Editing One-child policy (section)

=== Financial ===

The Family Planning Policy was enforced through a financial penalty in the form of the "social child-raising fee", sometimes called a "family planning fine" in the West, which was collected as a fraction of either the annual disposable income of city dwellers or of the annual cash income of peasants, in the year of the child's birth.<ref>[[commons:File:Sichuan social fostering fee schedule.jpg#file|Summary of Family Planning notice on how FP fines are collected]]</ref> For instance, in Guangdong, the fee was between three and six annual incomes for incomes below the district's per capita income, plus one to two times the annual income exceeding the average. Families were required to pay the fine.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Heavy Fine for Violators of One-Child Policy |url=http://www.china.org.cn/english/government/224913.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130513005350/http://www.china.org.cn/english/government/224913.htm |archive-date=13 May 2013 |access-date=4 October 2013 |place=China}}</ref>

The one-child policy was a tool for China to not only address overpopulation, but to also address [[poverty alleviation]] and increase [[social mobility]] by consolidating the combined inherited wealth of the two previous generations into the investment and success of one child instead of having these resources spread thinly across multiple children.<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Choukhmane |first1=Taha |last2=Coeurdacier |last3=Jin |first3=Keyu |first2=Nicolas |title=The One-Child Policy and Household Saving |date=24 December 2021 |url=https://tahachoukhmane.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/CCJ2021_OneChildPolicy.pdf |website=tahachoukhmane.com}}</ref> This theoretically allowed for a "demographic dividend" to be realized, increasing economic growth and increasing gross national income per capita.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Hesketh |first1=Therese |last2=Zhou |first2=Xudong |last3=Wang |first3=Yun |date=2015-12-22 |title=The End of the One-Child Policy: Lasting Implications for China |journal=JAMA |language=en |volume=314 |issue=24 |pages=2619–2620 |doi=10.1001/jama.2015.16279 |pmid=26545258 |issn=0098-7484}}</ref>

If the family was not able to pay the "social child-raising fee", then their child would not be able to obtain a {{Lang|zh-latn|[[hukou]]}}, a legal registration document that was required in order to marry, attend state-funded schools, or to receive health care. Many who were unable to pay the fee never attempted to obtain their {{Lang|zh|hukou}} for fear that the government would force extra fees upon them. Although some provinces had declared that payment of the "social child-raising fee" was not required to obtain a {{Lang|zh|hukou}}, most provinces still required families to pay retroactive fines after registration.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Zhao |first=Kiki |date=8 February 2016 |title=Chinese Who Violated One-Child Policy Remain Wary of Relaxed Rules |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/09/world/asia/china-one-child-policy-hukou.html |access-date=8 October 2021 |issn=0362-4331}}</ref>