Explain How It May Be Used To Reduce The Income Tax

This idea of reducing taxes to increase investment within the economy sounds like a good idea but hasn’t lived up to its expectations historically. The idea of supply side economics wasn’t a new idea for the American tax code. During the early 1920s, income tax rates were cut multiple times which averaged to a total of most rates being cut by a little less than half. The Mellon Tax Cuts named after Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon under Presidents Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge. He believed that changes in income tax rates causes individuals to change their behavior and practices. As taxes rise, tax payers attempt to reduce taxable income by either working less, retiring earlier, reducing business expansions, restructure companies or spending more money on accountants to find tax loopholes. If executed properly tax cuts can actually benefit economic growth, data from the Internal Revenue Service(IRS) showed that the across-the-board tax cuts in the early 1920s resulted in greater tax payments and larger tax share paid by those in the higher incomes. As the marginal tax rate on the highest income earners were cut from 60 percent or more to just 25 percent, the amount that this tax group payed soared from around 300 million to 700 million per year. (See Figure 2) This sudden massive increase in revenue allowed the U.S. economy to rapidly expand during the mid and late 20s. Between 1920 to 1929, real gross national product grew at an annual average rate of 4.7 percent and

One popular method of tax reform that some of the experts in this field think is worth considering is implementing a flat tax also known as a consumption tax. J. D. Foster says that “any tax with a single tax rate could be considered a flat tax.” An article from the website Tax Policy Center defines consumption as being “income less savings” (Gale). The major difference between an income tax and a consumption tax is the way savings are taxed. With an income tax all income is taxed when it is earned and again when interest is earned on any savings. Critics of an income tax say that this is double taxation and

However, there are also some drawbacks associated with raising taxes. Tax is a form of leakage from the circular flow of income leading to negative multiplier effect. If the government increases income tax rates, it might create disincentives to work. It is because when income tax increases, the opportunity cost for leisure time decreases; and people will have to work longer

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

However, these long and short term economic improvements are only what is predicted to happen and there negatives to the reduction in income tax. A factor that the government must take into account is the budget deficit, can the government afford to simply cut income tax that is a large source of revenue for the budget. A worsened budget deficit could have devastating impacts upon the economy, for example less people able to have the benefits they require, (this would also reduce demand in the economy as those on benefits generally spend the money they have as they do not have spare to save, this may damage the economy even further) or a reduction in money towards health care. Also, a reduction in income tax does not necessarily mean

Tax decreases can stimulate economic growth because if people are paying less in taxes, they have more money to spend. It has been proven over the years that tax decreases generate economic growth and federal revenue will always rise. From a personal standpoint I always spend more during tax season because I usually get a good return; since I am a single parent and full-time student, therefore, I qualify for various tax breaks. These obviously affect my household because I am more disposable income. Tax decreases can help a business if their taxes are decreased the organization will payout less and have more income.

The performance of the UK economy depends very much on the level of Aggregate demand within the economy. AD=C+I+G+(X-M). The UK economy can be judged by a number of key indicators mainly sustainable economic growth, low inflation (target 2%), a surplus on the

A decrease in tax rates might be enacted to stimulate consumer spending. If households receive the tax cut but expect it to be reversed in the near future, they may hesitate to increase their spending. Believing that tax rates will rise again (and possibly concerned that they will rise to rates higher than before the tax cut), households may instead save their additional after-tax income in anticipation of needing to pay taxes in the future.

The governments in any country use various taxation systems to raise funds to fund its national projects. The most common tax system is the income tax whereby the government raises funds from individual’s earnings. However, in the past few years, there has been heated debate about the adverse effects of progressive income tax on productivity and a proposal to replace it with national sales tax (Hodge, 2017). The national sales tax also known as the fair tax is intended to replace the current income tax and the idea is to enable the government to generate income from consumptions as opposed to earnings. This document examines the positives and negatives of the proposed national sales tax on the U.S. economy. The suggestion to impose a tax on consumption rather than consumption aims at encouraging savings and investments to improve productivity and promote economic growth. It is expected to promote fairness in the taxation because individuals will pay according to what they consume and not what they earn.

"A revolutionary change in our tax system is fundamental to re-energizing the American economy and restoring the American dream" (Moore 1). Currently, there are two major plans being considered to try and fix the tax system in the United States. These two plans are the Flat Tax and the National Retail Sales Tax. "Both the Flat Tax and a National Sales Tax would replace today's discriminatory tax structure with a single low rate. Either plan would promote the kind of capital formation that America needs to boost workers' incomes and raise long-term economic growth" (Mitchell 1). This means that the flat tax would take away the savings from the government and pass them on to the citizens and businesses. By doing this, there would be a rise in long-term economic growth.

Debate surrounding the controversial 50 pence additional rate of income tax for high income earners hit the limelight again at the beginning of this year following Shadow Chancellor ED Beals’ announcement that the Labor Party intended to restore the same if it was elected to power in the 2015 general elections. Addressing journalists in January, the Shadow Chancellor argued that such a move would see the economy raise approximately £10 billion over a period of three years, which would essentially imply that i) the level of national debt would be reduced, and ii) disparities in income and wealth would be minimized through a fully-progressive tax system structured to ensure that “those with the broadest shoulders bear a fairer

"Lower income taxes for all, with the greatest help for those most in need. Everyone who pays income taxes benefits - while the highest percentage tax cuts go to the lowest income Americans. I believe this is a formula for continuing the prosperity we've enjoyed, but also expanding it in ways we have yet to discover. It is an economics of inclusion. It is the agenda of a government that knows its limits and shows its heart." -President George W. Bush1

People believe that the tax system is a good way for a government to redistribute the income and make the society more fair and equal, and indeed, Canada's progressivity personal income tax system has decrease the income inequality in some extent. Some people argues that there should be more progressivity at the federal personal income tax system, because the richest Canadian still hold too much share of national income. In 2016, the Canadian federal government actually added a new tax bracket for the person whose income is above $200,000 at the rate of 33%. Government believes that the new added tax bracket will raise the revenue for 2016-2017 by $2.8 billion. However, they only take into account the net primary impact, they do not take the behavioural response into account. When they take into account the behavioural response, according PBO, the revenue that the federal government could actually get is only $1.8 billion.(p.6) The more progressivity on upper income earners will lead to the decrease of labour, reduce of reported income and further stunt economic growth. Canada will also further loss its competiveness of attract highly skilled workers. To reduce the income inequality ,the more progressivity personal income tax system could not achieve the goal perfectly, as it could not raised the anticipated revenue. Meanwhile, the more progressivity will put Canada at a even worse position since its negative impact on economy and Canada's

The Republican administration of Donald Trump presented an ambitious tax reform, making emphasis in a strong tax cut for individuals and companies, this is just a proposal for now, in what anticipates a long and never-ending debates in the Congress to get the approval. Examining how changes to individual and companies tax will affect long-term economy grows. The structure of such changes is critical to achieve what in the future could bring economic growth, the ultimate purpose of any government in the world. This work will try to analyze the pros and cons, consequences for our country and abroad, and finally have the criteria if this is viable for our economy, showing some statistics and graphics for a better

Quality job creation has been low, held back by complex labour laws. Tax reform could make growth more inclusive Tax revenue, 2015 or latest year available Note: Tax revenue includes social security contributions. Source: OECD Economic Outlook 100 database; OECD Revenue Statistics database; World Bank; Reserve Bank of India; Central Statistics Organisation. 1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933453263 A comprehensive tax reform would promote inclusive growth. Timely and effective implementation o f the Goods and Serv ices Tax wou ld support competitiveness, investment and economic growth. Government’s plans to reduce the corporate income tax rate and broaden the base will serve the same objectives. These two on-going reforms have been designed to be revenue-neutral while India needs to raise additional tax revenue to meet social and physical infrastructure needs. Property and personal income taxes, which are paid by very few people, could be reformed to raise more revenue, promote social justice and empower sub-national governments to better respond to local needs. Ensuring clarity and certainty in tax legislation and employing more skilled tax officers would strengthen the tax administration and make the system fairer and more effective. Policy reforms