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 January 2540 (Flat Taxation)
Details
Submitted by[?]: Tukarali Popular 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: January 2541
Description[?]:
| The Tukarali Popular Party propose to adjust the government's income tax policy to better address the economic situation of the United Tribes of Tukarali. With this reform would all forms of taxation except a flat income tax be abolished, while increasing our surplus by 700 billions. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Sales tax on luxury goods.
Old value:: 30
Current: 30
Proposed: 0
Article 2
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 |
| > 1 TUK | 25% | 2,324,809,000,000 TUK | Total | 2,324,809,000,000 TUK |
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:33:29, March 01, 2008 CET | From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of January 2540 (Flat Taxation) |
| Message | Do you know where that 700 billion is coming from? From the pockets of our poorest citizens. A flat tax is entirely regressive - the burden on the poor is much larger than that on the rich. No person with any semblance of reason would advocate a flat tax, and the mere fact that you seem to think it's a good idea suggests that you should stay away from economics entirely. |
| Date | 22:40:45, March 01, 2008 CET | From | Tukarali Popular Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of January 2540 (Flat Taxation) |
| Message | A flat tax will create greater willingness to follow your ambitions, many people are unwilling to go for promotions simply because the few more TUKs they might earn would increase their tax by 10 %. It will create a boost in ambitions and wealth of our country, which is by far not regressive. |
| Date | 22:47:45, March 01, 2008 CET | From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of January 2540 (Flat Taxation) |
| Message | No, that is entirely untrue. If a person earns more before tax, then they'll earn more after tax, in every case. Also, you apparently don't know what a regressive tax is. A person trying to change the tax system should have an idea of the theory of tax. For shame. |
| Date | 23:02:10, March 01, 2008 CET | From | Tukarali Popular Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of January 2540 (Flat Taxation) |
| Message | I am aware what a regressive tax is, all I stated is this will not have regressive results, read again. And yes ofcourse they will earn more, after tax, I never disputed that neither. However the fact is that it will also come to benefit the poor of our country, as the total wealth increases, will state revenues increase, allowing for more social spendings and tax cuts. And as the wealthy gain a stable tax rate will they feel more reassured when doing investments, it is therefore also likely we will see a drop in unemployment. |
| Date | 23:20:04, March 01, 2008 CET | From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of January 2540 (Flat Taxation) |
| Message | Of course it will have regressive results. Poor people need all their money to eat, to buy clothes, to live. Rich people don't need a lot of their money. A flat tax falls more heavily on the poor. That is a regressive tax. This will have no effect on investment. There is just no argument here. And to say that the increased revenues will go to social programmes is plainly not true, since you are clearly intent on removing them. |
| Date | 00:00:09, March 02, 2008 CET | From | Tukarali Popular Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of January 2540 (Flat Taxation) |
| Message | There are several charity organisations and government programmes that help people, in such extreme poverty as you mention. So it will most definatly not. And regarding investments, its pretty obvious that when people get to have responsibility over more of their own money, will there also be more to spendt, it can be investments in their homes, business and so on... More money in peoples hands increase consumption and investment, that is a fact, not an argument. Furthermore, I would strongly suggest you leave handling our opinions to us, not you, we do not try to tell your party what to believe. |
| Date | 00:15:08, March 02, 2008 CET | From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of January 2540 (Flat Taxation) |
| Message | So, you are intending to save people from poverty by relying on charities? There is no other word for that but stupid. |
| Date | 00:54:43, March 02, 2008 CET | From | JDW Tukarali Greens Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of January 2540 (Flat Taxation) |
| Message | oppose they want to decrease the income but not the size of gov and expect the other parties to believe this will not lead to inflation, maybe even hyper-inflation this is called voodoo economics because it only works in the magical realms of wishful thinking |
| Date | 01:07:25, March 02, 2008 CET | From | Tukarali Popular Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of January 2540 (Flat Taxation) |
| Message | JUP - Charity programmes AND GOVERNMENT PROGRAMMES... please read what I actually said. |
| Date | 02:24:38, March 02, 2008 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of January 2540 (Flat Taxation) |
| Message | We shall support. |
| Date | 19:53:20, March 02, 2008 CET | From | Tukarali Graenix Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of January 2540 (Flat Taxation) |
| Message | Looks like we are back to a government for the wealthy and well connected. |
| Date | 21:00:23, March 02, 2008 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of January 2540 (Flat Taxation) |
| Message | Passed. |
| Date | 22:02:58, March 02, 2008 CET | From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of January 2540 (Flat Taxation) |
| Message | And obviously the NUA is just a puppet for the TPP now, given they pretty much vote identically. |
| Date | 22:30:56, March 02, 2008 CET | From | Tukarali Graenix Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of January 2540 (Flat Taxation) |
| Message | They're chipping away at the rest of us little by little. And the shame is that its the largest party versus the three smallest. |
| Date | 22:55:20, March 02, 2008 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of January 2540 (Flat Taxation) |
| Message | Passed |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 256 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 244 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Jelbic = "Group of cultures with an overall Central Asian/Eurasian steppe theme, using a fictional language developed specifically for Particracy". |
| Random quote: "The main problem of the left is that it has been traditionally divided and unable to reach agreements between different leftist views, whilst the right has almost always moved in the same direction by giving concessions to different rightist points of view." - Aelius Celer, former Selucian politician |