You'll hate this Spart, but I think best way to lower state spending would be if:
1) all required to balance budgets;
2) revenue exclusively from universal single rate of land tax, which was required to be (transparently) emailed to residential tenants with regular rental invoices.
You're right Peter. A dollop of Henry George Utopianism ain't gonna fix anything.
Requiring balanced budgets is not the solution. It will just result in more taxes and more off budget spending.
And unless plan to have a flat/poll land tax, how do you plan to deal with the corruption and political interference associated with humans manually valuing land for tax purposes.
PS - think the corruption issue is overstated of manageable. Would however require adjustments, to avoid skewing of land use. Say, for however many 'floor levels' in a strata unit complex have 'different ownership titles', multiple the value for land tax.
Ie house on an acre > tax of "Z"
ie 5 level strata unit complex on same block > tax of "5 x Z"
Where I am coming from, is thinking spending will NEVER EVER AGAIN be curtailed, until the average 'disinterested voter, both incurs and sees, the tax it is costing them.
Would both sides of parliament ever agree to constitutional amendment to allow states to impose and collect their own GST - assuming the right would only agree, if GST base is broadened to a nil exemptions basis? I am thinking left side might only agree, if right side agreed to a similarly broad (nil exemptions) land tax.
And require annual adjustments to GST ratee, to recoup any prior year deficit. Option to lower for a surplus, if surplus projected again.
And criminalise or whatever needed, to curtail off-balance sheet skulduggery.
Not saying above approach, any more correct than your own. Same ends in mind.
You have a remarkable turn of phrase, wit and knowledge. Five stars.
Ahh my young grasshopper, thou has never filled out a payroll tax return or tried to interpret a payroll tax ruling has thy?
You are correct. Never filled out a return. That is a case for fixing the system and not completely destroying what's left of the federation.
I trust the feds even less than the states.
You'll hate this Spart, but I think best way to lower state spending would be if:
1) all required to balance budgets;
2) revenue exclusively from universal single rate of land tax, which was required to be (transparently) emailed to residential tenants with regular rental invoices.
Cheers
You're right Peter. A dollop of Henry George Utopianism ain't gonna fix anything.
Requiring balanced budgets is not the solution. It will just result in more taxes and more off budget spending.
And unless plan to have a flat/poll land tax, how do you plan to deal with the corruption and political interference associated with humans manually valuing land for tax purposes.
PS - think the corruption issue is overstated of manageable. Would however require adjustments, to avoid skewing of land use. Say, for however many 'floor levels' in a strata unit complex have 'different ownership titles', multiple the value for land tax.
Ie house on an acre > tax of "Z"
ie 5 level strata unit complex on same block > tax of "5 x Z"
Where I am coming from, is thinking spending will NEVER EVER AGAIN be curtailed, until the average 'disinterested voter, both incurs and sees, the tax it is costing them.
Would both sides of parliament ever agree to constitutional amendment to allow states to impose and collect their own GST - assuming the right would only agree, if GST base is broadened to a nil exemptions basis? I am thinking left side might only agree, if right side agreed to a similarly broad (nil exemptions) land tax.
And require annual adjustments to GST ratee, to recoup any prior year deficit. Option to lower for a surplus, if surplus projected again.
And criminalise or whatever needed, to curtail off-balance sheet skulduggery.
Not saying above approach, any more correct than your own. Same ends in mind.
Best regards
Peter