Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 23 APRIL 2026

CRS2.0制度评析——金融资产扩围、离岸架构穿透与全球税收透明新范式

Jincheng Tongda & Neal
Jincheng Tongda & Neal
Contributor
Jincheng Tongda & Neal

Jincheng Tongda & Neal

JINCHENG TONGDA & NEAL (JT&N) was founded in Beijing in 1992. JT&N has distinguished itself as a...

View firm profile
Explore more from Jincheng Tongda & Neal

Hong Kong's submission of CRS 2.0 amendment legislation in April 2026 marks a pivotal shift in global tax transparency, expanding coverage to crypto assets and strengthening beneficial ownership identification. How do these systematic upgrades address the structural deficiencies of CRS 1.0, and what challenges remain in achieving effective cross-border tax information exchange?

Hong KongTechnology

01.引言

2026年4月,香港正式提交CRS相关修订条例草案,标志着CRS2.0立法落地正式启动,此前开曼、BVI等主要离岸金融中心已先行实施新规。CRS2.0是OECD整合新版申报规则与加密资产报告框架(CARF)形成的升级体系,针对旧规则漏洞实现全方位完善。与CRS1.0相比,CRS2.0在金融资产界定、穿透识别机制、信息申报颗粒度三个层面均有实质性调整。本文旨在从制度评析角度,系统梳理CRS2.0的核心修订内容,分析其对金融资产认定及离岸架构穿透的影响,并对其制度效果与潜在问题作出客观评述。

02.CRS1.0的制度缺陷

OECD于2014年出台CRS并于2017年逐步落地适用,长期实践中显现的固有缺陷,推动了本轮规则修订。

第一,加密资产覆盖空缺。CRS1.0基于传统银行体系定义“金融资产”,对去中心化、自托管、跨链可转移的加密资产基本没有约束力。加密资产以非托管形式存储于冷钱包或在去中心化交易所流转时,基本游离于申报体系之外。

第二,被动非金融实体穿透不足。离岸SPV、家族信托等结构在CRS1.0框架下被分类为“被动非金融实体”(PassiveNFE),名义上须穿透至控权人进行申报。但各法域对“控权人”识别标准执行宽严不一,自我认证的真实性核查偏弱,实践中形成了多层间接持有架构,身份与受益所有权之间的链条被人为拉长,最终税务居民国的追溯难度较大。[1]

第三,双重税务居民申报存在套利空间。针对双重税务居民身份的账户持有人,CRS1.0允许仅向单一“主要”税务居民国交换数据。这一设计初衷是为减少重复申报负担,但在实践中被用作身份套利工具。主体利用构建双重身份,选择性向低税辖区报送信息,规避高税地区信息披露。

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from