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: Indirect Taxation Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Rutanian Heritage 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: August 2754
Description[?]:
| The 'Rutanian Heritage Party' believes that income tax is an inefficient, unequitable and inherantly troublesome method of taxation. Therefore, we propose the replacement of the federal income tax with a flat-rate sales tax - an indirect, rather than a direct form of taxation. This will not only eliminate the bureaucratic red-tape associated with an income tax, but will greatly reduce the effect that the income tax has in undermining personal initiative, incentive and responsibility. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Sales tax on essential goods such as food and non-luxury clothing.
Old value:: 0
Current: 20
Proposed: 5
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change International trade (this is a default in the absense of a specific free trade agreement or specific trade embargo)
Old value:: The nation does not impose any tariffs or quotas on imports.
Current: The nation imposes reciprocal tariffs on imports, with no tariffs imposed on states which impose no tariffs on our exports.
Proposed: The nation allows for imports, but imposes protectionist tariffs and quotas on all imports.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Sales tax on luxury goods.
Old value:: 0
Current: 33
Proposed: 5
Article 4
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 |
| > 1,000 RUT | 1% | 2,722,000,000 RUT | Total | 2,722,000,000 RUT |
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 01:30:02, May 09, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Elitist Party | To | Debating the Indirect Taxation Act |
| Message | This proposal is completely absurd. It would result in a state depth which could lead to severe problems in the functioning of the country. |
| Date | 01:35:42, May 09, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Heritage Party | To | Debating the Indirect Taxation Act |
| Message | Would the 'REP' substantiate their argument? Indirect taxation is always better, more efficient, and more equitable than direct taxation. The decline in income tax is offset by the flat-rate sales tax - this will not put us in debt, it's simply a shift in taxation away from income and onto the purchase of goods. |
| Date | 01:49:30, May 09, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Elitist Party | To | Debating the Indirect Taxation Act |
| Message | The "commonwealth" pressuposes that each individual is contributing to the management of the state. This is the principle underlining taxation. We believe that the taxation of consumption is an unfair method. It limits the individuals in their capacity to consume what they want and as much as they want. Income taxation is fair because they give a part of their work for the functioning of the state. Taxation is inherently a bad thing for the freedom of the individuals, a "road to serfdom". But it is a necessary evil. Therefore we should chose a method which harms on a smaller scale than the other methods. |
| Date | 02:09:28, May 09, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Heritage Party | To | Debating the Indirect Taxation Act |
| Message | "We believe that the taxation of consumption is an unfair method. It limits the individuals in their capacity to consume what they want and as much as they want." There is a fundamental difference between an income tax and a sales tax that the 'REP' has overlooked - whereas, with an income tax, the government is directly and mandatorily aquiring a proportion of what one earns, thereby diminishing his incentive to work harder and earn more, and undermining his initiative and responsibility for what he chooses to use his money for, a sales tax is paid upon purchase, of the consumers own volition. Surely, the latter is fairer, less 'limiting', more efficient, more equitable and less invasive than the former. "Income taxation is fair because they give a part of their work for the functioning of the state." This sounds suspiciously like socialism, arguing that the individual has some sort of obligation to surrender a part of his income for the operations of the State. Some form of taxation is undoubtedly necessary, but we disagree entirely that an income tax is 'fair'. Furthermore, the constitution does not afford the federal government the authority to tax income. "Taxation is inherently a bad thing for the freedom of the individuals, a "road to serfdom". But it is a necessary evil. Therefore we should chose a method which harms on a smaller scale than the other methods." We agree, and a sales tax harms on a far lesser scale than an income tax, which is why we are advocating it. Indirect taxation is simpler, more efficient, fairer and less invasive than direct taxation - honestly, we are a little surprised that the 'REP' would not support this legislation, given their general concern for freedom. |
| Date | 07:34:51, May 09, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Restoration Party | To | Debating the Indirect Taxation Act |
| Message | We agree somewhat with the RHP's arguments. Also, we are not opposed to this proposed legislation. This would wean us off income tax. Not a bad idea. |
| Date | 09:53:32, May 09, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Heritage Party | To | Debating the Indirect Taxation Act |
| Message | We are delighted to hear that the 'OP' support this legislation, though we are not surprised - this proposal is certainly more in line with the tenets of classical liberalism than the existing income tax system. |
| Date | 10:28:17, May 09, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Elitist Party | To | Debating the Indirect Taxation Act |
| Message | After tough consideration the REP decided to support this bill. We must mention however that the last argument about classical liberalism is not a logically correct argument, but we do not want to argue about the art of argumentation. We support the proposal, but in exchange we would like to see the changes in the educational bill. |
| Date | 10:58:09, May 09, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Elitist Party | To | Debating the Indirect Taxation Act |
| Message | And just for the record, the taxation of luxury goods is a socialist measure aiming to level the differences in the society taxing those who are able buy luxury goods. It would be advicable if the RHP would remove that item as well. |
| Date | 11:11:42, May 09, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Heritage Party | To | Debating the Indirect Taxation Act |
| Message | We only propose a sales tax on luxury items in line with sales tax on essential goods, so this is not a tax against the rich, but simply a flat-rate sales tax on all non-luxury and luxury goods, indiscriminately. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 207 | |||||
| no | Total Seats: 88 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: You can view helpful ideological statistics about the regions in your nation on the region pages. You can also view detailed political opinions and the importance of them there as well. |
| Random quote: "The avoidance of taxes is the only intellectual pursuit that still carries any reward." - John Maynard Keynes |