Talk:Amendment: The Individual Income Tax Act (630)

From The Kodiak Republic Wiki

Braughn F. G. Kryos OP

— 02/29/2024 2:01 PM

Tabled by Jack Williams, MGA, as an independent member's bill. An amendment to the act to fund government expenditure from individual revenues. Voting is set for 9 March. The Kodiak Republic Wiki Amendment: The Individual Income Tax Act (630) An act to fund government expenditure from individual revenues. ACTIONED on ## MONTH ### with ## Aye, ## Nay, ## Abstain, Braughn F. G. Kryos


a message

to this channel. See all 

pinned messages .

— 02/29/2024 2:01 PM

Braughn F. G. Kryos OP

— 02/29/2024 2:01 PM

@Assembly Member, debate for this bill is now open. I am curious as to why the member has decided that the government needs to increase the amount of personal income taxes? Josef Kovac — 02/29/2024 3:28 PM I'm also curious why the largest tax increase was in middle income? A whopping 5% as opposed to a 3% increase for the upper class. If we're to increase personal taxes at this time, I would rather it target the upper classes. Jack Williams (DPPK) — 02/29/2024 3:54 PM Seeing our deficit as well as the fact that we are going to increase funding for Military, Education, and Law and Order, I feel the increase in personal income tax will be able to give the government more revenue to fund new legislation as well help add additional funding to programs. Jack Williams (DPPK) — 02/29/2024 3:55 PM ((To be honest, I wrote the bill wrong, My character actually supports higher taxes on upper classes)) I would be interested in flipping those numbers to where upper class taxes are increased more. In fact, I am going to make that change now. give me a moment to do this unorthodox type of change. Done Jack Williams (DPPK) — 02/29/2024 4:02 PM This amendment will give more necessary funding for Kodiak. Obviously increasing income tax is never a fun topic and isn't very popular with the people of Kodiak but in order to give more funding towards current important programs and also towards our departments, this increase in income tax is necessary. I have increased taxes in each income category with higher salaries getting the bigger tax increase of 5%. With that I renew my motion This increase will also help with the overall goal of trying to get to a point where deficit is going down. Braughn F. G. Kryos OP

— 02/29/2024 4:22 PM

I am against the raising of taxes against the lower income brackets. I propose that the highest two income brackets (into which I fall) should have their taxes increased by 7% and the bottom two taxed tax brackets to have their proposed tax decreased. Josef Kovac — 02/29/2024 4:23 PM Beat me to it. I'm also in favour of that. Jack Williams (DPPK) — 02/29/2024 4:33 PM I don't disagree with raising higher brackets, I just feel we should look for a more fair tax increase across all brackets. The higher income class is already being beaten down with the Enterprise tax too. Braughn F. G. Kryos OP

— 02/29/2024 4:52 PM

Those who have more can well afford to give more. Attempting to raise all taxes equally defies raising taxes equitably. It is fair only to the rich to raise the taxes disproportionately. It is fair to everyone to raise the taxes on the wealthy more than on the poor. Jack Williams (DPPK) — 02/29/2024 4:58 PM How about this. The two higher brackets get 7% increase while the lower two get a 2% increase? Like I said I do agree with what you are saying, however I still believe It wouldn't be too hard for a 1-2% increase for the other two brackets. Braughn F. G. Kryos OP

— 02/29/2024 5:22 PM

Hmm. Perhaps. Let me consult with m’colleagues. Edmund Marwood [NUP] — 02/29/2024 5:27 PM Personally, I don't think a nearly 10% increase in taxes are warranted, especially if its just going to be about taking money from the highly qualified and educated to pay for a temporary military increase. Braughn F. G. Kryos OP

— 02/29/2024 5:33 PM

I think the “temporary military increase” is not the only target of this bill. We also need to provide surplus that will be used for other programs, like expanded social programs and healthcare. On top of the fact that I doubt anything about the recent hike in military spending is temporary. Edmund Marwood [NUP] — 02/29/2024 5:40 PM I am still hesitant to put our average effective tax rate any higher than 35% given it places us in the exceptionally high for income taxes Image Braughn F. G. Kryos OP

— 02/29/2024 5:43 PM

Effective tax rate doesn’t necessarily mean overtaxation. It just means that the taxation, in this case, is higher for the rich, those most capable of bearing the brunt, than the poor. This is why, if we must increase income tax, it should be increased most for these groups. Though, I would prefer other forms of taxation to be considered first, such as capital gains taxes. Edmund Marwood [NUP] — 02/29/2024 5:44 PM It clearly increases the effective income tax to 38% - picking a specific demographic to harm most doesn't change that fact Braughn F. G. Kryos OP

— 02/29/2024 5:47 PM

That’s not what I said. I said that higher effective taxation does not mean overtaxation. Edmund Marwood [NUP] — 02/29/2024 5:49 PM Given that these are nations with exceptionally more services than Kodiak, raising taxes to build more services would demonstrably be overtaxation Braughn F. G. Kryos OP

— 02/29/2024 5:51 PM

Would you rather we build the services first? Edmund Marwood [NUP] — 02/29/2024 5:53 PM Clearly what social and economic programs the Assembly feels are necessary should be built within the budgetary means we currently have - which may mean significant jiggling in legislated mandates. Braughn F. G. Kryos OP

— 02/29/2024 6:01 PM

So, let me get this straight, you believe that all government programs should be funded within our current budgetary means? Edmund Marwood [NUP] — 02/29/2024 6:03 PM I'd say its more nuanced than that - I'd say government programs should be built such that it increases economic output which ultimately would increase tax returns which could be invested into further government programs. You have to build the blocks at the bottom of the pyramid before you can build the rest of it. Jack Williams (DPPK) — 02/29/2024 6:05 PM You’d rather create government programs that creates revenue than just increasing Taxes for more revenue. Edmund Marwood [NUP] — 02/29/2024 6:07 PM Correct. Which is why the NUP has always supported measured increases in research and education while holding off on building universal healthcare. its also why supporting lowering corporation taxes is advisable as it provides more capital for replacing plant which can increase productivity and safety Jack Williams (DPPK) — 02/29/2024 6:19 PM I understand that even though I like universal healthcare. Though my worry is if we want implement programs and legislation that requires extensive funding, where do you think that funding is coming from? Edmund Marwood [NUP] — 02/29/2024 6:19 PM it must come from growth or cuts to other programs. The amount of funding to build a program and the amount of funding to maintain it, in most cases, are vastly different, often an order of magnitude for example, the cost to reduce the prison overpopulation would be enormous, but once its brought down, it no longer needs to be as expensive and can be reduced with funding reallocated to anti recidivism and education a contemporary kodiak example would be the major increases in education funding for approx 10 years, then reduced to a a more reasonable rate Education could, conceivably, be reduced further with only minimal negative effect to quality, but clearly it isn't a priority as there are certainly over funded programs elsewhere As industry minister, I would ask if we need to continue to subsidise agriculture and if we shouldn't start encouraging more market efficiency and consolidation Braughn F. G. Kryos OP

— 03/03/2024 8:37 PM

@Assembly Member, I would like to see more debate on this. Jack Williams (DPPK) — 03/04/2024 12:06 AM I will make a change for 7% increase to higher brackets with only 2% increase to the lower brackets. That will be my one amendment Dr Edmund Cosmo Maltravers Jr — 03/05/2024 10:25 AM I'm somewhat on the fence in regard to this bill. Jack Williams (DPPK) — 03/05/2024 10:30 AM I understand there are some reservations but I believe the increase in taxes can help fund new programs and also be helpful in department funding too. Why would we want to cut other programs to fund others, that doesn’t help with our debt nor does it even help with growth. Edmund Marwood [NUP] — 03/05/2024 4:11 PM Raising taxes, however, does hurt growth and raising taxes to fund more programs doesn't help debt either Jack Williams (DPPK) — 03/05/2024 4:13 PM I know that but establishing new programs without more room to implement them only adds on to the current debt now. I might be sounding outside my own purview, I just feel like this increase is needed. Jack Williams (DPPK) — 03/07/2024 11:20 AM I motion for a vote. it seems that it is time to move on Dr Edmund Cosmo Maltravers Jr — 03/07/2024 11:21 AM I second the motion Braughn F. G. Kryos OP

— 03/07/2024 7:54 PM

So it shall be done EasyPoll BOT

— 03/07/2024 7:55 PM

Question Does the General Assembly approve of the Amendment: The Individual Income Tax (630)?

Choices 🇦 Aye 🇧 Nay 🇨 Abstain

Final Result 🇦 ▓▓▓▓▓▓░░░░ [8 • 57%] 🇧 ▓▓▓▓░░░░░░ [5 • 36%] 🇨 ▓░░░░░░░░░ [1 • 7%] 14 users voted


alarm_clock: Poll already ended (4 days ago)
spy: Anonymous Poll
one: allowed choice
lock: No other votes allowed

Allowed roles: @Assembly Member Poll ID: b1930160 Braughn F. G. Kryos OP

— 03/07/2024 7:55 PM

@Assembly Member, voting for this bill is now open and will remain open for 72 hours. Braughn F. G. Kryos OP

— Today at 9:27 PM

With 8 ayes, 5 nays, and 1 abstain, the Amendment: The Individual Income Tax (630) is passed by the General Assembly. This debate will be archived shortly.

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.