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: P.d.l. 02/4302 - Solidarity Taxation Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Alleanza Radicale - NCD
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: January 4303
Description[?]:
| Stefano Romulani, Vice-Leader of LP: "Mr Speaker, we are presenting indipendently this proposal given the larger opposition the luxury sale tax incraese proposed by the Head of Government with the emergency budget. We heard talks about the further cut of this foundamental tools of redistribution, we heard in the past ridicolous debate on the role of the luxury goods and services into the economy, treating such items and the economy around them as any other market. But the luxury market, and people who pretend to be "fine" economists should know this, doesn't respond to the same rules and dynamics of all the other goods and services. Many luxury goods, indeed, respond to phenomena which are also in contrast with the classic economic rules, and an example is the phenomena of goods with a positive price elasticity of demand: making an item more expensive can increase its perceived value as a luxury good to such an extent that sales can go up, rather than down. Therefore, the effect of a luxury tax may be to increase demand for certain luxury goods. Luxury tax, furthermore, is based on the concept of positional goods, which are scarce goods whose value arises as status symbols largely from their ranking against other positional goods. This creates a zero-sum game in which the absolute amount of goods purchased is less relevant than the absolute amount of money spent on them and their relative positions. Agents competing in such a game for pure positional goods do not lose utility if some of this money is taken as tax, because their utility comes as status from the amount of money displayed to be spent rather than the use-value of the goods themselves. For a pure positional good, a luxury tax is the perfect form of taxation because it raises revenue without any adverse utility effects. For this reason, dumping in the trash the ridicolous protection for the luxury tax and the proposals to decrease it, we propose indeed to increase it and close the budget gap which since years is dryining resource to pay the debts. Thank you" |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Sales tax on luxury goods.
Old value:: 25
Current: 10
Proposed: 27
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:49:27, November 13, 2017 CET | From | Partito Nazionale Democratico | To | Debating the P.d.l. 02/4302 - Solidarity Taxation Act |
| Message | Ludovica Azuri, PNP Leader, Whip, The economics behind your proposal is undeniably excellent. However, the range of luxury goods is equally vast as essential goods. Whilst jewellery, watches and sports cars obey exactly the laws you have presented, and we may even have agreed with (by abstaining from the vote), other 'luxury' goods, like GMO free (bio) produce, or a larger car do not. Due to the breadth of luxury produce, and the fact that the production of said luxury goods employs many people, we will have to vote against your proposal. We would like to compliment though the fact that this bill was not a typical leftist method of populist redistribution |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 211 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 226 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 112 |
| Random fact: There is a phpBB forum dedicated to Particracy. Please click the Forum link in the top game menu. Additions to the game, suggestions and discussion is held there so get involved. http://forum.particracy.net/ |
| Random quote: "They should rule who are able to rule best." - Aristotle |