Eternity RPC Board
01-26-2017, 01:13 AM
Broderick Baird - NL
Thank you Mr. Speaker. As I'm sure most of you are well aware of the tax act that passed last year, I will keep my statement brief.
As most of you know, our President made it a priority of his to reduce the tax burden on lower income earners and roll back a terrible oversight in the original Harrow tax plan that this chamber failed to question, and that subsequent Assemblies have failed to resolve even after having addressed it: the tax on food, and the taxing of health products as a "luxury." These tax regulations put an undue burden on poorer families, who spend a greater proportion of their budgets on food and personal health.
Since income tax is all but eliminated on the lowest end, the most logical and equitable way of reducing this burden is to remove or reduce VAT on those items that make up the largest share of lower income budgets: food, and personal health. Yes, these lower rates apply to all, and everyone who buys in Nyland will receive the benefit of reduced taxes on these goods, but this is a simple, easy, and effective way of putting literally hundreds if not thousands of daler a year back into the pocketbooks of the families who are not only stretching their wallets thin, but who oftentimes have to make hard choices between eating eating more than two or even one meal a day and putting a roof over their heads; with reduced taxes on foods, these people can afford more for their families.
Furthermore, the changes in tax policy on foodstuffs only apply to those foods that are not "prepared;" that is, fresh, whole produce, meat, dairy and the like, all sources of wholesome nutrition instead of nutritionless fizzy beverages and snacks, which remain at the previous levels passed under President Morgen. Some might decry such a distinction, but the reasoning is rather simple, in that overconsumption of such highly processed, highly packaged goods tends to both be the undeniable source of obesity and diabetes in Nyland, while also generating hundreds of pounds of non-biodegradable garbage per year [i]per person[i] that sit in landfills for generations...with such a burden to both our beltlines and our pocketbooks, charging a nominal tax on top of such products for the future burden their consumption places on our budgets only makes sense.
That is all for now. I look forward to the inevitable arguments against this reasonable and responsible legislation.
Thank you Mr. Speaker. As I'm sure most of you are well aware of the tax act that passed last year, I will keep my statement brief.
As most of you know, our President made it a priority of his to reduce the tax burden on lower income earners and roll back a terrible oversight in the original Harrow tax plan that this chamber failed to question, and that subsequent Assemblies have failed to resolve even after having addressed it: the tax on food, and the taxing of health products as a "luxury." These tax regulations put an undue burden on poorer families, who spend a greater proportion of their budgets on food and personal health.
Since income tax is all but eliminated on the lowest end, the most logical and equitable way of reducing this burden is to remove or reduce VAT on those items that make up the largest share of lower income budgets: food, and personal health. Yes, these lower rates apply to all, and everyone who buys in Nyland will receive the benefit of reduced taxes on these goods, but this is a simple, easy, and effective way of putting literally hundreds if not thousands of daler a year back into the pocketbooks of the families who are not only stretching their wallets thin, but who oftentimes have to make hard choices between eating eating more than two or even one meal a day and putting a roof over their heads; with reduced taxes on foods, these people can afford more for their families.
Furthermore, the changes in tax policy on foodstuffs only apply to those foods that are not "prepared;" that is, fresh, whole produce, meat, dairy and the like, all sources of wholesome nutrition instead of nutritionless fizzy beverages and snacks, which remain at the previous levels passed under President Morgen. Some might decry such a distinction, but the reasoning is rather simple, in that overconsumption of such highly processed, highly packaged goods tends to both be the undeniable source of obesity and diabetes in Nyland, while also generating hundreds of pounds of non-biodegradable garbage per year [i]per person[i] that sit in landfills for generations...with such a burden to both our beltlines and our pocketbooks, charging a nominal tax on top of such products for the future burden their consumption places on our budgets only makes sense.
That is all for now. I look forward to the inevitable arguments against this reasonable and responsible legislation.