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: Income tax proposal of December 2450
Details
Submitted by[?]: AM Radical Libertarian Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill proposes to change income taxes. It requires more than half of the legislature to vote yes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: October 2452
Description[?]:
| The AM Radical Libertarian Party propose to adjust the government's income tax policy to better address the economic situation of the Axis Mundi Likatonian Res Publica. The tax on corporate income is destroying the incentive to create jobs and industry in this country. The regressive nature of the current income tax is placing the greatest burden on those least able to afford it. These must change! |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Tax percentage of the profit made by corporations.
Old value:: 75
Current: 15
Proposed: 25
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Sales tax on luxury goods.
Old value:: 50
Current: 12
Proposed: 30
Article 3
We propose to alter income tax brackets to the following setup. Information about the current income tax system can be found here.
| Bracket | Tax | Estimated Revenue |
| > 20,000 LIK | 5% | 4,876,000,000 LIK |
| > 30,000 LIK | 5% | 1,807,000,000 LIK |
| > 40,000 LIK | 2% | 60,000,000 LIK | Total | 6,743,000,000 LIK |
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:43:39, September 05, 2007 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 2450 |
| Message | While we appreciate that people like to pay lower taxes... there has to be balance. The AM RLP seem to be suggesting we cut tax income on every front... and especially for those MOST able to pay...? As for the AM RLP assertion that: "current income tax is placing the greatest burden on those least able to afford it".... we don't see any way in which that reflects reality. Surely, those with the most disposable income are actually those MOST able to help with the tax burden? |
| Date | 07:46:01, September 06, 2007 CET | From | Permissive Social Union | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 2450 |
| Message | We could support article two if it was a proposal drop it to 20%. 50% is oppressive we have to agree. After internal deliberation we have decided to support article two. A small compromise on article one and you will have our backing. |
| Date | 14:47:48, September 06, 2007 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 2450 |
| Message | AMSDP - the current tax structure has those under 20000 paying the highest rate (> 20,000 LIK 15%.) We propose cutting that back. LFF - Are you asking for a change in the corporate rate or the sales tax rate? |
| Date | 23:03:55, September 06, 2007 CET | From |  Likaton Coalition of the Willing | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 2450 |
| Message | We could support Article three, with no problems. Article two, were it less steep, say 50% -> 30%, for now, with a further step down once the economy balances. Article 1, is a bit of a sticking point. I would imagine that it will be hard to find an acceptable middle ground. We would want a significantly smaller reduction, with a further set of phased reductions in the future. |
| Date | 08:17:11, September 07, 2007 CET | From | Permissive Social Union | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 2450 |
| Message | AMRLP, we are asking for a compromise on article two. (We apologise for our scrambled anouncement above.) As our esteemed collegues the AMPS have weighed in with a 30% proposal, we will acquiesce to 30% as well. |
| Date | 21:27:17, September 07, 2007 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 2450 |
| Message | We have modified article 2 to 30%. As to article 1, we feel that with a current surplus of 119,373,664,079, the drop from 22,142,121,745 to 7,381,000,000 ( a difference of 14,761,121,745) can well be afforded by the government. An increase in disposable income from 17,000 to 19,000; 2,000; for a family earning 20000 is much more of a significant benefit. We in the government are giving of our surplus to those who have been giving of their need. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 346 | |||||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 320 |
| Random fact: If you have a question, post it on the forum. Game Moderators and other players will be happy to help you. http://forum.particracy.net/ |
| Random quote: "Let's call the drug war what it is, ethnic cleansing of Americans." - Jello Biafra |