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: 2817 Budget - Taxation
Details
Submitted by[?]: Green Party of Aldegar
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: April 2818
Description[?]:
| The Green Party of Aldegar propose to adjust the government's tax policy to better address the economic situation of the Second Republic of Aldegar. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Tax percentage of the profit made by corporations.
Old value:: 60
Current: 30
Proposed: 65
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 |
| > 2,500 ACR | 15% | 4,192,000,000 ACR |
| > 3,000 ACR | 35% | 17,408,000,000 ACR |
| > 4,000 ACR | 45% | 17,683,000,000 ACR |
| > 5,000 ACR | 55% | 17,295,000,000 ACR |
| > 6,000 ACR | 65% | 16,895,000,000 ACR |
| > 7,000 ACR | 70% | 13,638,000,000 ACR |
| > 8,000 ACR | 75% | 12,313,000,000 ACR |
| > 9,000 ACR | 80% | 11,147,000,000 ACR |
| > 10,000 ACR | 85% | 14,105,000,000 ACR |
| > 12,000 ACR | 90% | 22,188,000,000 ACR | Total | 146,864,000,000 ACR |
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 20:50:24, September 14, 2009 CET | From | People's Party - Republican Democrats | To | Debating the 2817 Budget - Taxation |
| Message | We regard the taxation progression at the lowert end of taxed incomes in this proposal as far too steep. |
| Date | 00:26:03, September 15, 2009 CET | From | New Whig Party | To | Debating the 2817 Budget - Taxation |
| Message | We feel that being forced to give up 90% of one's income is way, way, way too steep. |
| Date | 00:51:35, September 15, 2009 CET | From | Cooperative League of Aldegar | To | Debating the 2817 Budget - Taxation |
| Message | It isn't 90% of your income it's 90% of any income over 12,000 - why does nobody understand how progressive taxation works? |
| Date | 08:01:05, September 15, 2009 CET | From | People's Party - Republican Democrats | To | Debating the 2817 Budget - Taxation |
| Message | And this budget gives tax relief to any incomes between 10,000 and 12,000, while more taxes have to be paid for all incomes between 3,000 and 10,000 ACR. We cannot regard it as fair that middle income earners have to pay for Green Party's obsession with balancing the budget while high incomes are to be relieved. |
| Date | 10:47:24, September 15, 2009 CET | From | Green Party of Aldegar | To | Debating the 2817 Budget - Taxation |
| Message | I guess we need to teach macroeconomics in our schools then? A balanced/surplus budget ensures SUSTAINABILTY, and surely that is what all parties of leftist leanings should want to aim for? With a deficit running all the time, how are future administrations supposed to pay the public debt? Besides, the basis of Keynesian economics is being brave enough to run a deficit in times of recession in order to boost spending and production, and running a reasonable balance/surplus to pay off the previous deficit and save for future needs. |
| Date | 12:26:40, September 15, 2009 CET | From | People's Party - Republican Democrats | To | Debating the 2817 Budget - Taxation |
| Message | Balancing a budget at all cost, as the Green Party is proposing, does not ensure sustainibilty, but recession. Had the Green Party paid any intention to budget development, they would have noticed that the deficit has been continuously decreasing since the current, much fairer taxation system was introduced, and would continue to do so if we stuck to that system. We also fail to see howmaking low middle income earners pay for tax breaks for higher incomes is in any way a left wing policy. |
| Date | 17:56:01, September 15, 2009 CET | From | Green Party of Aldegar | To | Debating the 2817 Budget - Taxation |
| Message | You do realise that the balance shown in the game interface is not the total amount of deficit we have, but the deficit we make per year. With that in mind, our deficit will always get larger as long as we still have that little '-' sign in front of the numbers. We are making middle income earners pay for what they get: a great social security system, excellent health care and educational provisions, a clean environment, a comfortable infrastructure, and many more. It is with deep regret that we note that the PPSD is making this an ideological issue. We insist this is a matter of economic development, sustainable financing, and sound government. |
| Date | 18:20:25, September 15, 2009 CET | From | People's Party - Republican Democrats | To | Debating the 2817 Budget - Taxation |
| Message | You realise of course that debt service is part of the current budget, or at least it should be, that we are reducing that as we reduce the current deficit. The deficit-spending policies we have been following recently have had little time to set in, and over time both current and overall deficit would have been steadily reduced had the Green Party not in their ideological obsession with balancing the budget chosen to destroy our economic development a a stroke. This is an ideological issue, because it squarely opposes the short-term deficit-balancing ideology of the Green Party against the long-term approach of the PP-SD. And it is a communicative issue, because the Green Party have decided to destroy the recently introduced fair taxation system that the PP-SD has spent a long time working on without any consultation with their largest coalition partner. We also still wonder why the Green Party, if it is so insistent on making middle-income earners pay for the services they get, is at the same time giving tax relief to higher incomes. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 362 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 137 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Don't put "the" as the first word in your party name, because when parties are referred to in news reports, their names are preceded with "the", e.g. the [Socialist Party] has lost. |
| Random quote: "I think one should not go fast, because if you make mistakes you don't realize what you've done." - Manuela Carmena |