摘要:这是澳大利亚麦考瑞大学对累进税制和公司权利的谬论进行分析的一篇留学生论文,累进所得税的理念在经济社会中被广泛接受。本文的目的是揭露累进税制的谬论,论述它伤害了那些挣的最多以及支付更高的税收的人,以及那些如员工等低税收的人。
ll the trouble of living?” [2] (p. 318)
Is tax equity possible? Or is it just anything, the person in power says it is? To believe in equity one must first believe that objective principles of moral truth exist and are shared in the community [3] . Whether we are rich or poor, we are obliged to treat each other respectfully, because our sociable nature requires this of us. In short, in our essentials we are more alike than we are different. If this is so why should not be treated alike?
The state must be extremely careful in drawing up and enacting tax legislation. Taxes should be simple, fair, and no distortional; they should not burden in a different way individuals, corporations, and businesses. It should be borne in mind that all members of a society are taxpayers and that taxation affects everyone’s behaviors, real income and wages; the design of an optimal tax policy, affects all members of a society.
Though not normally discussed in moral terms, economic growth should be seen as an ethical obligation for government but failure of compiling a good policy deprives people of opportunity and creates barriers for the most efficient members of society. Because of informational restrictions on individuals’ abilities, needs or preferences, the trade-off between equity and efficiency objectives plays an essential role in the drawing of optimal tax policy. Because of its policy importance, taxation has been always a topic of discussion and researches.
Defining the Problem- There is a widespread belief among tax consultants and academics as well as the media and the general public, that direct taxes should be progressive. In other words, the more a person has or earns, the more he or she should pay in tax as a percentage of overall income. [4]
There is no just or progressive tax rates scale [5] . The injustice inherent in this conception of progressive taxation can be demonstrated through a simple example. In a proportional tax system with a particular rate of 25%, a subject whose taxable income is $1,000 will pay $250 in tax, while another whose taxable income is $10,000, will pay $2,500. Both individuals will thus have 75% of their profit left to invest in their business or to spend as they like. On the other hand, if the tax is progressive and the higher rate is 35%, the individual whose taxable income is $10,000 will pay $3,500 in tax and will have only 65% left to invest. So, bigger the taxable income, bigger the deductive tax and lower the remaining income.
Whether taxes are proportional or progressive, the person or company that earns more pays more. What is unfair, however, about progressive taxation is that it increases the percentage paid by higher earners. It is a way of punishing efficiency based on a distorted view of justice, fairness, and individual rights [6] . As such, it is just one of the many appeals of the communism epoch whose purpose was and still is (inheritance to the present) ultimately to grab income, wealth and capital from capitalists in the name of “social justice”, or contribution to the good of the community. [7]
In practice, the term “social justice” has served as a pretext to confiscate wealth from its legal owners and redistribute it at the government’s own judgment in the form of subsidies. Those governments that state that they have a right to do so disregard that legitimate income belongs to the pers
本论文由英语论文网提供整理,提供论文代写,英语论文代写,代写论文,代写英语论文,代写留学生论文,代写英文论文,留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。