I. Defining the concept of land ownership At present, the land system involves at least the following concepts: 1, land ownership, that is, land property rights. There are two kinds of land property rights in China: state-owned land and collective land. The property right of state-owned land belongs to the state and the whole people. The property right of collectively owned land belongs to collective members (natural persons). 2. Land use right, that is, the right of land users (natural persons or legal persons) to use the land within a certain period of time after paying the land transfer fee. In China, the right to use residential land is 70 years, and the right to use industrial and commercial land is 50 years, but it is limited to the development and utilization of state-owned land. Only when collectively owned land is converted into state-owned land can commercial development be carried out, that is, "land acquisition". At present, the ongoing "land confirmation" in rural areas of China belongs to the "right to use" confirmation. 3. The ultimate ownership of land refers to the nominal ownership in the case of separation of land property right and land use right. The nominal ownership of land, that is, the ultimate ownership of land, has different meanings in different countries. Take three types as examples: land ownership in the United States includes the right to use, the right to trade and the right to inherit; Land ownership in China is divided into state-owned land and collective land, and land holders only have the right to use, but not the right to trade and inherit. At present, neither China nor the United States have the concepts of ultimate ownership or nominal ownership. The ownership of land in Britain belongs to the king, that is, the ultimate ownership of land owned by the king of England is also nominal ownership. Although the land holder only has the right to use the leased land, the longest lease term is 999 years, which is actually a permanent lease system, and its right to use can be regarded as land ownership. Second, study the land system reform under the existing legal framework in China. Because the existing laws and regulations of our country stipulate two kinds of land ownership: state ownership and collective ownership. Our analysis and research should put forward effective solutions to these two land systems. State-owned land is owned by the state and the whole people, which is no problem. However, the 70-year use right of state-owned land has caused many contradictions in reality. China's land use right is defined as 70 years, mainly drawing lessons from Hong Kong's practice (99 years is the upper limit), and the process of determining the fixed number of years is quite dramatic. According to insiders, at first, the land use period was defined as 50 years. There are three reasons: first, there is no experience in the history of land transfer, so it is better to adjust it in a shorter time; Second, a person's working life is generally 50 years. If you start working at the age of 20 and work for 50 years, by the age of 70, you can live a lifetime, be transferred, be inherited and be renewed. As for what to guarantee, there is no consideration; Third, it is considered that the service life of real estate is generally 50 years, and after 50 years, the real estate can no longer be used. According to its value, it is basically worthless after 50 years of use. At that time, when the central government was discussing the issue of land circulation, a major leader asked whether the land use period could be extended, saying that 50 years was too short and suggested increasing it by several decades. Later, the law was promulgated and it became the maximum service life of 70 years (50 years for industrial land). It can be seen that at that time, the 70-year stipulation of land use right in China was very arbitrary, which left many troubles and even contradictions for the current reform of state-owned land system. The resulting problems and contradictions seem to be solved in only two ways. The first is to reform and privatize the land system in the United States. But it doesn't work in China at present (not allowed by law). The second is to reform the land system in Britain, and make it clear that the land ownership of the country is the ultimate ownership and also the nominal ownership, while the land holder only has the right to use the land, but it is necessary to change the 70-year right to use it into a permanent right to use it, including of course the right to trade and the right to inherit, and determine it in the form of law. Among them, the land system in Taiwan Province Province can continue to maintain the existing privatization state of the integration of ownership and use right, but it is clear that the ultimate ownership belongs to the state. Implement "one country, two systems". The land system in Hong Kong evolved from the land system in Britain. Since Hongkong has returned to China in 1997, the ultimate ownership of the land naturally belongs to the state, but the 99-year lease should be changed to a long-term lease. Macao's land system is implemented with reference to Hong Kong. In this way, the land systems of Chinese mainland, Taiwan Province, Hongkong and Taiwan Province have achieved a high degree of unity and integration. The ultimate ownership of land, that is, nominal ownership, belongs to the state. If the land ownership and the right to use are separated for a long time, the state can collect land tax justifiably. For the reform of collectively owned land, we can boldly innovate according to law, and we don't need the agrarian revolution or the current reform of land use rights. Because there are many contradictions in the reform of rural farmland homestead ownership in China, there will be endless future troubles. In my opinion, it is unwise and thoughtless to transfer any right to use collective land, including mortgage, shareholding and transfer, before the land ownership is resolved. A better approach is to continue to implement the "contract system" on the one hand, and accelerate the study of rural collective land system reform on the other. At present, the central document has promised that the rural collective land contract 15 will remain unchanged for 30 years, and even a major leader of the central government has vowed to remain unchanged for 30 years, that is, forever, but it is unreliable after all. As a result, the current rural land infringement incidents occur frequently, and it is in a dilemma of "cutting chaos". Therefore, I think that although there is no ready-made international experience for reference in China's current collective land reform, it has advantages in terms of weather, geography and people, and it is appropriate to carry out privatization reform in one step. Because the land owned by the collective is different from the land owned by the state, its land ownership originally belongs to the collective members, and the definition of property rights is very clear, which can completely implement the reform from property rights to people. This reform is not only carried out within the existing legal framework of China, but also has the bonus of institutional innovation. Therefore, it is time to seriously study its reform plan. With the deepening of land system reform, many contradictions and problems in China society can be solved. After the extension of the service life of state-owned land, it will not change the nature of state-owned land, and it will naturally introduce property tax (of course, the property that has paid the land transfer fee for 70 years will have to pay the property tax after 70 years), and it can also prepare for the introduction of the next property tax. After the reform of the collective land system, the land owned by individual farmers can directly enter the market, be converted into state-owned land through fair trade, or be publicly traded in the market to realize its due value or build its own commercial housing. The so-called "small property right house" problem will also be solved. "Demolition" will disappear from China and people will live and work in peace and contentment. Moreover, it can be believed that with the deepening of the reform of the land system, house prices will never skyrocket irrationally as they are now. Because under the current land system and "land acquisition" mode in China, at least 50% of the real estate development income (Beijing survey is 61.54%; Shanghai survey is 42.42%; According to Forbes, more than 75% of the capital flows to the government. Faced with the rising real estate prices in China, which are almost out of control, some government think tanks not only failed to study and put forward measures to reform the land system, but also listed the so-called "levying property tax" as one of the policy suggestions to reduce housing prices, which is really incredible. Don't they understand that the tax burden in the process of real estate development is already quite high, and the tax increase policy that has been tried and tested repeatedly by the government is the root cause and culprit of China's record high housing prices and soaring rents? But "there is no such thing as a free lunch", if we don't carry out drastic land system reform. China real estate market will face two completely different embarrassing situations. On the one hand, a large number of houses in third-and fourth-tier cities such as Wenzhou, Erdos, Yingkou and Changzhou cannot be sold at all, and dangerous houses will continue to appear, and this phenomenon will gradually spread to other third-and fourth-tier cities; On the other hand, housing prices in first-and second-tier cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Hangzhou will continue to soar, which will further boost rents.