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: Religous Taxation Bill of 2945
Details
Submitted by[?]: Hutorian Conservative Party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: August 2947
Description[?]:
| .......... |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change
Taxation of religious institutions.
Old value:: No religions are taxed.
Current: Religions are treated as companies, and all profit is taxed, however, charitable donations are not taxed.
Proposed: Religions are treated as companies, and all profit is taxed, however, charitable donations are not taxed.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:56:36, May 29, 2010 CET | From | Hutorian Conservative Party | To | Debating the Religous Taxation Bill of 2945 |
| Message | Rt Hon Sarah Marelle MP, NSC Frontbencher, Madam Speaker, religions should face taxes. This Act would not see them taxed to a high level. All profit would fit into the income tax brackets set out by the Finance Minister in his taxation Bills. We do not want to tax charitable donations but this is an area where extra government revenue can be located and given the radical nationalisation extra money is temporarily needed to cope with these reforms until state run institutions are operating at a high turnover. |
| Date | 19:14:52, May 29, 2010 CET | From | Labour Party | To | Debating the Religous Taxation Bill of 2945 |
| Message | Rev. Buchanan MP, Head of Ecclesiam Charity. Madame Speaker, on behalf of my party, we speak out against this. The Lutheran church of Hutori is a charitable organisation and is the biggest not for profit organisation in the nation! My party will oppose this. The state has no right to take away money from organisations that are themselves serving the nation! There is mass nationalisation in process at the moment in Hutori, and we agree to it on a moral ground because it is advancing the common people of hutori, but so is the church! When we entered into coalition with your party, we where under the impression that you had revised your stance on religion! Yet all we see here is the old legislative agenda of the HNP! |
| Date | 19:16:38, May 29, 2010 CET | From | Labour Party | To | Debating the Religous Taxation Bill of 2945 |
| Message | Uzziel Yitzhak MP, Head of the Labour Party. The Labour Party backs the honorable MP for Woodhurst Cental. |
| Date | 20:16:41, May 29, 2010 CET | From | Hutorian Conservative Party | To | Debating the Religous Taxation Bill of 2945 |
| Message | Rt Hon Sarah Marelle MP, NSC Frontbencher, Madam Speaker, yes Mr Speaker.....this is clearly the stance of the old HNP. The fact that we have voted in favour of Acts which ease restrictions on religion show that? No Madam Speaker, the old HNP stance was not to accept religion but we have. We still want to give religion a smaller role in Hutori. Madam Speaker, the Labour Party should know that this Act doesn't tax any charitable donation but only money that is a profit for the church! The aspect of what is being taxed is the section of the church which acts like a company. Perhaps the Reverend should not have entered politics or comment on a Bill which he doesnt understand and given his own views on religion, does not make him see the Bill clearly. He only sees a clouded vision of the Bill because he knows it affects him! Madam Speaker, the old HNP would not tolerate religion, whilst the NSC will grant it a role in Hutori. The reverent should know better than to talk nonsense and fabricate an arguement out of lies. |
| Date | 20:40:47, May 29, 2010 CET | From | Labour Party | To | Debating the Religous Taxation Bill of 2945 |
| Message | Uzziel Yitzhak MP, Head of the Labour Party. Madam Speaker, every single charitable organisation does not at all get taxed on its income, even though these organisations employ people just as the church does! The workers in the church still get taxed on their income! No different to any other charity in hutori! The church in no way acts like a company does! It does not take in a profitable turnover at all, but simply employes its workers, and spends its finances of charitable works and religious services! Just like a the Athiest Forum of Hutori is not taxed, yet spends absolutely nothing on charitable works! I hold the signatories of fifteen religious organisations in hutori, Including the Lutheran Church, The Catholic Church, The Muslim Association, The Chief Rabbinate among others! More than half of our population at one time or another have voluntarily donated to these organisations, and we will not allow our citizens money given volutnarily to find its way to the state! We cannot Tax Charity! |
| Date | 20:46:36, May 29, 2010 CET | From | Hutorian Conservative Party | To | Debating the Religous Taxation Bill of 2945 |
| Message | Rt Hon Sarah Marelle MP, NSC Frontbencher, Madam Speaker, the proposed is "Religions are treated as companies, and all profit is taxed, however, charitable donations are not taxed". So charity is not taxed! That point is what the whole Labour Partys opposition is based on when it isnt even an issue! We are not taxing charity! Perhaps Labour should acknowledge this point and tell us why they really oppose this Bill! |
| Date | 20:55:26, May 29, 2010 CET | From | Labour Party | To | Debating the Religous Taxation Bill of 2945 |
| Message | Madam Speaker, The income of all religious organisations, with the exeption of scientology which is not a recognised religion anyway, and is currently treated as a company, is based on voluntary donation! These organisations do not provide a service specifically for their income. The service they offer is free, with an optional donation! This renders the honorable lady's [party heckles towards Marelle] argument obsolete! |
| Date | 21:13:21, May 29, 2010 CET | From | Hutorian Conservative Party | To | Debating the Religous Taxation Bill of 2945 |
| Message | Rt Hon Sarah Marelle MP, NSC Frontbencher, Madam Speaker, given the Labour Partys corrupted vision of religous institutions as they employ members of the church in their party, they are in no position to comment on this Act. The Labour Party, specifically the Rev. Buchanan MP, only opposes this Act out of self-interest. He was not elected to Parliament in the interest of himself, but the interests of the Hutorian people and Hutori itself. Perhaps the Reverent should not forget this as he declares opposition. Madam Speaker, we are proposing that money churches generate through promotional events etc are taxed and not the donations given to them by Hutorian citizens. There is a key difference between the two, a concept that evades Labour - a concept they have to accept to see that this Act is a necessary one. They do not realise churches are able to make money and are not solely dependant on donations. Madam Speaker, this Act is not as the Labour member reffers as 'obsolete'. The only feature of this Act which is 'obsolete' seems to be the Labour members brain power, given his arguement is based on incorrect information! [sound of backbench laughter]. |
| Date | 21:55:07, May 29, 2010 CET | From | Hutorian Conservative Party | To | Debating the Religous Taxation Bill of 2945 |
| Message | Rt Hon Marquess Spence, Prime Minister, Madam Speaker, as my first statement after the end of the NSC/Labour Coalition, perhaps i should reflect upon it. It has broken down over this very Bill, the Bill which they see as a gross infringment on religious liberty. It would appear Labour also feel the NSC do not allow them to vote whatever way they want? The NSC policy of co-operation included a 'Bill for Bill' policy, where the NSC would vote for a Labour proposal in exchange for Labours support on a NSC proposal. This coalition has proven that the Labour Party are unable to successfully work in government, they are unable to take the neccessary steps to govern in co-operation with another party. This is reflected in both the coalition with ourselves and the one between them and the CLP. In a coalition government both parties had to make comprimises and it seems that Labour are incapable. Madam Speaker, apparantly it is this Act which angers Labour on religous freedom, this Act proves we have not changed from the HNP. What a pure load of nonsense. If we were the HNP, we would put forward Acts to outlaw religion but we have changed our stance on so many issues and had so many more reforms to implement but this now seems a distant reality given the breakdown of our coalition. A breakdown that Labour must take responsibility for. During the whole coalition period i must admit, i found Mr Yitzhak an extremely hard man to work with given his extremely narrow and self interested views and i urge all parties not to enter into any sort of agreement with this unworkable man. Madam Speaker, the NSC is prepared to lead a minority government, or work with either a two or three party coalition. We are now an open-minded party seeking to benefit the Hutorian nation not ourselves. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes | Total Seats: 145 | ||
| no |
Total Seats: 246 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: When it comes to creating a Cultural Protocol in a Culturally Open nation, players are not necessarily required to provide a plausible backstory for how the nation's cultural background developed. However, the provision of a plausible backstory may be a factor in whether Moderation approves the Cultural Protocol if players in surrounding nations question its appropriateness for their region of the game map. |
| Random quote: "Democrats couldn't care less if people in Indiana hate them. But if Europeans curl their lips, liberals can't look at themselves in the mirror." - Ann Coulter |