The United Kingdom Elections 2010

[rory_20_uk]

My brother's idea was similar, but suggested negative tax for the first earnings, then with an increasing scale. No other benefits.

Not working you get paid as your tax is negative. As you start to work this decreases slowly, so there is still an incentive for working.

As an adult, you are expected to budget for children - or not. No extra funds as if you can't afford them, don't have them.

Very simple to run and understand. Just insert earnings and taxes / benefits pop out. Very difficult to abuse as there isn't much there to abuse.

The need for masses of civil servants reviewing forms,, printing forms etc will be removed. The need for so many accountants to fight through labyrinthine forms will decrease. And so, taxes overall can also fall as there is less overhead, and probably less acidental overpaying / fraud.

[Beskar]

My brother's idea was similar, but suggested negative tax for the first earnings, then with an increasing scale. No other benefits.

Not working you get paid as your tax is negative. As you start to work this decreases slowly, so there is still an incentive for working.

Very simple to run and understand. Just insert earnings and taxes / benefits pop out. Very difficult to abuse as there isn't much there to abuse.

The need for masses of civil servants reviewing forms,, printing forms etc will be removed. The need for so many accountants to fight through labyrinthine forms will decrease. And so, taxes overall can also fall as there is less overhead, and probably less acidental overpaying / fraud.

Not exactly true, it can be abused. There are many loopholes, especially as you go into "What is earning a wage?" or the fact, many self-employed can simply like about how much they earn, thus get free money.

As for the first one, Steve Jobs (CEO of Apple) only earns around $1 a year in wages. Apple gives him his "wage" through "company expenses" which means there is no income tax.
As for the latter, self-employed can just claim they earn under a certain threshold and they get given money.

The consequences are, these two examples get money for nothing.

In my system, the worse case would be that government wouldn't recieve the right amount of tax part, not that plus handing out money. In otherwords, government wouldn't be responsible for giving away tax money for nothing, as in your brothers scheme, this would still be the case.

Also, the point of my system is to get people actually working. Even if it ultimately boils down to doing some simple tasks, as the ultimate result is, these people are getting up in the morning, they are going out of the house and they are doing something productive.