某单位（一般纳税人按月纳税）2019年4月购入一间商铺，并取得增值税专用发票，购入商铺的不动产进项税额___抵扣。

某单位（一般纳税人按月纳税）2018年11月购入一层写字楼，取得增值税专用发票，购入写字楼的不动产进项税额在2018年12月申报抵扣了60%，剩下的40%最早可在2019年___申报抵扣。

2019年5月，某企业（一般纳税人按月纳税）对已使用过3年的不动产进行改建，改建中发生进项税20万元，改建工程当月完工并均取得增值税专用发票，则以下说法正确的是___。

根据《财政部税务总局海关总署关于深化增值税改革有关政策的公告》（财政部税务总局海关总署公告2019年第39号）规定，生产、生活性服务业纳税人，是指提供邮政服务、电信服务、现代服务、生活服务取得的销售额占全部销售额的比重超过___的纳税人。如果该纳税人四项服务销售额的占比符合条件，则可以适用加计抵减进项税额的政策。

张某是销售童装的小规模纳税人，2019年5月的销售额为80000元，当月应纳增值税为___元

根据《财政部 税务总局关于实施小微企业普惠性税收减免政策的通知》（财税〔2019〕13号）规定, 对月销售额___元以下（含本数）的增值税小规模纳税人，免征增值税。

2019年1月17日，财政部、税务总局印发《关于实施小微企业普惠性税收减免政策的通知》（财税〔2019〕13号），规定自2019年1月1日至2021年12月31日，由省、自治区、直辖市人民政府根据本地区实际情况，以及宏观调控需要确定，对增值税小规模纳税人可以在一定的税额幅度内减征部分地方税费，该幅度为___。

2018年我国统一所有行业增值税小规模纳税人的经营规模标准为年应征増值税销售额___及以下

2018年9月5日，财政部、税务总局印发《关于金融机构小微企业贷款利息收入免征增值税政策的通知》（财税〔2018〕91号），明确自2018年9月1日至2020年12月31日，将符合条件的小型企业、微型企业和个体工商户贷款利息收入免征增值税单户授信额度上限提高到___。

2018年8月31日，第十三届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第五次会议通过了《全国人民代表大会常务委员会关于修改＜中华人民共和国个人所得税法＞的决定》，明确修改后的个人所得税法将于2019年1月1日起施行，___起先行施行新的减除费用标准（俗称“起征点”）和税率表。

根据2018年修改后的《中华人民共和国个人所得税法》，在中国境内无住所又不居住，或者无住所而一个纳税年度内在中国境内居住累计不满___的个人，为非居民个人。非居民个人从中国境内取得的所得，依照本法规定缴纳个人所得税。

2011年个人所得税法修订后，工薪资金的税率表由5%—45%九级超额累进税率变更为现在的___。

根据2018年修改后的个人所得税法规定，个人将其所得对公益慈善事业进行捐赠的，捐赠额未超过纳税人申报的应纳税所得额的___，可以从其应纳税所得额中扣除。

根据2018年修改后的个人所得税法的规定，减除费用标准从每月3500元提高至每年___。

根据《个人所得税法实施条例》规定，个人独资企业和合伙企业投资者的生产经营所得依法计征个人所得税时，个人独资企业和合伙企业投资者本人如果没有综合所得的，应当减除费用每年___。

根据《国务院关于印发个人所得税专项附加扣除暂行办法的通知》（国发〔2018〕41号）关于子女教育的扣除规定，纳税人的子女接受全日制学历教育的相关支出，按照每个子女每月___元的标准定额扣除。其中，学历教育包括义务教育（小学、初中教育）、高中阶段教育（普通高中、中等职业、技工教育)、高等教育（大学专科、大学本科、硕士研究生、博士研究生教育）。

根据《国务院关于印发个人所得税专项附加扣除暂行办法的通知》（国发〔2018〕41号）关于子女教育的扣除规定，纳税人的子女接受___的相关支出，可以按照规定的标准定额扣除。

根据《国务院关于印发个人所得税专项附加扣除暂行办法的通知》（国发〔2018〕41号）关于继续教育的扣除规定，纳税人在中国境内接受学历（学位）继续教育的支出，在学历（学位）教育期间按照每月___元定额扣除。同一学历（学位）继续教育的扣除期限不能超过48个月。

根据《国务院关于印发个人所得税专项附加扣除暂行办法的通知》（国发〔2018〕41号）关于继续教育的扣除规定，纳税人接受技能人员职业资格继续教育、专业技术人员职业资格继续教育的支出，在取得相关证书的当年，按照___元定额扣除。

根据《国务院关于印发个人所得税专项附加扣除暂行办法的通知》（国发〔2018〕41号）关于住房租金的扣除规定，直辖市、省会（首府）城市、计划单列市以及国务院确定的其他城市，扣除标准为每月___元；除前述所列城市以外，市辖区户籍人口超过100万的城市，扣除标准为每月（ ）元；市辖区户籍人口不超过100万的城市，扣除标准为每月（ ）元。

根据《国务院关于印发个人所得税专项附加扣除暂行办法的通知》（国发〔2018〕41号）关于住房贷款利息的扣除规定，纳税人享受住房贷款利息专项附加扣除，应当留存___。

根据《国务院关于印发个人所得税专项附加扣除暂行办法的通知》（国发〔2018〕41号）关于住房贷款利息的扣除规定，纳税人本人或者配偶单独或者共同使用商业银行或者住房公积金个人住房贷款为本人或者其配偶购买中国境内住房，发生的首套住房贷款利息支出，在实际发生贷款利息的年度，按照每月___元的标准定额扣除，扣除期限最长不超过240个月。纳税人只能享受一次首套住房贷款的利息扣除。

根据《国务院关于印发个人所得税专项附加扣除暂行办法的通知》（国发〔2018〕41号）关于大病医疗的扣除规定，在一个纳税年度内，纳税人发生的与基本医保相关的医药费用支出，扣除医保报销后个人负担（指医保目录范围内的自付部分）累计超过（）元的部分，由纳税人在办理年度汇算清缴时，在___元限额内据实扣除。

居民个人取得综合所得，按年计算个人所得税；有扣缴义务人的，由扣缴义务人按月或者按次预扣预缴税款；需要办理汇算清缴的，应当在取得所得的次年___内办理汇算清缴。

根据个人所得税法规定，纳税人取得经营所得，在取得所得的___前办理汇算清缴。

根据《财政部 税务总局 科技部关于提高研究开发费用税前加计扣除比例的通知》（财税〔2018〕99号）规定，2018年1月1日至2020年12月31日期间，企业开展研发活动中实际发生的研发费用，未形成无形资产计入当期损益的，在按规定据实扣除的基础上，再按照实际发生额的___在税前加计扣除；形成无形资产的，在上述期间按照无形资产成本的（ ）在税前摊销。

根据《财政部 税务总局 科技部关于企业委托境外研究开发费用税前加计扣除有关政策问题的通知》（财税〔2018〕64号）规定，关于企业委托境外进行研究开发活动所发生的费用，以下说法错误的是___。

根据《关于扩大固定资产加速折旧优惠政策适用范围的公告》(财政部 税务总局公告2019年第66号)规定，将适用固定资产加速折旧优惠的行业范围扩大至___。

根据《财政部税务总局关于设备器具扣除有关企业所得税政策的通知》（财税〔2018〕54号）规定，企业在2018年1月1日至2020年12月31日期间新购进的设备、器具，单位价值不超过500万元的，允许___。

下列各项中，准予在计算企业所得税应纳税所得额时据实扣除的是___。

根据《财政部税务总局关于企业职工教育经费税前扣除政策的通知》（财税〔2018〕51号）规定，自2018年1月1日起，企业发生的职工教育经费支出，在企业所得税前扣除的比例限额由不超过工资薪金总额2.5%提高至___。

根据《财政部、国家税务总局关于延长高新技术企业和科技型中小企业亏损结转年限的通知》（财税〔2018〕76号）规定，自2018年1月1日起，当年具备高新技术企业或科技型中小企业资格的企业，其具备资格年度之前5个年度发生的尚未弥补完的亏损，准予结转以后年度弥补，最长结转年限由5年延长至___。

为支持集成电路设计和软件产业发展，依法成立且符合条件的集成电路设计企业和软件企业，在2018年12月31日前自获利年度起计算优惠期，享受“两免三减半”优惠政策的税种是___。

2018年1月1日后投资新设的集成电路线宽小于65纳米或投资额超过150亿元，且经营期在___年以上的集成电路生产企业或项目，第一年至第五年免征企业所得税，第六年至第十年按照25%的法定税率减半征收企业所得税，并享受至期满为止。

2018年1月1日后投资新设的集成电路线宽小于130纳米，且经营期在___年以上的集成电路生产企业或项目，第一年至第二年免征企业所得税，第三年至第五年按照25%的法定税率减半征收企业所得税，并享受至期满为止。

2019年，财政部、税务总局联合发布了《关于保险企业手续费及佣金支出税前扣除政策的公告》（财政部、国家税务总局公告2019年第72号），对保险企业发生的手续费及佣金支出企业所得税进行税前扣除的比例提高至___。

2011年7月27日，财政部、海关总署、税务总局印发《关于深入实施西部大开发战略有关税收政策问题的通知》（财税〔2011〕58号），规定自2011年1月1日至2020年12月31日起，对设在西部地区的鼓励类产业企业减按___的税率征收企业所得税。

2018年，我国将服务贸易创新发展试点地区技术先进型服务企业所得税优惠政策推广至全国实施。即：在全国范围内认定为技术先进型服务企业（服务贸易类）的企业所得税适用税率是___。

根据《财政部 税务总局关于创业投资企业和天使投资个人有关税收政策的通知》（财税〔2018〕55号）规定，创投企业和天使投资个人投向种子期、初创期科技型企业，符合规定条件的可按投资额的一定比例抵扣其应纳税所得额。这个抵扣比例是___。

根据《财政部、税务总局关于实施小微企业普惠性税收减免政策的通知》（财税〔2019〕13号）规定, 2019年新出台的小型微利企业所得税优惠政策，引入新的计税方法，对年应纳税所得额不超过300万元的小型微利企业，按应纳税所得额分为两段计算，一是对年应纳税所得额不超过100万元的部分，减按25%计入应纳税所得额，并按20%的税率计算缴纳企业所得税，实际税负为（ ）；二是对年应纳税所得额超过100万元但不超过300万元的部分，减按50%计入应纳税所得额，并按20%的税率计算缴纳企业所得税，实际税负为___。

真象和假象的区别在于___

有的哲学家说，在大风扬起的尘土中，每一粒尘土的运动状况都是纯粹必然的。这是种___

“或然率”是指___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What does the author think of the 2015 report by the Census Bureau?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What does the author say about the Jones-Klenow method?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What do Jones and Klenow think of the comparison between France and the U.S. in terms of real consumption per person?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What is an advantage of the Jones-Klenow method?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What can we infer from the passage about American people’s economic well-being?___

大学生的成才目标是___。

现代人才素质的灵魂是___。

___是人才素质的基础.

世界政治格局发展的必然趋势是___。

在全面发展的教育中德、智、体、美是缺一不可，统一存在的，其中处于主导地位的是___。

时代精神的内涵十分丰富，其中___居于核心地位。

民族精神是一个民族赖以生存和发展的精神支撑。中华民族在五千年的发展中所形成的伟大民族精神的核心是___。

下列名言反映中华民族是一个艰苦奋斗的民族的有___。

___是人才素质的基本内容

10。___是我们立党立国的根本指导思想

衡量大学生全面发展的一个重要标准是___

独立生活意识指___

___作为社会主义核心价值体系的精髓，解决的是应当具备什么样的精神状态和精神风貌的问题。

___是人才素质的综合体现.

人们对生活在其中的世界及人与世界的关系的总的看法和根本观点就是___

人生观的核心是___

人的本质属性是___

社会主义社会人生价值标准是___

回答人为什么活着___

表明人应当怎样对待生活___

判别什么样的人生才有意义___

下列人生态度中正确的是___

下列属于正确的人生目的的是___

___认为,金钱可以主宰一切.

___ 认为，社会和他人是达到个人目的的手段。

___认为，人生的全部内容就在于满足感官的需求与快乐。

马克思对于人的本质的论断确立与___

人与自然关系的实质是___

在社会交往和公共生活中公民应该遵守的道德准则是___

社会公德最基本的要求是___

通过其规定和实施，影响人们思想，培养和提高人们法律意识，引导人们依法行为的作用是法律的___

有序的公共生活是构建和谐社会的___