Difference between revisions of "PANEC"
Latest revision as of 10:37, 22 January 2011
PANEC is a comprehensive tax plan set forth before congress by the Economic Council of the United States of America. The plan's name is derived from the creators of the plan; Publius-Ananias-NoneSuch-Economic Council.
The tax plan numbers were slightly different when first announced and underwent major debating in the eUS forums. The orginal tax plan proposal did not include import taxes which were to be decided later.
Diamonds and Iron
Diamonds and Iron were given a special import tax, because the United States of America lacks a high productivity zone of either raw materials. One proposal, however, suggested raising the imports and both to around 2-3% in order to bring in a little more currency to the treasury. The proposal was shut down, however, after research determined a 1% raise in diamonds would equal about an 8USD rise in the finished product.
The actual implementation of the PANEC Tax Plan is being planned, multiple congressman will be involved in proposing each individual tax change.
The following information is taken from the official Economic Council Proposal
The Goals of the PANEC Tax Plan are as follows
Sustained infrastructure purchases Defensive capability Positive cash flow
Ability to budget based on revenue expectations Ability to understand where tax dollars come from Simplicity
We have little understanding of where our tax dollars are coming from, and the game provides very limited means of tracking this information. The only information that can be accurately assessed is the average wage (via the economy tab), the number of employed citizens (via Pearl's script) and the treasury balance. As such, it is relatively easy to project the amount of dollars gained per day from income taxes, but import and VAT revenues are guesswork and difficult to break down by industry or sector. For too long, the eUS has based tax plans on guesswork and biased reports from individuals managing companies in an industry. Our plan proposes to minimize this guesswork by basing government revenue almost completely on income taxes. Income taxes were kept at the same rate across the board so that the government does not distort wage signals dictated by labour market conditions.
VAT rates have been reduced to their lowest levels across the board, with the exception of a 5% levy on weapons. Weapons are purchased almost exclusively during wartime. When wars break out, many 'freedom fighters', seeking to aid a cause or simply rank up, travel to foreign countries without taking employment. However, they are usually willing to purchase weapons to use in battle. The VAT levied on weapons seeks to capture some of those otherwise untaxed dollars.
The eUS is weak financially. With the liquidation of our federal reserves, we lack the ability to fund tanks to defend our shores if under invasion. Assuming $90 for a Q5 weapon, a tank requires 84 G to deal 5,000 damage to a wall. And as we've seen in Portugal and France, the opposition is willing to put up substantial walls. Any responsible tax plan that makes its way through congress should be running a positive cash flow so that the President can fund tanks if the need arises. Our plan aims to stockpile 900G towards national defense each month.
The American public has a bit of a distaste for war. Whether this is due to skillful media manipulation by the doves or assumptions based on RL is not the concern of this council. Simply put, our economy runs better when war is waged on a regular basis. Continual war dampens shocks to our economy by allowing consumers and weapons companies to spread their purchases over a continual basis rather than during the 24 hours the one time every month or two war breaks out. Further, war will be less expensive to wage as more competitors can enter a industry that no longer requires wealthy owners to float their companies during indefinite times of peace. Our budget allots enough funding to declare four battles a month, two of which have troops receive weapons from the QMG.
The current levels of spending by the government are unsustainable. In order to balance our budget, some cuts in spending had to be made. Infrastructure spending will have to be limited to an average $2,500 per day. Without forgoing any stockpiling of funds or raising taxes above our proposed levels, the current spending of $5,500 per day on infrastructure cannot be maintained. Additionally, the QMG will only be able to supply ten weapons per month per soldier. Marines, Army, and NG have been budgeted for Q3, Q2, and Q1 weapons, respectively.