Comments on: Regressive Taxation Based on Risk?

By: A. J. Peter Wall

A. J. Peter Wall — Sat, 08 May 2010 19:23:03 +0000

The golden rule: He who has the gold makes te rules! What makes a person worth ? millions of dollars in bonuses per year? Is it the fact that they can hijack the economic system, rebranding risk and selling it as security? If there are few to no controls on how much “top talent” can pay itself, why should there not be specific controls that they simply cannot evade, such as a maximum wage per year imposed through taxation? Do you think top talent works harder than you or I? Do you think they really have more responsibility than you or I (to the rest of mankind)? Is success defined by the size of the pedestal you build for yourself? William Gates Sr. said it (Business Week) after the dot-com bust: “We risk creating a new aristocracy!” Well, it seems he was right!

By: Daniel Plewman

Daniel Plewman — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 07:17:20 +0000

There was some progress on this matter in the Irish budget 2009, where the government announced a three year tax exemption for start ups, http://www.business-startup.ie/finance/tax-exemption-for-start-up-companies.html

By: Kevin Smith

Kevin Smith — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 16:18:51 +0000

AJ, what makes you say that a tax structure with progressively higher rates is “fairer”. Fairer to whom? If the tax rate were a flat x%, someone making $200k per year would pay twice as much in tax as someone making $100k per year. Why is that inherently unfair?

For that matter, I’d suggest that REVERSING our idea of progressive tax rates might be more fair, as people in higher income brackets are consuming *less* of public goods, and therefore should pay less to support government services.

Certainly, someone making $200K is not imposing twice the drain on public services that someone making $100K is, so why should he have to pay twice the tax?

I’d propose we have an “upside-down J-shaped curve” of a tax rate. At the very low end, people would pay less tax, simply because you can’t get blood from a stone. But at the higher end, the actual percentage paid should decrease, eventually to zero so that there is a maximum of annual tax any individual would have to pay regardless of his income.

Wouldn’t you work harder and try to succeed if you knew there was a chance of making enough to be “exempt” from further taxes? I know I would!
–
Keb’m

By: Feargal Byrne

Feargal Byrne — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:35:36 +0000

http://bit.ly/d8tRRM Can Regressive Taxation Based on Risk Save the Economy?

By: A. J. Peter Wall

A. J. Peter Wall — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 17:17:13 +0000

I disagree with your proposal on the principal of “moral hazard.” All individuals must be treated equally fair, or there will be many more problems to deal with. What I would suggest is an income tax rate that escalates proportionally with amount of income.