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: Sekowan Budget Revenue Proposal of 2570
Details
Submitted by[?]: Conservative 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: December 2571
Description[?]:
| HISTORY ------------- The general sentiment from parties based on comments made in budget debate bill (http://80.237.164.51/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=187720) was an increase in luxury tax, a progressive low income tax and no essential goods tax. OVERALL ------------- Instead of changing the level of revenue, we decided to instead first reflect the wants of the parties in how revenue is acquired. Therefore, increasing luxury tax and balancing by lowering income taxes. Therefore, the goal is to have an almost identical revenue level of 201,901,228,525 SEK. Just changing where revenue comes from. SUMMARY OF CHANGES ---------------------------------- 1. higher luxury tax 2. lower progressive income tax 3. same total revenue output CURRENT REVENUE BREAKDOWN (December 2569) -------------------------------------------------- Luxury goods: 37,453,376,515 SEK @ 16% = 2,340,836,032.19 SEK / % > 10,000 SEK: 25,755,465,932 SEK @ 10% = 2,575,546,593.20 SEK / % > 20,000 SEK: 32,379,162,269 SEK @ 21% = 1,541,864,869.95 SEK / % > 30,000 SEK: 34,764,401,361 SEK @ 33% = 1,053,466,707.91 SEK / % > 40,000 SEK: 27,362,183,593 SEK @ 45% = 0,608,048,524.29 SEK / % > 50,000 SEK: 23,130,255,449 SEK @ 50% = 0,462,605,108.98 SEK / % > 60,000 SEK: 10,399,093,653 SEK @ 55% = 0,189,074,430.05 SEK / % = Total SEK: 153,790,562,257 SEK Richest taxable individual during December 2569: 77,837 SEK MISCONCEPTIONS --------------------------- This proposal is not about lowering or increasing revenue through taxation. That will be at a later date. Radical changes are not good for the people so we believe a step-by-step progress toward the end goal is ideal so that we can make adjustments along the way. Revenue levels remain almost identical to previous levels. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Sales tax on luxury goods.
Old value:: 16
Current: 19
Proposed: 21
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 |
| > 10,000 SEK | 9% | 14,152,000,000 SEK |
| > 20,000 SEK | 20% | 19,795,000,000 SEK |
| > 30,000 SEK | 30% | 20,079,000,000 SEK |
| > 40,000 SEK | 40% | 14,284,000,000 SEK |
| > 50,000 SEK | 45% | 12,766,000,000 SEK |
| > 60,000 SEK | 50% | 7,109,000,000 SEK | Total | 88,185,000,000 SEK |
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 04:40:45, May 02, 2008 CET | From | 帝国公明党 (Teikoku Kōmeitō) | To | Debating the Sekowan Budget Revenue Proposal of 2570 |
| Message | We're opposed. We need to be raising taxes, not lowering them. |
| Date | 04:54:33, May 02, 2008 CET | From | Conservative Party | To | Debating the Sekowan Budget Revenue Proposal of 2570 |
| Message | DSP, this proposal is not about raising or lowering taxes. This is about changing where the revenue comes from. The total amount of revenue does not go down. So, your argument that this proposal is "lowering them" is FALSE. I wish you would wait till I remove the [in progress] message from the description before commenting. Nothing against the enthusiasm but, like now, you don't even understand the purpose of the changes proposed and fail to make a proper judgement on the proposal. |
| Date | 05:01:41, May 02, 2008 CET | From | 帝国公明党 (Teikoku Kōmeitō) | To | Debating the Sekowan Budget Revenue Proposal of 2570 |
| Message | Oh, sorry, did'nt see the in progress part. |
| Date | 08:51:18, May 02, 2008 CET | From | Normand Pluralist Party | To | Debating the Sekowan Budget Revenue Proposal of 2570 |
| Message | We will comment when the "in progress" has been removed. |
| Date | 19:05:30, May 02, 2008 CET | From | Conservative Party | To | Debating the Sekowan Budget Revenue Proposal of 2570 |
| Message | OOC: All right. I made some minor changes to the description and removed the [in progress]. Butcher away! |
| Date | 09:07:21, May 03, 2008 CET | From | Normand Pluralist Party | To | Debating the Sekowan Budget Revenue Proposal of 2570 |
| Message | Proposed tax changes benefit the rich most. We are not entirely sure we like that. Perhaps if the CP could provide a rationale? Otherwise, we like the proposal. |
| Date | 00:53:20, May 04, 2008 CET | From | Conservative Party | To | Debating the Sekowan Budget Revenue Proposal of 2570 |
| Message | One of the decisions taken was to keep the tax rate as multiples of five (easier to work with and to please DSP). The exception being the lowest tax bracket which was already a multiple. So, we wanted each tax bracket to get a break. Considering the income earned by for each % (see description) is so minimal, it's worth encourage more skilled workers to remain in Sekowo and not leave for a country that taxes their high earners more fairly. We don't earn much revenue from high income people and to collect the 200 Billion SEK, reducing low income became a challenging task since most of our people earn small salaries. I have three ideas: 1) Because each % of luxury tax amounts to the equivalent of one % of >10,000, for every increase of one results in the decrease of the other and the equation remains balanced. 2) Add a >70,000 bracket and charge 55%, assuming that the salaries will increase over time to make this viable 3) We add a new tax bracket of >5,000 and charge say 5% and we will be earning much more revenue. Do any of these help resolve any discomforts from any party? |
| Date | 06:26:41, May 04, 2008 CET | From | Normand Pluralist Party | To | Debating the Sekowan Budget Revenue Proposal of 2570 |
| Message | Well, we will ultimately support the proposal, though we care little for round numbers. |
| Date | 07:11:56, May 04, 2008 CET | From | Conservative Party | To | Debating the Sekowan Budget Revenue Proposal of 2570 |
| Message | Yes. But ultimately, one must try to compromise to get results. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 539 | |||||||
| no | Total Seats: 61 | |||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Particracy has been running since 2005. Dorvik was Particracy's first nation, the Dorvik Social Democrats the first party and the International Greens the first Party Organisation. |
| Random quote: "An "acceptable" level of unemployment means that the government economist to whom it is acceptable still has a job." - Author Unknown |