留学生税法补贴Subsidy论文 [7]
论文作者:英语论文论文属性:议论文 Argument Essay登出时间:2014-09-24编辑:yangcheng点击率:15263
论文字数:4406论文编号:org201409202309147878语种:英语 English地区:美国价格:免费论文
关键词:税法补贴论文indirect taxes财政政策货币援助sbusidy
摘要:本文是一篇留学生税法补贴论文,补贴,通常被视为税收的相反面,是一种财政政策的工具。补贴源于拉丁词“subsidium”,从字面意思上反应出背后所隐含的援助的意思。然而,当这些措施是透明的,有针对性的以及适用于实际执行情况时,他们才会展现出最有益的潜力。
ram has the net effect of reimbursing farmers for the difference between a crop's market price and the minimum level that Congress sets every five to six years.
Fixed payments. Fixed payments are given to farmers based on their farms' historical production and are unrelated to actual production.
Countercyclical payments. This program functions somewhat similarly to the marketing loan program by subsidizing farmers up to a government-set target price, this rate is higher than the marketing loan rate and therefore represents an additional subsidy.
For farmers who grow the subsidized crop, these policies have the net effect of subsidizing them up from their crop's market price to its countercyclical price rate, or even higher when the market price is above the countercyclical rate and they receive fixed payments.
Remedying Low Prices with Lower Prices Farm policy is supposed to help farmers recover income lost because of low crop prices. However, farmers can increase their subsidies by planting additional acres, which increases production and drives prices down further, thereby spurring demands for even greater subsidies. In other words, subsidies merely lower prices. This is the policy equivalent of trying to use gasoline to extinguish a fire.
When the 1996 farm bill increased the marketing loan rate of soybeans from $4.92 to $5.26 per bushel (which meant larger subsidies), farmers responded by planting an additional 8 million acres of soybeans, which contributed to the 33 percent decline in soybean prices over the next two years. Instead of alleviating low soybean prices, the new subsidies accelerated their fall at considerable taxpayer expense. Even the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) admits that subsidy increases have induced farmers to plant millions of new acres of wheat, soybeans, cotton, and corn.
In a free market, low prices serve as an important signal that supply has exceeded consumer demand and that production should shift accordingly. By shielding farmers from low market prices, farm subsidies induce farmers to grow whatever government will subsidize, not what consumers really want. Stephen Houston Jr., a Georgia cotton farmer, recently told The Atlanta Journal Constitution, 'We're just playing a game. [Market] prices don't have anything to do with what we're doing. We're just looking at the government payments.'
Contradictory Policies After handing out commodity subsidies that pay farmers to plant more crops, Washington then turns around and pays other farmers not to farm 40 million acres of cropland each year the equivalent of idling every farm in Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio The Conservation Reserve Program, which pays farmers to sign 10-year contracts pledging not to farm their land, is often promoted as supporting environmental stewardship. In reality, removing farmland to raise crop prices has been the program's central long-term justification. Paying some farmers to plant more crops and others to plant fewer crops simply makes no sense.
Ignoring Yields The illogic does not end there. Businesses calculate their revenues by multiplying the product's price by the quantity sold. Similarly, farmers calculate per-acre revenues by multiplying the crop price by the yield (crop volume per acre). However, farm subsidy formulas focus only on crop prices and simply plug in a historical yield measur
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。