自2001年我国行政审批制度改革全面启动以来，国务院已十余次取消和调整行政审批项目。整体上，行政审批项目的数量呈明显下降趋势，行政备案作为相对缓和的监管方式被广泛适用于行政管理的各领域。然而由于行政备案的立法空白及理论研究的相对欠缺，导致行政备案的法律属性不明，在实践中出现了“许可式备案”。本文在理清我国许可式备案现状的基础上分析许可式备案的弊端与成因，并提出许可式备案规制建议。

本文题为“行政审批制度改革背景下的许可式备案研究”，共分三章。现将主要内容摘要如下：

第一章对许可式备案进行概述。根据对目前学界关于行政备案定义的观点并结合许可式备案的自身特性，总结出许可式备案的定义为“以备案的形式存在，实质上产生行政许可法律效果的行政备案事项。”笔者搜集了国务院各机构及北京、上海、深圳、成都共计96项许可式备案，总结出其具有以备案的形式存在、程序上往往表现为事前审查、行政机关对备案材料进行实质审查、产生行政许可的法律效果等特征。

第二章分析许可式备案的弊端与成因。首先为弊端，在合法性方面，许可式备案的设定规避了《行政许可法》存在违法缺陷，并且缺乏行政程序约束。在合理性方面，许可式备案会降低行政管理效能，使相对人承担不合理的成本和负担以及会破坏营商建设。其次，许可式备案的出现有现实根源，产生的主要原因有“全能政府”管理理念的束缚、《行政许可法》关于行政许可的严格限制以及行政备案的立法空白。

第三章对许可式备案提出规制建议。首先是源头治理避免许可式备案出现，主要做法有：其一，明确行政许可与行政备案的边界，划清许可与备案的事项范围，杜绝以备案之名行许可之实；其二，明确行政备案的审查要求，行政备案原则上只能进行形式审查；其三，明确行政备案的法律责任，针对行政机关超出行政备案范围的事项仍旧设定行政备案的或者增加行政相对人权利义务的行为，配置以较为严厉的行政处分责任，迫使行政机关在追责的压力下主动清退不符合备案规定的事项。其次是对目前的许可式备案进行清理，对符合行政许可设定条件且确需设定行政许可的事项转化为行政许可，对适合以备案的方式进行监管的事项转化为行政备案，不需要政府监管的事项及规范性文件设定的备案事项应当取消。

Since the reform of China's administrative examination and approval system was fully launched in 2001, the State Council has cancelled and adjusted administrative examination and approval items more than ten times. On the whole, the number of administrative examination and approval projects has shown a significant downward trend. As a relatively moderate supervision method, administrative filing is widely used in various fields of administrative management. However, due to the legislative blank of administrative filing and the relative lack of theoretical research, the legal nature of administrative filing is unclear, and "permissive filing" appears in practice. On the basis of clarifying the current situation of permission-based filing in my country, this paper analyzes the drawbacks and causes of permission-based filing, and proposes regulatory suggestions for permission-based filing.

This article is entitled "Research on permission-based filing under the background of administrative examination and approval system reform", and is divided into three chapters. The main contents are summarized as follows:

Chapter 1 provides an overview of licensing filing. According to the current academic views on the definition of administrative filing and combined with its own characteristics of permission-based filing, it is concluded that permission-based filing is defined as "administrative filing matters that exist in the form of filing and substantially produce the legal effect of administrative licensing." A total of 96 licensing-type filings from various agencies of the State Council and Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, and Chengdu have been concluded. They have the characteristics of existing in the form of filings, often manifested in advance in procedures, and have the legal effect of administrative licensing in substance.

The second chapter analyzes the disadvantages and causes of licensed filing. First of all, there are disadvantages. In terms of legality, the setting of permission-type filing avoids the "Administrative Permission Law", has illegal defects, and lacks administrative procedures. In terms of rationality, permission-based filing will reduce the efficiency of administrative management and increase the burden on administrative counterparts. Secondly, the emergence of permission-type filing has practical roots. The main reasons are the constraints of the management concept of "all-round government", the strict restrictions on administrative licensing in the "Administrative Permission Law", and the legislative blank of administrative filing.

The third chapter puts forward regulatory suggestions on licensing filing. The first is to control the source to avoid the appearance of permission-style filing. The main methods are: first, clarify the boundary between administrative licensing and administrative filing, demarcate the scope of licensing and filing matters, and prevent the fact of licensing in the name of filing; second, clarifying The review of administrative filing requires that, in principle, administrative filing can only be subject to formal review; third, clarify the legal responsibilities of administrative filing, and still establish administrative filing or increase the rights and obligations of administrative counterparts for matters beyond the scope of administrative filing. , and assign more severe administrative sanction responsibilities, forcing administrative organs to take the initiative to remove matters that do not meet the filing requirements under the pressure of accountability. The second is to clean up the current permit-type filing, convert the items that meet the conditions for setting administrative licenses and that really need to be set into administrative licenses, and convert the matters that are suitable for supervision by the way of filing into administrative filings, without the need for the government The regulatory matters and the filing items set in the normative documents shall be cancelled.