can not tell so many lies and inaccuracies in 2 minutes fifty-seven seconds and Zapatero in first cut of his "interview" by call it in some way with the lady friend while Campbell on Wednesday 17 June in Four.
"The government that I head has lowered taxes, has lowered the income tax of individuals, has lowered the corporate tax to help businesses create jobs and we have abolished estate tax basically paying the middle classes and was an obsolete tax that we have a tax cut around 20,000 million euros, which is 2% of gross domestic product. "
This is false, the drop commenting tax of 20,000 million euros is due solely to a decrease in activity, decreased activity is logical to collect less, as the decline taxes, personal income tax reform favors the capital gains passing to tax only 18% of the work with a maximum 43% marginal.
Who out injured with reform? The middle class, which derives its income through work. For example, those who have a taxable earned income less than 33,007.20 euros per year (middle class), his first record at 17,007.20 euros and over 24% to EUR 33,007.20 28% those who derive their income from dividends, interest and rent, are taxed on a fixed rate of 18%.
comment is laughable that the middle class is the great benefit from the elimination Heritage tax, but I think it's because of their ignorance. Let's see, the former Heritage tax levied on personal net worth (net of debts) from 108,812 euros, was not contained therein to the usual residence was exempt from this tax up to 150,253.03 euros.
Who is more beneficial for the suppression of the Heritage Tax? Of course, not the middle class, few members of the middle class taxed and taxed if the amount was minimal. For example anyone who had to EUR 167,000 of the base, he recorded 0.2% is paid 334.26 euros, and who had paid EUR 5,347,998.02 2.1% specifically 71,362.33 euros each year.
Does anyone with more than 5,000,000 euros of equity to be considered within the middle class? I do not know, apparently Zapatero himself.
"Now we've uploaded the snuff tax as a revenue-raising measure, but tobacco control and thus a measure for health that has been done in recent years, and also Oil tax revenue collection has more slope, which will give 10,000 million more, the public purse, is one tenth of gross domestic product and that also goes the other way to save energy because we to save energy. "
Indirect taxes break with the principle of" equity "tax do not depend on ability to pay the subject, we all bear alike. Zapatero of course, justifies rise snuff as a measure to protect our health, I have never heard a crap beaten. Why not tax other equally unwise for our health such as alcohol, fast food, bakery products, coffee etc.? The rise exclusively reflects a desire to tax collection as well as gasoline, the problem is that with the rise of these taxes, reduce our disposable income products to be fairly inelastic demand, these 1,000 million for example, that they anticipate the rise of gasoline are 1,000 million less in savings and subsequent consumption of families and the self, a whole way of promoting economic recovery. Above we said that we need to save energy, you see Zapatero, if you really want the cost of energy remains at least as expensive than we currently pay, leave aside his demagoguery, listen to the council's recommendations nuclear energy and keep Garoña open, and stop telling stories about renewable energies such as wind, much more expensive and of dubious harmony with the environment environment.
Who will suffer the burden of these increases? The answer is clear, again the middle classes.
"We have a low tax burden, we have fiscal pressure to 32.8 in 2004 when the government was reached in 34 so we have lower tax burden, the EU average is at 40 % "
This is also false and non-Why? Because the tax burden is GDP / Collection, and we have overestimated GDP (higher than real) can not be that we are declining just 3%. With an unemployment rate close to 17%, it is impossible that our economy is declining at the same rate as the rest of European countries and have 9 out of ten new European unemployed I do not think so, and on the other hand, the collection is what it is, but however if this proceeds are deducted the taxes due but not paid about 3% of total revenue, we would tax burden well above the government of Aznar.
Who has supported mainly the rise in tax burden? Then in view of the stated above, there can be other than the suffering middle class if that class seen seen our president intends to make it disappear from government all with the help of the opposition because in this country some act and Mr Rajoy silent.
0 comments:
Post a Comment