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: Tax Amendment Bill of 3754
Details
Submitted by[?]: Democratic Progressives
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: February 3760
Description[?]:
| This bill is aimed at equalising tax rates to make it look neater. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Sales tax on essential goods such as food and non-luxury clothing.
Old value:: 7
Current: 0
Proposed: 5
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Sales tax on luxury goods.
Old value:: 44
Current: 30
Proposed: 50
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 10:41:23, November 06, 2014 CET | From | Tomorrow Party | To | Debating the Tax Amendment Bill of 3754 |
| Message | Mr. Neutras Consul, The Government is reviewing the current budget in order to shrink our current deficit. We appreciate the Liberal Conservatives' desire to change it too. I must also say that we may decrease the essential tax but do not plan on increasing the luxury tax. This is on the grounds that we do not wish to discourage wealthy businesspeople or other members in the middle class to spend in our economy. Luxury goods also provides employment and annual contributions to our GDP, so plummeting sales will not be helpful to this nations economy. It has happened in the past, Mr. Neutras Consul, and we do not wish to revisit that. They're are other means. Clark Brisbane Finance Minister |
| Date | 09:31:42, November 07, 2014 CET | From | Democratic Progressives | To | Debating the Tax Amendment Bill of 3754 |
| Message | While we agree that the purchase of luxury goods make a significant contribution to our economy, Mr. Consul, we have raised it to 50% to round up the number to a more even figure. The increase is minor and is easier to calculate for salespeople. It should not be too much of a concern. |
| Date | 10:25:52, November 07, 2014 CET | From | Tomorrow Party | To | Debating the Tax Amendment Bill of 3754 |
| Message | Mr. Neutras Consul, Just because it is a "more even number" should not be worthy of a reason to increase a tax. The government would also like to say that a 6 percent increase is not "minor". It will have a significant affect to the Selucian economy, something as a government in which we can not allow. Luxury Goods cross many industries and are the bulk of sales. 6% may be a small increase according to the Liberal Conservatives but multiply that across the industries it covers and you will realize, Mr. Neutras Consul, the real magnitude of this increase. The government does not see any reasons for increasing the luxury goods. Clark Brisbane Finance Minister |
| Date | 04:38:14, November 08, 2014 CET | From | Democratic Progressives | To | Debating the Tax Amendment Bill of 3754 |
| Message | Mr. Consul, a 6% increase in tax for luxury goods will not be of detrimental effect to our economy. The increase in tax revenue will more than make up for the shortfall of sales. Luxury goods are increasingly inelastic at this moment, and we would like to take advantage of the situation and help cut the deficit. |
| Date | 04:57:15, November 08, 2014 CET | From | Tomorrow Party | To | Debating the Tax Amendment Bill of 3754 |
| Message | Mr. Neutras Consul, The government still finds this outrageous that the Liberal Conservatives still do not realize the problems that exist with a 6% increase such as the deadly effect it has on Selucian Economics. We do agree that the tax revenue is making up for the shortfall of sales however, that extra money is going to the government. Unless the Liberal Conservatives believe in funding some absurd plan to compensate those that supply luxury goods, everyone knows that these people will be affected. Not only will they sell less but they will loose more revenue. The government does not need that money, we have much safer alternatives especially to cut the deficit. Even if the luxury goods are inelastic at this moment, things will change in a hurry when this tax is added which will prompt a removal of the increase. Clark Brisbane Finance Minister |
| Date | 10:29:48, November 12, 2014 CET | From | Democratic Progressives | To | Debating the Tax Amendment Bill of 3754 |
| Message | Mr. Consul, it is obvious that the Tomorrow Party is against this simply to protect the interests of the rich rather than looking at society as a whole. A 6% increase will not have the detrimental effect that they imply, and will help distribute income more evenly. It also seems that they fail to grasp basic economics - elasticity is the responsiveness of quantity demanded to a change in price. An increase in tax, which means an increase in price, will suddenly make it elastic, as they imply, otherwise there would be a most awkward system by which producers alter their prices. The rich will not mind spending slightly more on these goods, and any fall in quantity demanded will be less than proportionate to the increase in price, so there will still be a net gain in GDP contributions by luxury goods. |
| Date | 23:06:41, November 12, 2014 CET | From | Selucian National Quorum | To | Debating the Tax Amendment Bill of 3754 |
| Message | ###PRESS RELEASE The Selucian Nationalists support this progressive tax arrangement which will no doubt help our low-income earners and shift the tax burden to our high-income earners. Mathos Tullia SNP Leader |
| Date | 10:31:57, November 13, 2014 CET | From | Tomorrow Party | To | Debating the Tax Amendment Bill of 3754 |
| Message | Mr. Neutras Consul, The government's point is that it will affect demand of luxury goods. Period. We also have a point that the government's revenue has to come from somewhere and we believe that it will come out of income that should be for the sellers of luxury goods. The government also believes that the rich do good to the economy. Every economist knows that increased spending provides great benefits to all. They have no right to have to pay more than any one else. They earnt all of their money. This government cares about the whole society but does not believe the rich nor the poor nor the middle class should bear the burden for a tax increase. Clark Brisbane Finance Minister |
| Date | 22:23:47, November 15, 2014 CET | From | Tomorrow Party | To | Debating the Tax Amendment Bill of 3754 |
| Message | Mr. Neutras Consul, Does any other party in the Capitale Imperirum have any thoughts about this bill? Richard Stark Prime Minister (Officiis) of Selucia |
| Date | 05:48:22, November 16, 2014 CET | From | Selucian National Quorum | To | Debating the Tax Amendment Bill of 3754 |
| Message | Mr. Neutras Consul, The SNP will vote aye. No further comments. Mathos Tullia SNP Leader |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 343 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 357 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players consent to the reasonable and predictable consequences of the role-play they consent to. For example, players who role-play their characters as committing criminal offences should expect those characters to experience the predictable judicial consequences of that. |
| Random quote: "The truly powerful feed ideology to the masses like fast food while they dine on the most rarified delicacy of all: impunity." - Naomi Klein |