我国民事诉讼收费制度是移植于德国,与法院职权主义相适应而存在。传统民事诉讼理论认为此项收费有多重意义,如抑制讼累,增加政府收入等。但纵观中国几十年诉讼收费制度的实践,我们发现其不合理性愈见明显,主要表现为讼费负担不公、收取的依据不合理、法院乱收费现象甚为严重等。那么针对这种不合理现象,应如何应对?是盲目移植美国法国的较为合理的制度,还是根据我国民事诉讼收费的现状来进行改革?是完全免收讼费,还是实行有限的有偿主义收费?本文最终的目的是寻求我国目前民事诉讼收费的改革的正确之路。 China’s civil lawsuit charging system is transplanted in Germany, which is compatible with the court authority. Traditional civil litigation theory that the charges have multiple meanings, such as suppressing litigation, increasing government revenue. However, looking at the practices of China’s lawsuit charging system over the past decades, we find it more and more obvious that the unreasonableness is more obvious. This is mainly reflected in the unjustness of the lawsuit, the unreasonable basis of charges, and the unlawful charging by the courts. So how should we deal with this unreasonable phenomenon? Is it a relatively reasonable system to blindly transplanting the United States and France, or is it to be reformed according to the status quo of China’s civil lawsuits? Is it free of litigation costs or is it limited to pay for fees? The ultimate goal of this article is to find the right way to reform civil charges in China.