as a tax on entry 英翻中...

**勿用翻譯軟體 翻譯網站**

我把前文post出來, 避免問題模糊不清, 但是, 我實際要問的是第二點跟第三點...

A certain level of competition is therefore developing under the current policies. Nevertheless, in the longer term, the policy approach of regulating entry to promote infrastructure development can be questioned:

First, competition itself provides powerful incentives to enhance network penetration. By diminishing competition in the market place, it is possible that the mechanism is reducing the overall level of new investment relative to the situation in which there are no restrictions on entry. There need be no policy trade-off between network build-out and competition. Competition itself provides strong incentives for new investment.

Second, as a tax on entry, this tax is relatively non-transparent. It is difficult to observe the price that consumers are paying in the form of reduced competition. Third, the network investment obligations set out in the concession (which must be specified many months or years in advance) may restrict the ability of the new entrants to respond to new technological, demand and market developments in the industry as they arise.

1 個解答

  • T40
    Lv 5
    1 0 年前



    執照發放形成的門檻,可以看做是一種稅(tax on entry應該是取得許可執照需付出高額的費用,或是其他如后討論的投資項目),由於這種稅比較不透明(不是一種明白的稅目),很難估計消費者將因之付出多少代價(因為高額執照許可費造成的寡佔/競爭減少,消費者因而無法享受完全競爭帶來的好處)。