Robin Hood on the contrary: the poor pay more taxes
Rossiyskie officials and liberal experts continue to insist on the efficiency of a flat income tax. How persuasive their arguments?The most compelling argument in favor of the current system is considered to be its simplicity and reduction of attempts to tax evasion. After declining marginal rate of personal income tax tax revenues increased by 0.7-0.8% of GDP, while the share of hidden wages decreased from 35% to 32%. However, a more detailed analysis, it is clear that these arguments are not directly related to the question of the amount of tax rates and their impact on macroeconomic indicators.
They are primarily concerned with the effectiveness of public institutions - namely, tax and law enforcement agencies. After all, the quality of their work is primarily determined by the scale of impunity goes into the shadows. The flat tax system is practiced in only 10% of the world. For the rest of the complexity of accounting is not the cause of the failure of a progressive scale.However, the best existing system of taxation can be estimated by considering the loss of our country due to the failure of progressive income taxation.The poor pay more - less richAs paradoxical as it sounds, but the same for all income tax rate less affluent Russians to give the state a large part of their earnings than their rich counterparts. The fact that the rich and the poor Russians different income structure. If the poorer population groups live mainly on wages, the receipts of wealthy Russians by two-thirds consist of species such as business income, dividends, bank interest or rental property, some of which are taxed at a rate lower than the income tax. Given the mandatory social security contributions simple an employee is forced to allocate a budget of more than 39% of their earnings at the time, as the richest part of the Russians pay less than 13%. Needless to say that such a distribution of the tax burden is hardly fair. The introduction of a progressive scale of personal income tax could work out the imbalances.Limited opportunities for social and economic policyHowever, the actual nature of the Russian system of regressive income tax is not limited to the context of justice. He goes into the plane of economic policy and demography.In many modern countries the tax system is used for social policy, resulting in the redistribution of income part of the public in favor of the most needy citizens. This is clearly expressed in the lining of the distribution of income between different population groups. For example, in the United States as a result of the redistribution of the social product through the fiscal system, the income gap between the poorest 10% and 10% of the richest citizens is reduced from potential 68 times to 15 times real. In Russia, the use of this distribution mechanism is severely limited due to the flat rate personal income tax. As a result of the fact that during the 2000s, incomes in the wealthiest Russians grew faster than that of the poor, the ratio of income of the 10% most affluent citizens to the income of the poorest 10% increased from 13.9 to 16.3 times. It is noteworthy that according to experts, to save social security, this difference should not exceed 8-9.Meanwhile, social policy can not be viewed in isolation from economic policy. It is estimated that the reduction of excessive inequality by 1% increases the rate of economic growth by about 5%. This is logical: after all, part of the redistribution of income in favor of the super-rich minority of the poorer majority leads to an increase in the purchasing power of large sections of the population, and hence increases aggregate demand and stimulate production. Moreover, scientists revealed the dependence of demographic indicators of inequality. When reducing inequality is growing birth rate and death rate falls. More equitable distribution of income through progressive scale of personal income tax could make a significant contribution to solving the problems of economic growth and depopulation. And here we are talking not about mass seizure of wealth, but only on the redistribution of the revenues relatively small group - about 20% of the population. To make sure that such a transfer is capable of providing sufficient resources to fight poverty, you should pay attention to the statistics of the Federal Tax Service, according to which 1% of taxpayers in Russia gets 50% of revenues.Excessive burden on businessMarket fundamentalists used to scare the Russians that in the case of the introduction of a progressive tax scale investments will become unattractive and foreign capital will run out of the country. But for some reason they are mixed together far unequal things - personal income tax and taxes on business activities. Tax on income in Russia is indeed one of the lowest among comparable in terms of population and volume of production of the world (see. Table №1).The maximum income tax rate in the worldCountryThe maximum income tax rate,%France50.3Italy47.9Germany47.5Great Britain45China45United States39.6India33.9Russia13If the EU tax on incomes brings to the treasury from 8 to 10% of the runway, in Russia's share is limited to four per cent. But a small amount of revenue from personal income tax leads to the need to compensate for the lack of budget funds due to the companies' money. Given that 80% of the assets of the Russian big business registered abroad and there happens 80% of its financial turnover, the highest tax burden falls on the shoulders of small and medium-sized companies that are not registered in the offshore and fully subject to the tax requirements of Russian legislation.The tax system as a result of lobbying character of the stateIt is easy to make an assumption about the reasons for the emergence in Russia of the existing tax system. Apparently, it is in the nature of lobbying the modern Russian state. Its essence lies in the fact that major decisions in the management of the country are taken in the first place, in accordance with the preferences of the most powerful interest groups, and not in the public interest.A striking example of this kind are constant attempts to solve the problem of large-scale producers and the budget at the expense of small businesses that do not have significant lobbying power. Suffice it to recall the sudden, more than doubled, increasing compulsory insurance premiums for individual entrepreneurs in 2013, which led to the mass closure of SP. One of the key beneficiaries of the system with a flat tax scale is the Russian ruling class consisting of oligarchs and senior officials whose relatives are in business or are composed of top managers in large corporations. Increasing the income tax would mean for them a serious decrease in their welfare.However, the main lobbying group, influencing the decisions of the Russian liberal leaders, apparently, is outside the country and submitted it a global business that implements its policies through international financial institutions - the IMF and the World Bank. Universal strategy of these institutions is to build a neoliberal economic regimes in the global periphery hands of pro-Western elites ready to thoroughly implement all the recommendations of the IMF regarding its economic policy.Flat rate tax to a certain extent is a consequence of the radical-market economic model, the main essence of which lies in the failure of the state to participate in the development of the country. That is why among the practitioners flat income scale, so many countries with economies in transition and small states that do not possess the full economic sovereignty: Albania, Bulgaria, Guernsey, Hong Kong, Georgia, Jersey, Iceland, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Mongolia, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Ukraine, Czech Republic, Estonia.Conclusion: the flat rate personal income tax is a consequence of the neoliberal economic model and does not allow the State to fully realize the potential of regulation of social, economic and demographic policy. Given the mandatory social security contributions paid by the employer from the wages fund, formally flat income tax rate in Russia is transformed into a regressive scale, when the rich pay a smaller share of their income than the poor. Reducing the tax burden on personal income leads to an increase in the burden on business. However, all these problems can be solved. To overcome them you need to implement a number of measures developed and described in the works of the Center of scientific thought and political ideology. One of the key measures is the introduction of a progressive tax scale.Andrew Degtev
Rossiyskie officials and liberal experts continue to insist on the efficiency of a flat income tax. How persuasive their arguments?The most compelling argument in favor of the current system is considered to be its simplicity and reduction of attempts to tax evasion. After declining marginal rate of personal income tax tax revenues increased by 0.7-0.8% of GDP, while the share of hidden wages decreased from 35% to 32%. However, a more detailed analysis, it is clear that these arguments are not directly related to the question of the amount of tax rates and their impact on macroeconomic indicators.
They are primarily concerned with the effectiveness of public institutions - namely, tax and law enforcement agencies. After all, the quality of their work is primarily determined by the scale of impunity goes into the shadows. The flat tax system is practiced in only 10% of the world. For the rest of the complexity of accounting is not the cause of the failure of a progressive scale.However, the best existing system of taxation can be estimated by considering the loss of our country due to the failure of progressive income taxation.The poor pay more - less richAs paradoxical as it sounds, but the same for all income tax rate less affluent Russians to give the state a large part of their earnings than their rich counterparts. The fact that the rich and the poor Russians different income structure. If the poorer population groups live mainly on wages, the receipts of wealthy Russians by two-thirds consist of species such as business income, dividends, bank interest or rental property, some of which are taxed at a rate lower than the income tax. Given the mandatory social security contributions simple an employee is forced to allocate a budget of more than 39% of their earnings at the time, as the richest part of the Russians pay less than 13%. Needless to say that such a distribution of the tax burden is hardly fair. The introduction of a progressive scale of personal income tax could work out the imbalances.Limited opportunities for social and economic policyHowever, the actual nature of the Russian system of regressive income tax is not limited to the context of justice. He goes into the plane of economic policy and demography.In many modern countries the tax system is used for social policy, resulting in the redistribution of income part of the public in favor of the most needy citizens. This is clearly expressed in the lining of the distribution of income between different population groups. For example, in the United States as a result of the redistribution of the social product through the fiscal system, the income gap between the poorest 10% and 10% of the richest citizens is reduced from potential 68 times to 15 times real. In Russia, the use of this distribution mechanism is severely limited due to the flat rate personal income tax. As a result of the fact that during the 2000s, incomes in the wealthiest Russians grew faster than that of the poor, the ratio of income of the 10% most affluent citizens to the income of the poorest 10% increased from 13.9 to 16.3 times. It is noteworthy that according to experts, to save social security, this difference should not exceed 8-9.Meanwhile, social policy can not be viewed in isolation from economic policy. It is estimated that the reduction of excessive inequality by 1% increases the rate of economic growth by about 5%. This is logical: after all, part of the redistribution of income in favor of the super-rich minority of the poorer majority leads to an increase in the purchasing power of large sections of the population, and hence increases aggregate demand and stimulate production. Moreover, scientists revealed the dependence of demographic indicators of inequality. When reducing inequality is growing birth rate and death rate falls. More equitable distribution of income through progressive scale of personal income tax could make a significant contribution to solving the problems of economic growth and depopulation. And here we are talking not about mass seizure of wealth, but only on the redistribution of the revenues relatively small group - about 20% of the population. To make sure that such a transfer is capable of providing sufficient resources to fight poverty, you should pay attention to the statistics of the Federal Tax Service, according to which 1% of taxpayers in Russia gets 50% of revenues.Excessive burden on businessMarket fundamentalists used to scare the Russians that in the case of the introduction of a progressive tax scale investments will become unattractive and foreign capital will run out of the country. But for some reason they are mixed together far unequal things - personal income tax and taxes on business activities. Tax on income in Russia is indeed one of the lowest among comparable in terms of population and volume of production of the world (see. Table №1).The maximum income tax rate in the worldCountryThe maximum income tax rate,%France50.3Italy47.9Germany47.5Great Britain45China45United States39.6India33.9Russia13If the EU tax on incomes brings to the treasury from 8 to 10% of the runway, in Russia's share is limited to four per cent. But a small amount of revenue from personal income tax leads to the need to compensate for the lack of budget funds due to the companies' money. Given that 80% of the assets of the Russian big business registered abroad and there happens 80% of its financial turnover, the highest tax burden falls on the shoulders of small and medium-sized companies that are not registered in the offshore and fully subject to the tax requirements of Russian legislation.The tax system as a result of lobbying character of the stateIt is easy to make an assumption about the reasons for the emergence in Russia of the existing tax system. Apparently, it is in the nature of lobbying the modern Russian state. Its essence lies in the fact that major decisions in the management of the country are taken in the first place, in accordance with the preferences of the most powerful interest groups, and not in the public interest.A striking example of this kind are constant attempts to solve the problem of large-scale producers and the budget at the expense of small businesses that do not have significant lobbying power. Suffice it to recall the sudden, more than doubled, increasing compulsory insurance premiums for individual entrepreneurs in 2013, which led to the mass closure of SP. One of the key beneficiaries of the system with a flat tax scale is the Russian ruling class consisting of oligarchs and senior officials whose relatives are in business or are composed of top managers in large corporations. Increasing the income tax would mean for them a serious decrease in their welfare.However, the main lobbying group, influencing the decisions of the Russian liberal leaders, apparently, is outside the country and submitted it a global business that implements its policies through international financial institutions - the IMF and the World Bank. Universal strategy of these institutions is to build a neoliberal economic regimes in the global periphery hands of pro-Western elites ready to thoroughly implement all the recommendations of the IMF regarding its economic policy.Flat rate tax to a certain extent is a consequence of the radical-market economic model, the main essence of which lies in the failure of the state to participate in the development of the country. That is why among the practitioners flat income scale, so many countries with economies in transition and small states that do not possess the full economic sovereignty: Albania, Bulgaria, Guernsey, Hong Kong, Georgia, Jersey, Iceland, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Mongolia, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Ukraine, Czech Republic, Estonia.Conclusion: the flat rate personal income tax is a consequence of the neoliberal economic model and does not allow the State to fully realize the potential of regulation of social, economic and demographic policy. Given the mandatory social security contributions paid by the employer from the wages fund, formally flat income tax rate in Russia is transformed into a regressive scale, when the rich pay a smaller share of their income than the poor. Reducing the tax burden on personal income leads to an increase in the burden on business. However, all these problems can be solved. To overcome them you need to implement a number of measures developed and described in the works of the Center of scientific thought and political ideology. One of the key measures is the introduction of a progressive tax scale.Andrew Degtev
Having a separate savings account to deposit all the sales tax collected is a great way to avoid spending money that's not yours.
ОтветитьУдалитьtax specialist in the UK