In a nut shell, it can be concluded that GST actually does more benefits to the Malaysia economy which subsequently enhance the well-being of the Malaysian citizen. Firstly, GST is an important source of revenue for government, especially for countries such as Singapore, where the personal income tax and corporate tax are low. With huge amount of GST being collected, Malaysia government can manage the country more effectively, which is obviously beneficial to both individual and the society. Also the government can use the GST to improve the infrastructures in Malaysia. For instance, the government can use the amount of GST collected to build infrastructures such as hospitals and improve the roads system in Malaysia. Hence, government doesn’t need to borrow money from other countries to fund for these upgrades and developments, hence …show more content…
The reduction in the business costs will cause local products and services more competitive in the domestic and international markets. In addition, the GST is expected to improve tax compliance and is easier to administer due to its self-policing feature. With GST, bureaucracy in the government’s delivery system will be significantly reduced with Malaysia economy improved. However, GST also has its disadvantages as well. The GST penalizes every Malaysian citizen equally regardless of both the rich and the poor. Unlike the income tax or corporate tax, GST is hardly progressive. It makes necessities such as food, transport, houses, clothing and medical treatment more expensive to both the rich and the poor. However, GST can be progressive if the government taxes more on luxuries and less on necessities and Malaysia government can construct strong transfer or welfare system to assist those financially needy
Keep note of the overall outcome for Australian Tax policy for the Commonwealth Treasury is “To influence Strong sustainable economic growth for the good of the Australian People.” Additionally the 4 key Pillars of Australian Economic Diplomacy Promoting Trade Encouraging Growth Attracting
Sales tax is income elastic; because of this fact, consumers have a higher tax incidence and carry the burden. From this, it has been evidenced that the tax burden is vertically unequitable and can be seen as unfair to the less fortunate. Sales tax is paid by retailers, which is dependent upon their sales revenue. However, since the demand of consumers is inelastic and can vary based on market and economic conditions, this burden is felt more by lower income individuals and families. However, it is important to note that the tax burden is independent of who physically pays the tax.
The study found that a NIT with a 22% marginal tax rate and 11% per-capita GDP transfer would have a 2.1% increase in consumption. Further, the study found that under the NIT the biggest gains are made by low productive agents in the economy. If the NIT were to be implemented without a transfer payment, there would a loss of 4.1% in the welfare of citizens relative to the present tax code. Daneri also notes that a flat tax policy would to underperform a NIT. Daneri offers what he calls the “Popular NIT”, which calls for a 19% marginal tax rate and 9% per-capita GDP transfer.
People may not like taxes but they are used to invest in new Technology, education and public welfare of the people like Medicare, Medicaid, social security, and general protection. They can borrow money but that always affect taxpayers but the money will always be repaid to the lenders but the only way is by raising taxes (Concurrent Powers). Concurrent powers are able to enforce laws, "...law
The Sugar Act caused alarm in the American colonies because of the expected economic disadvantages, and its difficult implementation in all thirteen colonies. Added to this was a general post-war depression that affected the colonies. It was this combination of factors which provided the background for the oppositional activities. One of the steps taken, was to threat with a boycott all of English products. Meanwhile rumors of a possible new act which was being prepared by the British added to the growing tension in the American
The meaning of the Pell grant is to help economically disadvantaged students received a higher education by reducing the burden of the tuition and fee costs, and thereby, increase college participation. However, these good intentions of the Pell grant have caused one profound and unplanned consequence; which is the contribution to growing tuition cost for public and private colleges and universities. Supply and demand are the basic concepts of economics, so it’s no surprise that the increasing demand for higher education brought on by the Pell grant will have the consequence of rising tuition. More importantly, though, when Pell grants are used to pay for college, students are not as concerned with the cost as they would be if they were paying from their own pocket. As a result, the law of demand
The Great Society program was made by the president Lyndon B. Johnson in the year of 1965. Since the creation of the program, people are debating that the Great Society Program was good to the country or bad. I think that the Great Society Program was good for the country but it did have some bad things about it.
This made the government 30-40% of its overall income which is absolutely
These papers are saying that being taxed by a strong federal government is a good thing because it allows the government to do things that benefit the American
Although United State tends to disadvantage from importing more manufactured items from other nations, United State is still having a great advantage when it comes to saving money. For instance, when manufactured products are made in the country, the factory owners have to pay the unskilled workers a sufficient hourly pay, and the business owners have to also worry about electric, water, and other necessary bills. However, when the products are made in other nations, the United State do not have to worry about bills and spending so much time and money on making the manufactured products since they are able to get their products cheaper when it made out of the country. On the other hand, even though the United State could still be getting
Kaitlin and Richmond, I believe that both of you made valid points about the benefits to the Cadillac Tax. I agree that something sound be done to decrease “luxurious” spending at the cost of other, however I am not sure how this is different wanting to give everyone access to health care unless I have missed something in my understanding. As I stated before, allowing the opportunity to gain access will increase usage and I do not see this being any different other than it is at an increase value. Please correct my thinking if I am missing something. I am not sure exactly what could be done to reduce cost and “punish” those who squander and take advantage of these benefits.
Head Start is a national, federally funded child development program that provides services with an overall goal of increasing the school readiness of young children from birth to age 5 from predominantly low-income families by supporting their development in a comprehensive way. Head Start approaches the needs of both children and their families with health, nutrition, and other social services that are designed to foster stable family relationship, enhance children’s physical and emotional well-being and establish a learning environment that supports and develop strong cognitive skills. Head Start has the philosophy that parents are a child's first and most influential teacher therefore services are offered to help prepare the parent(s)
2014). This group of customers will have an even harder time buying luxury goods when they have to pay more tax. Due to their price sensitivity they will be likely to not buy the good anymore after an increase in price. An example to illustrate this situation can be a person buying a wedding ring once in his life or going on a relaxing holiday. While before the luxury tax he might have been able to go on a luxury holiday every 10 years, he might now decide to not go anymore at all.
The progressive income tax is a tax structure where the tax rate increases as an individual taxpayer's income increases: the higher the taxpayer's income, the higher the taxpayer's respective tax rate. The progressive tax does of cause not exist merely for economic reasons. The progressive income tax can be used as a tool to distribute income or wealth or to be punitive, but that would be a deliberate choice and is not an essential component of the progressive tax . However it is the only way in an income tax regime to accomplish that.
In countries such as Italy, taxpayers regularly challenge tax legislation on constitutional grounds. Taxpayers in the US continue to challenge the US progressive rate structure at trial and appeals court levels without success. In Mauritius, we do not have ample case law related to the taxpayers’ right but in case of a dispute regarding taxation, the court should be able to censure any excessively high tax burden on citizens. Some rare case exist for instance when the NRPT was introduced.