#consumer tax

[limitdne]

okay but flat consumer taxes are actually a pretty decent idea

you're still taxing the hell out of the rich

they think they need a 100,000 dollar car, so if you tax that by 10%, thats 10,000 in tax money. 

multi million dollar home? boom thats a few hundred thousand right there.

buying a shit ton of stock? money money money

spending a few hundred on a bottle of wine so you look cool in front of your vain as fuck rich friends? moneys everywhere

you could put a big ass fucking tax on things like marijuana, tobacco products, alcohol, and other harmful products which would lead to a more healthy country because no one fucking wants to pay 20% tax on shit like that.

it would be great for student receiving scholarships because our money wouldn't be taxed which means that we would be able to pay for shit like oH MY FUCKING GOD YES I HAVE WATER THANK YOU. because water is a utility and all that fun shit....

also, fucking military spending. they spent all this fucking money on a plane that costs around 8,000 to maintain per day. we dont need shit like that. I'm all for having money that is dedicated to creating ways to combat newer forms of warfare (if you want to keep the peace, prepare for war) like biological and chemical shit, but we dont need the fucking plane. scrap it and use if for the planes that were used a few decades ago that still fucking work because holy shit they were manufactured well and theyre cheap as fuck to maintain (i think that they were used during the cuban missile crisis, can't remember for the life of me at the moment).

you know what we dont fucking need? politicians that make a $300,000 salary. if they fucking have some big ass line of some shit and thats where they get their money, then good for them. i dont give a fuck. but there is NO FUCKING REASON why they should be making $300,000+ per year. cut that shit. i grew up in suburbanite hell where 90% of  the people work blue collar jobs and they make an average of 53k per year in my area (in the nicest areas its about 65k). in the areas closer to the city, each individual makes around 41.5k and they have bigger families and they still keep their heads above the water. I'm talking families of five or more. so yeah, there is no fucking reason why a government official should be making that much money. id even be fine with 150k because of the schooling and experience shit but not 300k. chill the fuck out. 

but anyways, if we did some of this shit, we community colleges would be free, public tuitions wouldn't make me want to die, and maybe we would have a functioning society.

(also rich people aren't allowed to bitch about taxes because they get to choose what they pay for.)

[theganjaherald]

Washington state to eliminate excise tax on marijuana businesses and spike the consumer's tax.

Washington senate just passed SB 6062 and it has been sent to the house for consideration. This bill would simplify the tax system and get rid of excise tax for the marijuana businesses. currently taxes are collected when the producers sell to processors (25%), when processors sell to retailers (25%), and when retailers sell to consumers (25%). SB 6062 would eliminate all taxes except retail to consumer,that tax would be increased to ( 37% ). The taxes collected from the wholesale side is much less significant and the increase should accommodate for all the taxes removed with the bill evening it out for consumers.

The IRS code doesn’t allow deduction of business expenses for anyone in the marijuana selling field so, state excise taxes paid by these businesses can’t be deducted federally. This bill would make things easier for the businesses and help reduce the cost of top shelf bud.

You might notice the pricing spreads for most stores involve a few tiers,some with dirt prices and others that consist of top shelf strains with some recognizable staples mixed in. This bill could make that gap in price shrink.

It seems obvious that the cheapest buds in any dispensary are the ones grown in house avoiding the taxes. The lower tier strains are usually named something you probably never heard of or have a tag added to claim lineage . These are usually the least potent and have a lackluster taste.

The problem with the bill is it just moved around taxes, it didn’t get rid of anything. Without reductions that compete with street-level they will still be losing taxes to the black market that could help benefit the state and generate more revenue for the growers that are legal beagles.

Feel free to take a look at the paper work on legiscan thanks to Marijuana Buisness Daily for the great article featured image credits go to Lending Memo

  Washington state to eliminate excise tax on marijuana businesses and spike the consumer’s tax. was originally published on The Ganja Herald

[therakyatpost]

New Post has been published on The Rakyat Post

New Post has been published on http://www.therakyatpost.com/news/2014/05/29/malaysias-gst-progressive-model/

Malaysia's GST is a progressive model

PUTRAJAYA, May 29:

The Goods and Services Tax (GST) will be implemented on April 1 next year, but many remain unsure whether the GST is a progressive or regressive tax system and its impact on the people.

The GST mechanism and its implications may not be something straight forward for most people and like pointed out by the Customs Department’s GST director Subromaniam Tholasy, things become more complicated when people start talking of progressive and regressive tax systems without knowing what they were.

He pointed out under a regressive taxation system, the medium and low income group bear much of the tax burden while under a progressive taxation system the high income earners pay more taxes.

“GST is a broad based consumer tax based on expenditure and not on income as misunderstood by some. This means if someone spends more on GST imposed goods and services, thus the person will be paying more taxes.

“The confusion happens as some feel GST is based on income. If GST is based on income, every value added tax (VAT) or GST will appear more regressive and will burden the medium and low income earners,” he said.

The Customs Department and Finance Ministry have conducted intensive study on GST implemented by160 nations, and the study conducted pointed out that Malaysia’s GST model is progressive in nature.

Subromaniam said the International Monetary Fund (IMF) concurred with this finding.

He went on to explain that in the event all goods and services were to be subjected to GST without any exemptions, it is then considered regressive.

“Nonetheless when GST is implemented there will be many exemptions or zero GST that is bound to benefit the low and medium income earners.

“Based on the spending patterns of low and medium income earners, they hardly spend on non-essential items and services, or items that do not enjoy GST exemptions,” he said.

Elaborating on other factors that contributed to the general public apprehension on GST, he said some feared that the GST would be implemented along with the existing Sales and Services Tax (SST).

“GST will replace SST. There is a general misconception that the GST will be implemented with the existing SST, and if this is true then it will burden the people and appear regressive,” he said.

Speaking on the existing SST, Subromaniam said that while both taxes were progressive in nature, the government wanted to go ahead with GST to restructure the national taxation system.

The restructuring of the national taxation system is seen crucial in overcoming the loopholes with SST and to ensure an effective, efficient and transparent tax system to enhance the nation’s competitiveness.

Among the shortcomings of the existing taxation system is that overlapping taxation and multi-level taxation, transfer pricing and value and no tax exemption on exports.

“GST is more effective as it will help to reduce the bureaucratic hassle and enhance tax compliance within the society.

“Apart from that there would be greater transparency on the pricing as all business transactions would be recorded on invoice receipts that will be audited by the Customs Department,” he said.

Subromaniam said based on the accumulated data, the tax burden on households with an income of RM2,000 per month is only 2.59% while for those with an income of RM12,000 is 4.14% per month.

He said with a GST rate of 6%, the tax paid by households with RM2,000 income is RM39.16 per month while for the households with RM12,000 income it is RM345.06 a month, nine times greater.

“Households with an income of RM2,000 spend about 32% of the total purchase on items with zero GST and 32.63% on GST imposed items.

“Households with an income of RM12,000 only spend about 12.15% of their total income on GST exempted goods while 63.90% of the spending is on GST imposed items,” he said.

Among the things exempted from GST are basic necessities like rice, sugar,salt, flour, cooking oil, lentil, spices, salted fish and shrimp paste.

Government services like the issuance of passport, licence, healthcare services, learning in school; transport services like bus and train, highway tolls and education services are exempted from GST.

“The public have to seek knowledge on GST to understand the system better and should avoid from listening to hearsay that GST will benefit the rich and burden the poor.

“It is undeniable that GST has an impact on the medium and low income earners but the impact is very small on them compared with the impact on high income earners.

“In spite of the negligible impact of GST on the low and medium income group, the government will continue with the special cash assistance among others the Bantuan Rakyat 1Malaysia (BR1M) and RM300 cash for BR1M recipients when GST is implemented,” he said.

GST has been implemented in 160 nations and the rate of 6% is the lowest in the world compared with Singapore (7%) and 10% in Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam.