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 October 2190
Details
Submitted by[?]: Progressive Party
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: June 2191
Description[?]:
| The Progressive Party propose to adjust the government's income tax policy to better address the economic situation of the Republic of Likatonia. |
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 |
| > 7,500 LIK | 30% | 53,340,000,000 LIK |
| > 11,500 LIK | 32% | 17,028,000,000 LIK |
| > 13,000 LIK | 34% | 15,058,000,000 LIK |
| > 14,500 LIK | 36% | 20,782,000,000 LIK |
| > 17,000 LIK | 38% | 12,907,000,000 LIK |
| > 19,000 LIK | 40% | 10,918,000,000 LIK |
| > 21,000 LIK | 42% | 22,489,000,000 LIK |
| > 26,000 LIK | 45% | 14,063,000,000 LIK |
| > 30,000 LIK | 47% | 18,385,000,000 LIK | Total | 184,970,000,000 LIK |
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 20:04:56, February 24, 2006 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of October 2190 |
| Message | Approximately 14,000,000,000 per year in the hole, with the newly passed budget? I think not! |
| Date | 21:10:02, February 24, 2006 CET | From | Progressive Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of October 2190 |
| Message | Well, if you look at our economics page, we are getting about 14M LIKs through the luxury tax which somehow passed. Once we revoke the luxury tax, then we can bring back the income tax to match the budget. |
| Date | 21:11:33, February 24, 2006 CET | From | Progressive Party | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of October 2190 |
| Message | Also, the government's job isn't to profiteer. We've been running surpluses for many many years. It wouldn't hurt the country that much to go into the red for a few years. |
| Date | 22:45:36, February 24, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Income tax proposal of October 2190 |
| Message | How is a surplus a bad thing? If we NEED a reserve, it would be better if it were there, than to need it and NOT find it. On the other hand, AM AAP thinks we should do everything in our power, to avoid JUST the kind of deficit spending the PP appears to recommend. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 265 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 236 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Check out the forum regularly for game news. http://forum.particracy.net/ |
| Random quote: "The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves." - Henry Kissinger |