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: Removing taxes on essential goods
Details
Submitted by[?]: GSD - Gaduridos Social Democrats
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: April 4476
Description[?]:
| GSD is proposing bill to remove taxes on essential life goods for our citizens. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Sales tax on essential goods such as food and non-luxury clothing.
Old value:: 1
Current: 0
Proposed: 0
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Sales tax on luxury goods.
Old value:: 11
Current: 15
Proposed: 13
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 05:07:58, October 25, 2018 CET | From | Partito Federalista Libertario (IDD) | To | Debating the Removing taxes on essential goods |
| Message | I would vote for this |
| Date | 08:24:36, October 25, 2018 CET | From | Gaduridos Progressive Movement | To | Debating the Removing taxes on essential goods |
| Message | A 1% tax is almost nothing but brings a good amount of revenue that the government can use. |
| Date | 16:08:51, October 25, 2018 CET | From | GSD - Gaduridos Social Democrats | To | Debating the Removing taxes on essential goods |
| Message | We don't think that our country budget should be financed with taxes on essential humanity needs, like food. There are many rich people and families and removing that 1% would let them save some more money. GSD is however asking for complete analyse from Finance Minister Zeba Jean. |
| Date | 16:23:01, October 25, 2018 CET | From | GSD - Gaduridos Social Democrats | To | Debating the Removing taxes on essential goods |
| Message | (OOC) rich = poor* |
| Date | 18:04:04, October 25, 2018 CET | From | Conservative Party | To | Debating the Removing taxes on essential goods |
| Message | This would cause a 37 billion Gadur deficit. We would like to reduce taxes but we cannot risk our fiscal stability. |
| Date | 18:05:23, October 25, 2018 CET | From | Conservative Party | To | Debating the Removing taxes on essential goods |
| Message | 37,105,237,484 Gadur, to be exact on the deficit this would cause. |
| Date | 22:18:26, October 25, 2018 CET | From | Gaduridos Progressive Movement | To | Debating the Removing taxes on essential goods |
| Message | As stated by the conservative party removing this small tax would cause a deficit which means we would have to cut spending along with this — something the GPM is not willing to do. The other alternative is to raise taxes else where. If it were more corporate taxes we would further strain our businesses which are already under heavy regulations. Or tax the the people more directly which would make them pay more via taxes than just leaving this 1% tax. Zeba Jean Minister of Finance |
| Date | 22:36:06, October 25, 2018 CET | From | GSD - Gaduridos Social Democrats | To | Debating the Removing taxes on essential goods |
| Message | We can easily solve this by slight raising luxury taxes. |
| Date | 22:45:24, October 25, 2018 CET | From | GSD - Gaduridos Social Democrats | To | Debating the Removing taxes on essential goods |
| Message | We can easily solve this by slight raising luxury taxes. |
| Date | 19:17:03, October 26, 2018 CET | From | Gaduridos Progressive Movement | To | Debating the Removing taxes on essential goods |
| Message | It would take a poor person to spend $10k on essential before the amount they spent on tax for it reaches $100. The GPM recognizes anyone making anything less than $30k a year to be "poor". That averages to about $7.5k every 3 months. This means that even if they spend all their money on essential goods (which is unlikely) throughout those 3 months it will only add up to $75 in taxes. My office estimates that there is a 40:60 split on how poor people spend their money — 60% being essentials 40% being luxury — Using the 40:60 model with our current tax rates would be as following: people under $30k incomes are not taxed so that still leaves them with the $30k. (60% of 30 is $18)k while the rest of the 30k adds up to $12k. That $18k is currently being taxed by 1% which would be $180 yearly taxed. While that $12k is currently being taxed by 11% which would be 1.3k yearly. This bill would give poor people 180 of yearly income. 65:35 for rich 50:50 for middle income. Since we used $30k for poor(the high point) we will use $150k for the middle and since we can't really calculate the high point for rich we will use the the amount of $250k. 20% of 50k is $12k (150-12=138) 25% of 150k is $37.5k (250-37.5=212.5). (rich)(65% of $212.5k is $138.1k). (35% of it is 74.4k) (11% of $138.1k is $15.2k.) (1% of $74.4k is $744.) (Medium) (50% of 138 is $69k.) (11% of $69k is $7.6k) (1% is $69) With the possible GSD proposal: The goal here is to make the current bill and possible bill to add up as much as possible (23923) math after bracket is done above, no essential tax will be calculated. 12% luxury tax: (poor:$1.6k )(medium:$9k)(rich:$18k )($26200 with a 12% luxury tax calculated in) Based on this every one will pay more. The GSD wants the poor to save their money but this will do the exact opposite. Most of the math is rounded to the nearest tenths and does not account for everyone within a group. But what it does show is the general trend that will happen. Some of the math may also be a little off. We give this a + or - 3% margin of error. Zeba Jean Minister of Finance |
| Date | 19:19:52, October 26, 2018 CET | From | Gaduridos Progressive Movement | To | Debating the Removing taxes on essential goods |
| Message | (Occ)The above calculations were being done before the GSD changed the bill and pushed it to a vote. With that being said 13% may or may not be too much of an increase. |
| Date | 19:20:36, October 26, 2018 CET | From | Gaduridos Progressive Movement | To | Debating the Removing taxes on essential goods |
| Message | *OOC |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes | Total Seats: 74 | ||
| no | Total Seats: 307 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 119 |
| Random fact: Particracy is set in the fictional world of Terra, which mirrors the real world of today and yet is not quite like it. |
| Random quote: "Man is by nature a political animal." - Aristotle |