mason@tmsoft.uucp (Dave Mason) (08/15/89)
In article <1989Aug14.231027.11461@lsuc.on.ca> dave@lsuc.on.ca (David Sherman) writes: >[...] >I see a lot of proposals for tax changes, and they come from >the Department of Finance, not from "big business". >[...] >I agree that sales taxes are regressive. On the other hand, >most industrialized countries rely on a form of VAT, which is >what the GST is. One of the goals of the change is to reduce >the extent to which the tax system distorts business and investment >decisions, and the GST should result in less distortion. This discussion raised a couple of alternatives in my mind to the current smorgasbord of taxes. Perhaps Dave Sherman can comment on whether these ideas have been tried or are in use elsewhere. 1) Has any serious consideration ever been given to having ALL revenue collected through a (progressive) personal income tax. Cancel all sales taxes, user fees, etc. It would be MUCH cheaper to collect. The top rate would probably be 60%-70%, but at least you'd see all the taxation in one place, and the government could tune the progressiveness of the tax as appropriate. 2) We will soon have the hardware in place that we could have a capital transfer tax. If all `money' where kept in computers & we used a debit card to buy everything from a house to a corporation to a bubble gum, the government could skim some small amount (1-5%) off EVERY transfer of money. The costs of collection would be even lower, it would be relatively painless, and in some sense it would be very fair. ../Dave
Oliver@real.FIDONET.ORG (Oliver McDonald) (08/16/89)
In an article of <15 Aug 89 13:56:01 GMT>, mason@tmsoft.uucp (Dave Mason) writes: DM>In article <1989Aug14.231027.11461@lsuc.on.ca> dave@lsuc.on.ca (David DM>Sherman) writes: DM> DM>1) Has any serious consideration ever been given to having ALL revenue DM>collected through a (progressive) personal income tax. Cancel all DM>sales DM>taxes, user fees, etc. It would be MUCH cheaper to collect. The top DM>rate would probably be 60%-70%, but at least you'd see all the DM>taxation in one place, and the government could tune the DM>progressiveness of the tax as appropriate. Yah, this might work, if only we could trust the government to tune the tax appropriately. They seem to be able to do little in an appropriate maner. DM>2) We will soon have the hardware in place that we could have a DM>capital transfer tax. If all `money' where kept in computers & we DM>used a debit card to buy everything from a house to a corporation to a DM>bubble gum, the government could skim some small amount (1-5%) off DM>EVERY transfer of money. The costs of collection would be even lower, DM>it would be relatively painless, and in some sense it would be very DM>fair. Yes, and with little extra work one could track the location, tastes, actions, of every person in the country. Just think what a boon this would be to the police system. Big Brother is possible NOW with this type of thing. Always use cash, it's untraceable... Oliver. -- | Views? What Views? |Oliver McDonald - via FidoNet node 1:342/1 | They're mine, not anyone |UUCP: ...!alberta!ncc!real!Oliver | elses! |ARPA: Oliver@real.FIDONET.ORG Hubble's Law applied to computers: The act of running a debugger, changes the output.
stephen@ziebmef.uucp (Stephen M. Dunn) (08/16/89)
In article <1989Aug15.135601.12057@tmsoft.uucp> mason@tmsoft.UUCP (Dave Mason) writes:
[...]
$2) We will soon have the hardware in place that we could have a
$capital transfer tax. If all `money' where kept in computers & we
$used a debit card to buy everything from a house to a corporation to a
$bubble gum, the government could skim some small amount (1-5%) off
$EVERY transfer of money. The costs of collection would be even lower,
$it would be relatively painless, and in some sense it would be very
$fair.
Looking at this from a practical ponit of view (I'll leave the economic
view to someone more qualified to comment than I am), this isn't going to
happen, at least for many, many years. Can you imagine little Davey Mason
Jr. going up to the counter in the store with a pack of hockey cards in his
left hand and a debit card in his right hand?
And also, what happens to such things as social clubs which sell
refreshments (e.g. cans of pop) to their members during their meetings? Are
they going to have to install some sort of computer just so they can sell
$.50 cans of pop to their members? When several people need stuff and one
of them goes to the store, buys all the stuff, and then gets his friends to
pay him back, how's that going to work? Or does he have to collect their
debit cards when he goes, leaving them without access to their cash, and then
stand in line and present five different debit cards to the cashier, saying
"Charge $5.79 to this card, and $8.57 to that one ... no, maybe that should
be $6.22 on this card and $7.38 on that one, and $2.87 on mine ..."?
I wouldn't mind seeing a greater use of electronic funds (although, as a
consumer, I'd rather have a credit card than a debit card, since it is
quite possible to sensibly use a credit card and avoid paying interest on
your purchases); however, I personally don't think that the elimination of
non-electronic forms of money is something we'll see in the near future.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
! Stephen M. Dunn stephen@ziebmef.UUCP ! DISCLAIMER: Who'd ever !
!---------------------------------------------------! claim such dumb ideas? !
! I have become comfortably numb ... ! I sure as heck wouldn't !steven@enel.ucalgary.ca (Steven Leikeim) (08/19/89)
In article <1989Aug15.135601.12057@tmsoft.uucp> mason@tmsoft.UUCP (Dave Mason) writes: >1) Has any serious consideration ever been given to having ALL revenue >collected through a (progressive) personal income tax. Cancel all sales >taxes, user fees, etc. It would be MUCH cheaper to collect. The top ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Would it be cheaper to collect? If everyone only received a/several paycheck(s) this would be fairly easy. But you also have to take into account interest (You did report ALL of the interest your bank paid you on your savings account on last years income tax return, didn't you :-) ), capital gains, dividends (We currently are careful, sort of, about taxing income twice), etc. >rate would probably be 60%-70%, but at least you'd see all the >taxation in one place, and the government could tune the >progressiveness of the tax as appropriate. As has been mentioned before, if the tax rates are too high for a group of people, they will simply move their income to another country which has "better" (for them at least) tax laws. BTW, I would like to see a flatter income tax than currently exists. This however will take lots of time and may people (At least the lobby groups) will probably howl that this is unfair to all Canadians because they will produce statistics to prove that somebody will end up paying MORE tax than before. Steven Leikeim | University of Calgary | There are lies, damned lies, Department of Electrical Engineering | and statistics. .uunet!{ubc-cs,utai,alberta}!calgary!enel!steven