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: Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171
Details
Submitted by[?]: Proletariat Revolution 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: June 2174
Description[?]:
| The people of Likatonia pay income tax and it ends there. They don't pay for any of the goods that they are buying. They are able to keep their money in their pocket and not pay it out. Given that while the people of Likatonia have the right to the basic necessities of life, anything beyond basic, that qualifies as a 'luxury' is being bought tax free. To keep things fair for all of Likatonia's children, the tax rate on non-luxury items and necessities will remain at a constant zero, as this will ensure that no family will go hungry because they have to put something back on the shelf so they don't breal the budget. However, anything beyond it, items which a consumer act defines as luxury or non-necessarry items will be taxed. This is working on the principle that should a person be able to afford something extra, they can pay a little extra. The tax rate will stay low, while still being existent, so that the government may garner more income to direct towards programs and benefits for the whole of Likatonia. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Sales tax on luxury goods.
Old value:: 0
Current: 12
Proposed: 7
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 15:54:27, January 15, 2006 CET | From | Proletariat Revolution Party | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | Please read the details section as well. |
| Date | 20:55:26, January 15, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | "They don't pay for any of the goods that they are buying" That needs to be clarified, because they obviously have to pay for the goods they are buying. "However, anything beyond it, items which a consumer act defines as luxury or non-necessarry items will be taxed. This is working on the principle that should a person be able to afford something extra, they can pay a little extra" Why? There is no government demand for extra funds, so why do we need thses extra funds? Do you not think that slapping a heft tax upon luxury goods may deter the poor from buying a luxury product every once in a while? In effect you are simply making it harder for the poor to purchase good quality products. "so that the government may garner more income to direct towards programs and benefits for the whole of Likatonia." Again, the govt. has not demanded more funds, there is no need at this current time. We shall vote nay for now. |
| Date | 22:20:34, January 15, 2006 CET | From | Likaton Fascist Front | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | TOTAL chooses not to read the details section as a form of civil disobedience. |
| Date | 01:40:48, January 16, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | The AAS worked long and hard to help craft the triumphant monument to low taxation, that is the Likatonian economic policy. We shall not now plunge our financial knives into the back of the hardworking taxpayer. |
| Date | 04:23:02, January 16, 2006 CET | From | Proletariat Revolution Party | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | There is a difference between taxing luxury items and taxing those which are needed by all people. Let's put it another way... It is fair if someone can afford a a luxury item like a HD TV to pay a little extra. If they can afford the luxury item, they can afford to pay into a pool that puts more money into programs. Tax isn't just about garnering income for the government; it is also a way to pay for the programs people may or may not take for granted. |
| Date | 10:58:02, January 16, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | Yes but don't you see, slapping a tax on luxury goods only makes it harder for poor people to but them. The poor will still watch television, they will still smoke tobacco and drink alcohol so they will simply lose a greater chunk of their income. |
| Date | 14:38:03, January 16, 2006 CET | From | Proletariat Revolution Party | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | I realise it doesn't stop anyone from buying them. There, by mentioning tobacco or alcohol, you've justified this. After all, our healthcare isn't all private. We provide subsidy. We provide other forms of social benefits. |
| Date | 14:42:36, January 16, 2006 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | During our tenure in the Finance Ministry, we strove for lower taxes for all citizens, while balancing the budget at all times. We see no need to reverse these policies, and are not in favor of government surpluses above the level necessary to provide for emergencies. Having the extra money just tempts the governmetn to spend it. Let the people keep their hard earned cash. |
| Date | 17:05:05, January 16, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | "There, by mentioning tobacco or alcohol, you've justified this. After all, our healthcare isn't all private. We provide subsidy. We provide other forms of social benefits." But government spending is lower than government income, that justifies opposition to tax increases. |
| Date | 20:03:56, January 16, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | The AAS would like to endorse the RLP position. The RLP served an enviable term in the Finance Office, doing much good work. Their approach to taxation was consistent with our own, so, of course we endorse it, but they also were very careful to maintain a balanced budget. As they have illustrated, excess surplus is an invitation to increase spending. |
| Date | 20:55:08, January 17, 2006 CET | From | JLP Liberation Militia | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | J. Paul Getty, MInister of Finance, is strongly against a sales tax. It is a vehicle to waste the spending power of the hard-earned income of the Liktonian citizen. JLP agrees with our friends from the RLP position. |
| Date | 21:03:40, January 17, 2006 CET | From | JLP Liberation Militia | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | J. Paul Getty also wants to remind all parties that we have a surplus of 1,351,869,823 LIK in this years financials. As such, there should be no need to consider any tax hike, or the introduction of any new methods of taxation. |
| Date | 21:23:08, January 17, 2006 CET | From | JLP Liberation Militia | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | J. Paul Getty also wants to remind all parties that we have a surplus of 1,351,869,823 LIK in this years financials. As such, there should be no need to consider any tax hike, or the introduction of any new methods of taxation. |
| Date | 21:23:35, January 17, 2006 CET | From | JLP Liberation Militia | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | Sorry for the re-send |
| Date | 12:31:37, January 18, 2006 CET | From | Likaton Fascist Front | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | We thank the JLP for that pertinent observation and agree. |
| Date | 03:46:54, January 19, 2006 CET | From | JLP Liberation Militia | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | J. Paul wishes to point out that we are now projecting a surplus of 1,502,351,385 LIK, an increase since our last correspondence. |
| Date | 15:26:00, January 21, 2006 CET | From | Proletariat Revolution Party | To | Debating the Introduction of Sales Tax Act of July 2171 |
| Message | We hate deleting anything... so... |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 108 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 302 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 90 |
| 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: "Every month we do not have an economic recovery package, 500 million Americans lose their jobs." - Nancy Pelosi |