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: D.07.4204 Income Tax Proposal
Details
Submitted by[?]: Association of Consumers and Taxpayers
Status[?]: defeated
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: March 4205
Description[?]:
| The Association of Consumers and Taxpayers propose to adjust the government's income tax policy to better address the economic situation of the Holy Luthori Empire. |
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 |
| > 500 LPD | 10% | 1,409,000,000 LPD |
| > 750 LPD | 15% | 2,114,000,000 LPD |
| > 1,000 LPD | 20% | 5,636,000,000 LPD |
| > 1,500 LPD | 40% | 75,449,000,000 LPD |
| > 5,000 LPD | 45% | 69,925,000,000 LPD |
| > 10,000 LPD | 50% | 46,191,000,000 LPD | Total | 200,724,000,000 LPD |
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 01:02:11, May 02, 2017 CET | From | Association of Consumers and Taxpayers | To | Debating the D.07.4204 Income Tax Proposal |
| Message | This bill raises the income tax deductible from 200 LPD to 500 LPD, provides 7 MM LPD in tax relief and reduces the number of tax brackets down to 6. |
| Date | 04:02:40, May 02, 2017 CET | From | Association of Consumers and Taxpayers | To | Debating the D.07.4204 Income Tax Proposal |
| Message | This bill was a starting point. This bill purposely focuses on tax relief for lower income earners. Further cuts could include reducing the rate in the fourth bracket from 40% to 30%; this would amount to a reduction of ~19 MM LPD in accrued income tax payable per annum. But that gives us almost no more jiggle room. It might be possible to reduce entitlements or discretionary spending, but where to begin? If any party has any constructive ideas, kindly field suggestions to the floor. Politics is not a spectator sport. |
| Date | 10:03:46, May 02, 2017 CET | From | Progression | To | Debating the D.07.4204 Income Tax Proposal |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, As ACT admit, this places more of a burden on low-income workers which reflects their unfair ideology quite well. Furthermore it slashes £7 billion from the public finances which could be spent on schools or hospitals - instead they want to begin to starve public services of cash so they can begin to privatise them. We should be cutting income tax for low and middle-income workers who are the ones struggling financially and raising tax on the rich and corporations who can afford to pay tax instead. If Labour jump into government with ACT - who has proven its disastrous and unfair economic vision - shame on them. - Elaine Pierce-Wilkins MP, Shadow Finance Secretary |
| Date | 21:38:39, May 02, 2017 CET | From | Association of Consumers and Taxpayers | To | Debating the D.07.4204 Income Tax Proposal |
| Message | Apparently Progression is uninterested in reducing the tax burden on lower income earners. We are to say the least perplexed. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 254 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 266 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 130 |
| Random fact: Particracy does not allow official national flags of real-life nations or flags which are very prominent and recognisable (eg. the flags of the European Union, the United Nations, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union or the Confederate States of America). |
| Random quote: "There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right with America." - Bill Clinton |