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: Income tax proposal of December 4017
Details
Submitted by[?]: National Front
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill proposes to change income taxes. It requires more than half of the legislature to vote yes. This bill will pass as soon as the required yes votes are in, or will be defeated if unsufficient votes are reached on the deadline.
Voting deadline: February 4019
Description[?]:
| The The National Front Party propose to adjust the government's income tax policy to better address the economic situation of the Federal Republic of Beluzia. |
Proposals
Article 1
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 |
| > 10,000 BEL | 10% | 40,057,000,000 BEL |
| > 20,000 BEL | 22% | 36,047,000,000 BEL |
| > 30,000 BEL | 35% | 22,387,000,000 BEL |
| > 40,000 BEL | 48% | 18,181,000,000 BEL |
| > 55,000 BEL | 55% | 1,758,000,000 BEL |
| > 60,000 BEL | 60% | 357,000,000 BEL |
| > 75,000 BEL | 75% | 0 BEL | Total | 118,787,000,000 BEL |
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 19:06:59, April 23, 2016 CET | From | National Front | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | This bill is just the first in a range of new spending and taxation plans that the new Finance Mister Tony Jones is looking to put forward. Tony Jones had this to say " It is time that this party start to act on its promise to reduce taxes and all classes not just the upper class. This new taxation policy will still leave the Government with a surplus (if my maths is correct ) of 16,949,680,847 BEL. This new spending plan will help the poor bring themselves out of poverty WITHOUT stopping or reducing Government support for these people. This is a new taxation plan that I hope every party can support because it will help the people who need it most. The people who are the backbone of this nation. I plan to put forward a spending plan I the future depending on the outcome of this bill. I hope all the parties in the new cabinet can support this bill to show that we will be a Government that will work together to reduce the burden of taxation on the poor." |
| Date | 19:18:50, April 23, 2016 CET | From | Party of Liberty | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | The Party of Liberty completely agrees with this. We believe that we need to start giving these people more than just hand outs - we need to start giving them a hand up. |
| Date | 22:45:46, April 23, 2016 CET | From | SLP-Libertarian Alliance | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | We do not support this. We'd rather use our surplus to fund our programs. |
| Date | 22:52:20, April 23, 2016 CET | From | National Front | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | This taxation decrease would still leave a very large surplus for more investment into the economy so both can still be achieved by cutting taxes and increasing invest. |
| Date | 22:58:33, April 23, 2016 CET | From | SLP-Libertarian Alliance | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | Well I just proposed a new budget proposal. Unfortunately it is incompatible with this, so we would like all parties that want to increase spending to refuse this tax plan. |
| Date | 23:08:00, April 23, 2016 CET | From | SLP-Libertarian Alliance | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | As well, this tax proposal disproportionately benefits the wealthiest Beluzians. Adding another 20 grand to the top tax bracket benefits those with an extra 20 cents to the BEL, while the porrest get only 3 more cents to the BEL. If you are going around preaching that you are giving more money to the poor at least make sure your math backs that up. |
| Date | 15:27:49, April 24, 2016 CET | From | Knights of the People | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | We would agree to reduce the lower brackets, but the higher ones shouldn't be lowered. |
| Date | 16:23:32, April 24, 2016 CET | From | National Front | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | The National Front would support cutting more in the lower income boundaries however with parties like the Social-Liberal party wanting to increase spending again the Government would fall into a debt which this party will not allow, while we are responsible for the nations finances. A new bill will be propsed by the finance minister ,Tony Jones, to increase some spending however this can not be done with the spending plan that the social-liberal party has proposed. We ask all parties to vote down the social liberal bill and allow cross party work to go forward with a new spending plan depending on the passing of this bill. |
| Date | 16:23:32, April 24, 2016 CET | From | National Front | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | The National Front would support cutting more in the lower income boundaries however with parties like the Social-Liberal party wanting to increase spending again the Government would fall into a debt which this party will not allow, while we are responsible for the nations finances. A new bill will be propsed by the finance minister ,Tony Jones, to increase some spending however this can not be done with the spending plan that the social-liberal party has proposed. We ask all parties to vote down the social liberal bill and allow cross party work to go forward with a new spending plan depending on the passing of this bill. |
| Date | 16:37:04, April 24, 2016 CET | From | SLP-Libertarian Alliance | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | This proposal requires us to not do a full on spending increase and is disproportionate to the wealthy. We encourage the parties that want to support the poor to vote down this disasterus plan. |
| Date | 16:39:04, April 24, 2016 CET | From | SLP-Libertarian Alliance | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | Also, our plan will leave us with a surplus of this bill fails, so we do not want debt. If anything, the national front wants either debt or the full destruction of our welfare system. |
| Date | 08:54:47, April 25, 2016 CET | From | Party of Liberty | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | You call this disastrous, however you will not be when the wealthy people, the smart people and the ambitious people leave the country. They will leave the country because of our ridiculously high tax rates. You may point out that the poor only get 3 per BEL off their tax, while the rich get 15 per BEL but you have to consider that the poor were only paying 13 per BEL in the first place, while the rich were paying 70 per BEL. This huge tax rate will make them leave the country, and then where are out entrepeneurs? Our scientists? Big businesses? Gone. And with them, the tax they pay. And with them, the jobs they provide. In the end, if you look at the bigger picture this massive tax rate on the rich, in the end, only crushes the poor. The rich can just go somewhere else. Vote up this plan to stop a brain drain! |
| Date | 13:12:03, April 25, 2016 CET | From | SLP-Libertarian Alliance | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | Well, if they leave then it just proves the point that the rich do not care about the average citizen and are only here to exploit the poor so that the rich will only get richer while the are left to rot. Also, the majority of new jobs are generally provided by small business and startups. Also, do you really think that these CEOs and businessmen will really give more to the poor with less taxes. I'd argue no. We have seen time and time again that these massive tax cuts will only promote inequality. They will not suddenly lead to prosperity for all, only just the top executives that can buy two mansions with their yachts because the "progressives" feel that promoting inequality is the best way to grow the economy. Also, this argument ignores scaling. You say that a 13 BEL tax decrease is necessary because before it was 70 BEL. However, the people that barley have their taxes change make 10,000 to 20,000 BEL. These tax cuts will not change anything for these people, except maybe allowing them to go out to a restaurant once a month rather than every other, while higher earners are going to get more per each cent cut. So, this proposal dramatically increases wealthy earnings while leaving the poor with squat. And, your argument forgets the benefits to the poor that the increased welfare spending brings, not to mention the government created jobs in the environmental service and infrastructure development. Instead, your argument is simple fear-mongering that ignores the benefits of increased spending. Business has survived for so long without this proposal, it will continue to survive. |
| Date | 17:01:07, April 25, 2016 CET | From | Party of Liberty | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | No, the majority of the rich do not care about the poor. That is fact. And that is a fact you must use and acknowledge. The rich care about earning money, and in most cases earning money means helping the poor in some way or another. This means employing them into your business. Tell me, if you were rich, would you stay and pay this ridiculously high tax or would you leave to a place with less tax? You would pick the latter. In a place with lower tax, they can actually do something. If you want the rich to leave, then OK. You can deal with the huge loss of jobs and money and massive needings to put much more money into welfare to compensate - let's see how the economy fares then. You say that we can see "time and time again" that tax cuts lead to "inequality." This is simply wrong. Tax cuts lead to increased prosperity - while not instant, it does happen. You cannot ignore the increased consumerism and thus the increased employment as factories and shops get increased production, and wages begin to rise as the people demand it. This plan allows the people themselves to chose their destiny, and gives them a hand up - not a hand out. That is what the people of this country need. You also forget that this is part of a larger plan, this is not the only bit. We are first giving a cut to the poor and are stopping a 'brain drain'. As time goes on we wish to continue cutting tax to the poor, bit-by-bit, to ensure that we are not going into debt while also pushing forward with these tax cuts and helping the poor to climb up the financial ladder. You call my argument fear-mongering? When it is you who paint the rich as evil people who "exploit" the poor? The way you say it makes them sound like slave-drivers, which they obviously are not. Your arguments also forgets the negatives that increased welfare spending brings - for example staying on welfare because it gives more money than actually going out and getting a job. While welfare is very much needed, don't get us wrong, we cannot give them so much that it is more financially viable to stay at home and do nothing. Yes, business has survived. But it needs to /live/. This plan will breathe life into the market and allow it to prosper and thus help all in Beluzia, not just the rich or poor. And also, we never said anything about your plan anyway? So we're not very sure as to why you're defending it. |
| Date | 17:22:16, April 25, 2016 CET | From | Unsubmissive Beluzian Workers Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | We're sorry, SLP, but the PL has persuaded us |
| Date | 19:14:51, April 25, 2016 CET | From | SLP-Libertarian Alliance | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | I made my point, and clearly these untrue progressives want income inequality and only prosperity for their rich friends. When it is our welfare thrown into jeopardy and everything privatized, I hope you will all realize this is a mistake. I am willing to come to a compromise here, but I will have you know that we will not surrender any more of our government to the billionaires that got you elected so that you can only advance them. And please, don't call yourselves progressive. You are not to us. |
| Date | 19:14:55, April 25, 2016 CET | From | SLP-Libertarian Alliance | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | I made my point, and clearly these untrue progressives want income inequality and only prosperity for their rich friends. When it is our welfare thrown into jeopardy and everything privatized, I hope you will all realize this is a mistake. I am willing to come to a compromise here, but I will have you know that we will not surrender any more of our government to the billionaires that got you elected so that you can only advance them. And please, don't call yourselves progressive. You are not to us. |
| Date | 19:25:27, April 25, 2016 CET | From | Party of Liberty | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | Well, if you consider keeping this country affloat and being one of the most socially liberal parties here unprogressive - then whatever the men in the high castle say. |
| Date | 19:28:07, April 25, 2016 CET | From | Party of Liberty | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | If the new definition of progressive is destroying our country, then I am happy not to be you. |
| Date | 19:39:53, April 25, 2016 CET | From | SLP-Libertarian Alliance | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of December 4017 |
| Message | Woah, destroying our country. I'll admit it was rash, rage-filled, and stupid. That does not change the facts or both of our ideas. The main problem I have is that this relies on supply-side or Trickle Down economics, which has proven to not work. Cutting taxes on the wealthy does not lead to prosperity for the entire society. Several studies have shown in other countries that while cutting taxes grows the top earners growth by a large amount, it does not lead to growth among the poor. And as to companies moving overseas, wouldn't that mean that they lose market share. And this ignores the corporate tax rate only being 10%, this is based on individuals. We will not lose corporations themselves due to high taxes on the individuals at the helm. I would like to apologize to the parliament for my outburst, good evening, and let us progress Beluzia by voting no. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 556 | |||||
| no | Total Seats: 194 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: You can view who's online (i.e. been active the last 10 minutes) at the bottom of the menu (either at the top or the side). |
| Random quote: "Politics is perhaps the only profession for which no preparation is thought necessary." - Robert Louis Stevenson |