落实,制定分工管理的政府定价或政府指导价的中介服务收费标准。

  省级以下其他有关业务部门或同级行业协会等社会团体应根据各自职责,协助本级价格主管部门做好中介服务收费管理工作。

  第九条 实行政府定价、政府指导价的分工权限和适用范围,按中央和省级价格主管部门颁布的定价管理目录执行。定价目录以外的中介服务项目,实行市场调节价。

  第十条 对实行市场调节价的中介服务收费,政府价格主管部门应进行价格政策指导,帮助中介机构做好价格管理工作。

第三章 收费标准的制定

  第十一条 制定中介服务收费标准应以中介机构服务人员的平均工时成本费用为基础,加法定税金和合理利润,并考虑市场供求情况制定。

  法律、法规和政府规章指定承担特定中介报务的机构,其收费标准应按照补偿成本、促进发展的非营利的原则制定。

  中介服务收费标准应体现中介机构的资质等级、社会信誉,以及服务的复杂程度,保持合理的差价。

  第十二条 实行市场调节价的中介服务收费标准,由中介机构自主确定。实施服务收费时,中介机构可依据已确定的标准,与委托人商定具体收费标准。

  第十三条 价格主管部门制定或调整政府定价、政府指导价的中介服务收费标准,应认真测算、严格核定服务的成本费用,充分听取社会各方面的意见,并及时向社会公布。

第四章 收费行为的规范

  第十四条 应委托人的要求,中介机构实施收费应与委托人签订委托协议书。委托协议书应包括委托的事项、签约双方的义务和责任、收费的方式、收费金额和付款时间等内容。

  第十五条 中介机构向委托人收取中介服务费,可在确定委托关系后预收全部或部分费用,也可与委托人协商约定在提供服务期间分期收取或在完成委托事项后一次性收取。

  第十六条 中介机构应在收费场所显著的位置公布服务程序或业务规程、服务项目和收费标准等,实行明码标价,自觉接受委托人及社会各方面的监督,不得对委托人进行价格欺诈和价格歧视。

  第十七条 中介机构的行业协会等社会团体以及中介机构之间不得以任何理由相互串通,垄断或操纵服务市场,损害委托人的利益。

  第十八条 中介机构要严格执行国家有关收费管理的法规和政策,不得违反规定设立收费项目、扩大收费范围、提高收费标准。

  第十九条 中介机构不得以排挤竞争对手或者独占市场为目的,低于本单位服务成本收费,搞不正当竞争。

  第二十条 委托人可自主选择中介机构提供服务,中介机构不得强制或变相强制当事人接受服务并收费。

第五章 法律责任

  第二十一条 因中介机构过错或其无正当理由要求终止委托关系的,或因委托人过错或其无正当理由要求终止委托关系的,有关费用的退补和赔偿事宜依据《合同法》办理。

  第二十二条 中介机构与委托人之间发生收费纠纷,由所在地业务主管部门或行业协会协调处理,委托人对业务主管部门或行业协会的处理有异议的,可申请所在地价格主管部门协调处理,当事双方或其中一方对行政机关或行业协会协调处理仍有异议的,可协议申请仲裁或依法向人民法院起诉。

  第二十三条 中介机构违反本办法规定,有下列行为之一的,由价格主管部门依据《价格法》和《价格违法行为行政处罚规定》予以查处。

  (一)不符合本办法规定的收费条件,实施收费的;

  (二)违反收费管理权限,自立收费项目,自定收费标准收费的;

  (三)擅自提高收费标准、扩大收费范围、增加收费频次、超越收费时限收费的;

  (四)违反已签定的协议(合同)实施收费的;

  (五)违反自愿原则,与行政机关或行使行政职能的事业单位、行业组织联合下发文件或协议,强制或变相强制委托人购买指定产品或接受指定服务并收费的;

  (六)公证性的中介机构提供虚假服务成果收费的;

  (七)未按规定实行明码标价或对委托人进行价格欺诈、价格歧视的;

  (八)违反规定相互串通,垄断或操纵服务市场,损害委托人利益的;

  (九)违反规定搞不正当价格竞争,以低于本单位服务成本收费的;

  (十)其它违反本规定的收费行为。

第六章 附 则

  第二十四条 省、自治区、直辖市人民政府价格主管部门可依据本办法结合本地实际制定实施细则。

  第二十五条 本办法由国家计委负责解释。

  第二十六条 本办法自发布之日起实施。






下载地址: 点击此处下载
Chapter VII
Special Rules for Anti-dumping Disputes

OUTLINE

Section One Recourse of Anti-dumping Disputes to the DSB
I Introduction
II Sufficiency of Panel Request under the AD Agreement
(i) Art. 6.2 of the DSU and Article 17.4 of the AD Agreement
(ii) Art. 6.2 of the DSU and Article 17.5(i) of the AD Agreement
(iii) A Summary Guiding
III General Legal Basis for Claims against Legislation as Such
IV Special Rules for Claims against Anti-dumping Legislation as Such
(i) Introduction
(ii)General Legal Basis under Art. 17 of the AD Agreement
(iii) Understanding of Art. 17.4 of the AD Agreement
(iv) Extensive Basis in Context
(v) A Summary
Section Two Ad hoc Standard of Review for Anti-dumping Disputes
I Introduction
II Special Standard of Review under the AD Agreement: in General
(i) Ad hoc Approaches to Domestic Determination: Art. 17.6
(ii) Relationship between Art. 11 of the DSU and Art. 17.6 of the AD Agreement
(iii) A Summary Guiding
III Scope of Review of Fact-findings: Art. 17.5(ii) of the AD Agreement
(i)Overview of the GATT Practice
(ii)Concerned Rulings in Reports Issued by WTO Panels
(iii)Tentative Remarks: Guidance from the Appellate Body





Section One
Recourse of Anti-dumping Disputes to the DSB

I Introduction
Compared to the legally fragmented previous GATT dispute settlement system, the new WTO dispute settlement system is an integrated system with much broader jurisdiction and less scope for “rule shopping” and “forum shopping”. However, according to Art. 1.2 of the DSU which states in part that, “[t]he rules and procedures of this Understanding shall apply subject to such special or additional rules and procedures on dispute settlement contained in the covered agreements as are identified in Appendix 2 to this Understanding”, many covered agreements under the WTO jurisdiction continue to include special dispute settlement rules and procedures. Such special rules and procedures are listed in Appendix 2 to the DSU. And in this chapter, we will focus on such special dispute settlement rules concerning anti-dumping disputes, i.e. Arts. 17.4 through 17.7 of the Anti-dumping Agreement (‘the AD Agreement’).
An analysis of the DSB practice suggests a separate contribution of this chapter to this book, merited by dispute settlement proceedings in the anti-dumping field. In this chapter, the author focuses on the two main issues repeatedly raised, as preliminary or procedural issues, during dispute settlement regarding anti-dumping. One is the issue of recourse of anti-dumping disputes to the DSB, which deals mainly with Arts. 17.4 and 17.5(i) of the AD Agreement; the other one is the issue of standard of review in anti-dumping areas, which runs most on Art. 17.6, including Art. 17.5(ii), of the AD Agreement. And in this section we will focus on the first one. In this respect, Arts. 17.4 and 17.5(i) of the AD Agreement states:

“17.4 If the Member that requested consultations considers that the consultations pursuant to paragraph 3 have failed to achieve a mutually agreed solution, and if final action has been taken by the administering authorities of the importing Member to levy definitive anti-dumping duties or to accept price undertakings, it may refer the matter to the Dispute Settlement Body (“DSB”). When a provisional measure has a significant impact and the Member that requested consultations considers that the measure was taken contrary to the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 7, that Member may also refer such matter to the DSB.
17.5 The DSB shall, at the request of complaining party, establish a panel to examine the matter based upon:
(i) a written statement of the Member making the request indicating how a benefit accruing to it, directly or indirectly, under this Agreement has been nullified or impaired, or that the achieving of the objectives of the Agreement is being impeded, and
(ii) …”
II Sufficiency of Panel Request under the AD Agreement
Generally, as noted in previously, it is only where the provisions of the DSU and the special or additional rules and procedures of a covered agreement cannot be read as complementing each other that the special or additional provisions are to prevail. A special or additional provision should only be found to prevail over a provision of the DSU in a situation where adherence to the one provision will lead to a violation of the other provision, that is, in the case of a conflict between them. Then the author means to get down to the issue of whether these provisions cited above limits panel request under the AD Agreement to somehow other than those required by Art. 6.2 of the DSU.
In Mexico-HFCS (DS132), the dispute involves the imposition of a definitive anti-dumping measure by the Mexican Ministry of Trade and Industrial Development (SECOFI) on imports of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) from the United States. Mexico argues that the United States' request for establishment of this Panel is not consistent with the requirements of Art. 6.2 of the DSU and Art. 17.4 and 17.5(i) of the AD Agreement, and therefore argues that the Panel must terminate the proceeding without reaching the substance of the United States' claims.
(i) Art. 6.2 of the DSU and Art. 17.4 of the AD Agreement
In considering the alleged failure to assert claims under Art. 6.2 of the DSU and Art. 17.4 of the AD Agreement, the Panel rules that: 1
“[W]e note first that the Appellate Body has stated that Article 6.2 of the DSU and Article 17.4 of the AD Agreement are complementary and should be applied together in disputes under the AD Agreement. It has further stated that: ‘the word “matter” has the same meaning in Article 17 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement as it has in Article 7 of the DSU. It consists of two element: The specific “measure” and the “claims” relating to it, both of which must be properly identified in a panel request as required by Article 6.2 of the DSU.’

国家工商行政管理局关于重新发布《工业品买卖合同》等合同示范文本的通知

国家工商行政管理局


国家工商行政管理局关于重新发布《工业品买卖合同》等合同示范文本的通知
国家工商行政管理局
工商市字(2000)第216号




各省、自治区、直辖市及计划单列市工商行政管理局:
根据《中华人民共和国合同法》的有关规定,结合《工矿产品购销合同》等合同示范文本多年来推行使用的实践,国家工商行政管理局对原《工矿产品购销合同》等合同示范文本进行了修订,现重新予以发布,请做好推广使用工作。重新发布的合同示范文本,由各省、自治区、直辖市、计划单列市工商行政管理局指定印刷企业印制,并负责监制。当事人使用上述合同示范文本,可到当地工商行政管理机关领取。
附件:1.工业品买卖合同(GF-2000-0101)(略)
2.农副产品买卖合同(GF-2000-0151)(略)
3.加工合同(GF-2000-0301)(略)
4.定作合同(GF-2000-0302)(略)
5.承揽合同(GF-2000-0303)(略)
6.修缮修理合同(GF-2000-0307)(略)
7.租赁合同(GF-2000-0601)(略)
8.保管合同(GF-2000-0801)(略)
9.仓储合同(GF-2000-0901)(略)


2000年9月22日