Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
In a good way, taxes are spent for the benefit of the country. Taxes are important for the existence of the state.
An ordinary employee doesn't earn much money. Small businesses are also not rich. And those who are engaged in large business – they have large profits, they buy luxury goods, and in some countries there are high taxes on luxury goods.
It makes sense to take money from someone who has it, and not engage in petty theft.
But it would be reasonable to exempt the poor from taxes, so as not to aggravate their situation. Why they became poor is another question.
A person may have some goal other than making money. Money is a means. For example, a person can open some project of their dreams – this will be their motivation.
I am opposed to a progressive tax scale, because it will encourage people to avoid taxes, underestimate their income, and so on. It is better to have one tax. Of course, I already foresee jokes that one way or another people will still try to avoid taxes, since 13% of a million rubles is in any case more than 13% of 500 thousand, but this is in any case better than an increase in interest.�
But if you cross the border, you may get more money.
As the example of France or the United States shows, motivation does not disappear anywhere. And if you also collect taxes from everyone, not just the poor. Then there are also normal roads and the quality of work of the state goes up. Within the framework of capitalism, this will already be progress and will greatly improve the quality of life for everyone.
I generally freeze out all this difference with taxes. Why do I have to pay tax for an apartment based on the cadastral value? I already bought it once, the square footage does not increase, it is located in the same place, why should I pay more just because it cost more when I bought it? The same thing with the car, do I somehow spoil the roads more if I don't have an Oka, but a Maserati?
They shouldn't. Motivation is really lost.�
The tax should be the same for everyone.
Let's analyze your question and try to think about it before answering it.
The theses in your question speak of indignation and lack of understanding of the overall picture of the problems of justice of our economy and the tax system. (Look, for example, at the tax systems and interest rates in developed Western countries and compare them with our own.)
I absolutely disagree with this thesis, because in our country this is not the case!
There are a lot of citizens who work “a lot”, but this does not mean at all and has nothing to do with the fact that they earn “a lot”. In this case, it may sound right and logical and beautiful at first glance, BUT … wages and their calculation are completely unrelated to the amount of labor. And in practice I have not seen balanced and differentiated fair and reasonable estimates of labor remuneration within any organization… And who can appreciate it?… I haven't even met any calculations and there are enough objective employees who are responsible for these calculations and are able to make them.
In a social state and society, there are certain rules of life.
(Look, for example, at the tax systems and interest rates in developed Western countries and compare them with our own). What is “fair”? is it fair to earn “a lot” of money? “A lot” is a relative quantity. However, it is applicable to our economy, but it still has certain values and orders of numbers. There are still other (rather, moral aspects). Well, why do you need a lot? Whether you will spend these funds correctly (maybe you spend them on luxury, maybe you will spend them on good deeds, or maybe you will share them with society and those in need for their development and prosperity).
I don't ask such questions, because I believe that the PUBLIC GOOD IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN the PERSONAL! (but you don't understand this, and neither do those who drew up Article 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which forgot about Society. And society, if you know it, logically, consists of more people than 1 person. Therefore, the rights and freedoms of Society are a higher value. And we get this article develops individualism and selfishness and benefits only yourself, but not the public.
———————————————-
I sincerely believe, and I used to believe long before reading your question, that the tax system in the Russian Federation at the moment should be as follows::
At the moment, these are not even half-measures, on a progressive scale, but stupid small calculations and changes that will come out sideways and will be of little use (what is 15% there, there should be other orders of numbers). Everything needs to change dramatically!
Why even take a tax from the poor and poor? To then reallocate it back, the same amount, in the form of assistance to the same people, in the form of subsidies from the state?
Yes, you don't need taxes at all to pay for work less than 25,000 rubles a month, you don't need them!
For labor payments less than 25,000 rubles, reduce and make the minimum tax – 5%, up to 7%. And no more.
If labor costs are higher than 50,000 rubles per month, you can take up to 13%,
And from 100,000 rubles to 400,000 rubles – take up to 25%,
Over 400,000 rubles a month – take 33%.
This is a fair scheme!
Which reflects the poor, the poor, the middle class and the rich!
It turns out that there are four fair gradations that pay taxes fairly:
Beggars-do not pay!; The poor pay at a minimum -5%; Normal, ordinary people, but not reached the middle class-13%; The middle class-25%; And the rich-33%. (otherwise, the stratification of society, poverty and extinction due to these dishonestly enriched oligarchs and rich people) will still be imperceptible for their lives (and this difference in distribution, which they will share with the poor – is a benefit and a matter of survival of people and the nation), but at the same time it will limit these rich people and prevent them from basking in unnecessary, unworthy and uncultured excessive luxury.
—————————-
In addition, I believe that the budget, that funds for social needs and funds should be received and distributed NOT ONLY from taxes, but also from the profits of minerals and other things that are now in the hands of private corporations, and not even ours, but foreign ones, and these funds are swung there and for the super-profits of local oligarchs, who, thanks to our imperfect laws, rob the population (and do not divide) and use according to Article 9, paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, land and mineral resources in private ownership exclusively for their own enrichment and enrichment of foreign corporations.
What types of motivation do you know?
How and what is the motivation to “work hard” with increased taxes???
Are you saying that “significant” earnings will be taken away from your total and relative amount?
For you, is this difference in numbers (quantity) significant for motivation???
Are you motivated only by money?
I am sincerely sorry, because if you think like this, then greed can manifest itself NOT ONLY and NOT SO MUCH IN the PERCENTAGE OF TAX, but also in general – in the TOTAL amount of your salary. If it is generally “low” for you, then this circumstance will also kill your motivation to work! Therefore, the claim that only a percentage will select motivation can be considered unfounded. Motivation, to a greater extent, is selected for completely different, more significant reasons.
——————————————————
Consumer society and reducing everyday life only to the amount of income and, accordingly, spending – not the idea and “reasonable” exclamation that you need to accept.
In our capitalist society, there are too many people who are fixated on their own well-being and income, who forget about society.
See. Currently, our country has regressive taxation. That is, the more you earn, the lower the percentage of taxes you pay.
According to your logic, this should encourage everyone to earn more.�
But this is not happening.
Conclusion: Your logic is not correct.
No, it will not kill you, because even with progressive taxes, you will still get more than you could get by working less. Of course, you can sit on the couch and dream: “I wish I could earn more…” But in fact, the income still increased. Another question is whether the value of “time spent on work” and “loot received” is in a favorable proportion for you, but this is a special situation. It depends on what you can spend your free time on.
If those who collected taxes from you before, had the right to do so, and had the right to raise them a little, there is no contradiction with injustice. Another thing is that this is ill-conceived and short-sighted, because it kills your desire to work hard. Accordingly, it will not be possible to collect increased taxes in the future. But here the question of justice lies in the plane of law – whether the tax authority has the right to increase the tax burden in relation to you or not.
On average, people who are more fortunate have a high salary: their parents provided for them in childhood and did not need to earn extra money instead of lessons, a good education, and dating
Costs grow more slowly than expenses, for example: if you spend constantly with a PO of 50k, you can save 20k, and with a po of 70k-40k, twice as much
To compensate for these factors, a progressive tax scale is introduced. Which, of course, demotivates you to earn more. For example, in the Netherlands, some people work four days a week – taking into account progressive taxes, the hourly rate is higher than when working full-time.
I agree with the author of the question. If the tax is x % of earnings, then the person who earns a lot and so in absolute terms pays a larger amount than the rest. Plus, they probably consume more goods and services. Where taxes are also included. He probably has a more expensive car, which costs more money to maintain and operate than the average car. He has better housing conditions, and consequently the property tax is higher. And on vacation, he and his family spend more, giving the opportunity for additional earnings as the industry as a whole, and tax deductions from its activities. Etc, etc. Based on all this, I am a categorical opponent of the progressive scale of taxation. It either kills motivation in general, which happens quite rarely, or (which happens much more often) leads to all sorts of schemes for “optimizing” income.