We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Reduce Double Taxation
Details
Submitted by[?]: Tuesday Is Coming
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: November 2087
Description[?]:
| As we can assume, right now, that an income tax exists; we know that income is taxed as it is paid by corporations to shareholders, entrepreneurs, workers, and other individuals. Therefore it can be shown that money earned by corporations is taxed twice, first by corporate taxes, then by income taxes as what remains is distributed. We propose to reduce this needless complexity and unfair tax structure by a sharp reduction in corporate taxes. Any revenue lost by this measure shall be recovered by other methods of taxation, along with misc. reductions in spending, but given that other methods of taxation do not currently exist in the game, this basically stands alone. The forseeable goal of this bill is to encourage investment and economic growth. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Tax percentage of the profit made by corporations.
Old value:: 15
Current: 23
Proposed: 5
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:31:39, July 27, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | There is already a bill reducing this to 15 in voting. |
| Date | 22:01:51, July 27, 2005 CET | From |  Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | I know, this would take the 15 and reduce it by another 10 |
| Date | 22:28:03, July 27, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | OK. We will support this (shock horror!) |
| Date | 22:44:03, July 27, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | A Laissez faire party supporting a tax cut!? |
| Date | 22:44:53, July 27, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | Would any support a complete cancellation of corporate double taxation? |
| Date | 00:08:02, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | When we have alternatives available, sure. For now we have to have some way of paying the army and police. |
| Date | 00:24:32, July 28, 2005 CET | From | CNT/AFL | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | Double taxation is twice as good as single taxation, so we're going to oppose this one. |
| Date | 00:35:55, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | I'm supporting the smaller tax cut as a spur to economic growth. this would be a catastrophic cut, forcing us into either a massive deficit or major service cuts. |
| Date | 03:16:03, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | "I'm supporting the smaller tax cut as a spur to economic growth. this would be a catastrophic cut, forcing us into either a massive deficit or major service cuts."--Greens "Any revenue lost by this measure shall be recovered by other methods of taxation, along with misc. reductions in spending, but given that other methods of taxation do not currently exist in the game, this basically stands alone. "--Bill Description(Tuesdays) A few things to mention here: 1)The laffer curve. Often a reduction in tax rates has less expected results on tax revenue. Where a reduction in rates by X% causes an increase in revenue, or a decrease by much less than X%. (One reason:If this encourages investment, then in the future the taxable base will be much higher and this could make up for the percentage decrease.) 2)Corporate taxes, however steep, do not typically provide the bulk of a country's tax revenue. ((OOC:))In the US, (last time I checked), corporate taxes covered about 10% of the (federal) budget. This isnt even enough to cover the "interest on the debt" portion. Most income came from income or payroll taxes. If you want to see what excessive corporate profit taxes can do, take a look at the Great Depressio and the results of FDR's "Undistributed Profits Tax". Corporate profits tend to be the main method by which companies build up capital to expand and create jobs. Taking more of this away, has a disproportionately bad effect on the near future economic outlook. |
| Date | 22:16:20, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | Any replies? or do we now move into voting? |
| Date | 02:42:46, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | I guess we shall see... |
| Date | 02:47:15, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | Having checked on the budget page, 5% of 0 is the same as 15% of 0 so we can support this with a clear conscience :-) |
| Date | 03:05:47, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | it won't be 5% of zero in the future, though. |
| Date | 03:08:29, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | someone more knowlegable can probably say more, but wasn't the Laffer curve part of the whole supply-side economics trheory that Bush the Elder described as "voodoo economics"? just curious here, not trying to score points. |
| Date | 03:28:12, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | I doubt it, the Laffer curve is used to explain how a tax cut often results in higher tax revenue. It was a foundation stone of Reaganomics. |
| Date | 03:29:47, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | When we have options for taxation and spending then we can actually set about arranging levels to encourage growth etc. However surely it is better to have these levels as low as possible and only raise them where necessary. |
| Date | 03:50:38, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | if it was a foundation strone of Reagonomics, then Bush definitely called it voodoo economics. He thought Reagonomics was idiocy, or at least he did before Reagan won the nomination. |
| Date | 04:06:49, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Reduce Double Taxation |
| Message | (following post out of game context) However, if you check recent news, you will see that recent estimates of the US budget deficit have been drastically reduced. This is all because of(democrats would say in spite of) [younger] Bush's tax cut during his first term. Reducing tax rates did in fact increase revenue in this case, as it did for Reagan and Kennedy. Deficits are not caused by a shortage of revenue, therefore, but an excess of spending. And it matters little what Bush Sr. thinks of certain policies, the results are independent of Republican(or Democrat)s' opinions. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 227 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 107 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 116 |
| Random fact: Particracy has 464 player slots. |
| Random quote: "And what is Aleppo?" - Gary Johnson |