Figure (7) may work as another evidence of the inability of Egyptian tax system to mobilize domestic savings, as it shows that while domestic private savings, as a percent of GDP, was fluctuating around a downward sloping trend, marginal tax rate was fluctuating around a relatively horizontal trend which indicates that marginal tax rate has no or insignificant power over stimulating domestic private savings.
Figure 7.Marginal Tax Rate and Private Domestic Savings to GDP Source: Author’s calculations based on data extracted from Ministry of Finance, Monthly Financial Report, different editions.
To verify this conclusion, the effect of main sources of tax revenue (taxes on income, taxes on property, taxes on goods and services and tariff) on domestic savings will be examined statistically. The only source of tax revenue that has statistically significant effect on domestic savings is property tax. Tax on properties is negatively related to domestic savings with coefficient -12, see appendix (3). Accordingly, small reduction in property taxes will have magnitude increase in domestic savings. Thus, if financial markets are operating efficiently, tax cut on properties will have a considerable positive effect on the process of economic growth, especially since property taxes represent only 3.6%, in average, of total tax revenue.
While domestic saving is a leakage of income that flows outside the economy; however, it can be re-injected in the economy again
Throughout the entire existence of any form of government, there has always been taxes. Most of the time (if not all), people hate taxes. With this being said, the United States has adopted a progressive tax since its very existence. We believe that if our nation is placed under a flat tax system, our economy will operate more effectively. If we incorporate a flat tax system we will be able to ensure fairness among all citizens, eliminate tax loopholes, and allow opportunities for business expansion. With this being said, we will be examining the strengths and weaknesses about the flat tax system and how it has been used into practice.
In the United States, the top one percent received about 20 percent of the overall income for 2016. This creates an uneven distribution of income causing Americans to argue about whether or not the wealthy should pay more in federal income taxes. One side of the argument is that the wealthy make a huge portion of the nation’s income; therefore, they should have higher tax rates. The other side argues that wealthy Americans already pay their fair share of taxes by paying nearly 40 percent and should not be forced to pay more. These arguments both use compelling evidence to make their claims; however, a solution could be reached by increasing the tax rate of the top one percent by only 10 to 20 percent.
Another idea would be to avoid increasing the tax rates as this will help “minimize economic distortions that shrink the level of production” (Baker III, 2009, p. 1). To promote economic growth, our team recommends that we take the approach of increasing the corporate tax base and decreasing the corporate tax rates. Other suggestion is to reduce the deductibility of state and local taxes. Other reforms that could be looked
The federal and state governments provide the American citizens with all of the basic necessities within our communities and society that is taken for granted. Programs responsible for assistance in times of need, providing a quality standard of living, and maintaining the strongest military in the world costs incomprehensible amounts of money and could never exist without taxes from the American people. Taxes are payments made by individuals and businesses to support the government and its services. The constitution grants that congress “shall have the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises and to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the people”. Taxes paid by Americans redistribute
Whilst William McBride, chief economist for Tax Foundation website, sided with tax cut policy saying that to strengthen the financial state, “we should lower taxes on the earnings of capital,” “workers and the businesses that hire them,” Chye-ching Huang and Nathaniel Frentz, both are senior Tax Policy analysts, completely debunked the evidence McBride provided to support his argument, which includes the review of twenty-three among twenty-six studies he thought to advocate the idea. Indeed, as one conducts research, regardless of what sources it comes from, agreement over tax issue should never be found as a unanimous answer. One of the reasons why it is so difficult to reach a definite conclusion rests on the fact that although some statistics may show economic growth was in step with tax cut, correlation does not mean causation: just as ice-cream sale and murder rate increase during summer time, it is baseless to assume that higher ice-cream consumption leads to higher odds for crime. Moreover, because there is a great amount of research has been done on taxes, different interpretations from these data are understandable. Before concluding that “nearly every empirical study of taxes and economic growth published in a peer reviewed academic journal” finds cutting taxes improves the financial status quo, thus, people need to consider
More than 35% of American adults are obese and as a consequence, are at increased risks for health issues such as heart disease, high blood pressure, and diabetes ("Overweight & Obesity"). The U.S. taxpayer is supplementing much of the cost to treat obesity related health issues through public health programs such as Medicare and Medicaid ("Economic Costs"). A positive externality will occur in the form of decreased health care expenditures on Medicare and Medicaid. The U.S. government should impose an excise tax on soda and other beverages that contain sugar. Consumers who drink excess sugary beverages impose a negative internality on their health; as well as imposing a negative externality on the American
rate, in periods of higher income tax the GDP sees an increase thus proving that higher taxes do not create a drag in the economy. When the top marginal tax rate is at a 75 to 80 there is an about 4.6 GDP growth creating this “Sweet-spot”.
1) The author looked at income ineaquality and thought both things could happen, those are, higher inequality can stop growth in the early stage of economic dedvelopment and can encourage growth in a near steady rate. The author also looks an income tax and ther role that plays in ioncome inequality. By the end the author showed that both are possible and that the income redistribution by high income tax doesn't always lower income inequality. Income inequality can be lessened by higher income tax near a steady state, but it cannot be reduced in an early stage of economic development.
1.1. The capital stock in a country reveals the profitability of the federal capitals, meaning the ability of the state to use its capitals to generate revenues. These revenues in turn impact the GDP in the meaning that the higher the profitability of the capital, the higher the gross domestic product. Some data that could be assessed to help establish this relationship include the values of the private nonresidential gross fixed capital formation, the private residential gross fixed capital formation, the private total gross fixed capital formation, the government gross fixed capital formation or the total gross fixed capital formation (Kiel Institute for the World Economy).
For some time now, the United States economy has been trending in the direction of social injustice. Income inequality is ever expanding, and the primary reason is that those people at the very top of the income distribution are accumulating wealth at rates never seen before. The rich are getting richer to the extent that they are driving a massive wedge between socio-economic classes within the United States, and the impacts are far-reaching. Combating this inequality begins with an examination of the economic policies currently in place. Federal tax policy is an ideal place to start, considering the prominent role it plays in determining the distribution of wealth.
Should the flat tax rate system be implemented? No, the flat tax rate system should not be implemented. In this paper, the pro arguments will be presented, which will affirm the thesis. Then the con arguments will be presented. A rebuttal will then follow, and finally, the author’s conclusion will be offered.
The United States tax system is in complete disarray. Republicans and Democrats agree that the current tax code is complex, unfair, and costly. The income tax system is so complex; the IRS publishes 480 tax forms and 280 forms to explain the 480 forms (Armey 1). The main reason the tax system is so complex is because of the special preferences such as deductions and tax credits. Complexity in the current tax system forces Americans to spend 5.4 billion hours complying with the tax code, which is more time than it takes to manufacture every car, truck and van produced in the United States (Armey 1). Time is not the only thing that is lost with the current tax system; Americans also lose
As a significant proportion of household consumption is based on borrowing and if the cash rate falls, the amount households can borrow will increase
There are two things in life that are certain: death and taxes. In today's world, the majority of our government's income comes from taxation. A tax is not a voluntary payment or donation, but an enforced contribution imposed by government (Mikesell, 2011). Taxes are an amount of money collected from citizens, and they are used to provide public goods and services to benefit our communities. Taxes are amounts established in a political process of structured laws to determine how the collective cost of government services will be distributed among elements of the market economy. The two most important tax policies are the level of taxation, or how much taxes should be, and the structure of the system, or how revenue is to be raised
Taxation systems are usually modeled in such a way that they take into consideration the social welfare of the citizens. The government and other policy makers have the responsibility of ensuring that the system takes into account the needs of the citizens. The bottom line is that taxation should foster equal distribution of resources. The rate of taxation is usually arrived at after several considerations have been made. The rates are not fixed as they depend on the various economic changes. The issue of how taxation should be distributed among the different economic classes is yet to be addressed.