Oh dear.

Taxing women, just because they're women

At least your Northern neighbours had the right idea :-)

"The so-called tampon tax is a sales tax on feminine hygiene products which are used to absorb menstrual blood."
Thanks for that, I thought they were a type of kettle drum!

The reason we still have 5% VAT on tampons and in the UK is because the EU deems them a 'luxury item'. Maybe that's one thing that will change for the better post Brexit.

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

A thought, put sales tax on everything and use all the sales tax for benefits.

That way the sales tax on luxury goods goes to helping the poor, because in a lot of cases exempting items from sales tax advantages the wealthy more than the poor.

---

A thought, put sales tax on everything and use all the sales tax for benefits.

That way the sales tax on luxury goods goes to helping the poor, because in a lot of cases exempting items from sales tax advantages the wealthy more than the poor.

Why yes, exempting food and medicine helps the wealthy far more than the poor. Just as a sales tax on yachts helps the wealthy and hurts the poor.

America is in the title of the thread, use its exemptions, not your islands.

Now SIN taxes are another matter. Tax on booze and tobacco. They likely hurt the poor more than the rich as there are likely more poor lush future lung cancer patients than there are rich ones.

And FYI http://www.boe.ca.gov/pdf/pub61.pdf on what is exempt and what isn't in 1/50 of the USA.

---

Well one way to recover lost tax if they reduce the Tampon Tax to 0 is to put a hefty tax on Viagra - That way even the old pharts in power can be seen to pay their share of tax :-)

Well one way to recover lost tax if they reduce the Tampon Tax to 0 is to put a hefty tax on Viagra - That way even the old pharts in power can be seen to pay their share of tax :-)

Only if the old phart is doing a Lamar Odom. Now maybe a brothel tax ... :-)

---

Well one way to recover lost tax if they reduce the Tampon Tax to 0 is to put a hefty tax on Viagra - That way even the old pharts in power can be seen to pay their share of tax :-)

Only if the old phart is doing a Lamar Odom. Now maybe a brothel tax ... :-)

Ah but that needs people to "rise to the occasion" so a Viagra Tax covers all :-)

It wouldn't take long for the deficit to clear :-)

A thought, put sales tax on everything and use all the sales tax for benefits.

That way the sales tax on luxury goods goes to helping the poor, because in a lot of cases exempting items from sales tax advantages the wealthy more than the poor.

Sales Taxes and VAT's, negatively effect the Poor and Working Class more than the Wealthy.

Just another Liberal/Left Wing Fraud.

WK...

The Wealthy are laughing all the way to the bank.

Who do you believe spends a higher percentage of their income on goods that would be subject to sales tax/VAT,
a) the less well off,
b) the more well off, or
c) they spend about the same
?

Do you have data to support your belief?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

A thought, put sales tax on everything and use all the sales tax for benefits.

That way the sales tax on luxury goods goes to helping the poor, because in a lot of cases exempting items from sales tax advantages the wealthy more than the poor.

Sales Taxes and VAT's, negatively effect the Poor and Working Class more than the Wealthy.

Just another Liberal/Left Wing Fraud.

WK...

The Wealthy are laughing all the way to the bank.

Who do you believe spends a higher percentage of their income on goods that would be subject to sales tax/VAT,
a) the less well off,
b) the more well off, or
c) they spend about the same
?

Do you have data to support your belief?

I think you will find that it's a bit more complicated than that ...


For instance, here in Texas, much food sold at Grocery and Convenience stores is NOT subject to sales tax. So that does muddy the water, so to speak.

Supporting information?

http://comptroller.texas.gov/taxinfo/taxpubs/tx96_280.pdf

---

https://youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE

#Texit

Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson(L) in 2016.

Truth is dangerous... especially when it challenges those in power.

Who do you believe spends a higher percentage of their income on goods that would be subject to sales tax/VAT,
a) the less well off,
b) the more well off, or
c) they spend about the same
?

Do you have data to support your belief?

As the wealthy spend less of their income on goods by a large margin that fact swamps any attempt to make the tax progressive on a percentage basis. (They don't live paycheck to paycheck.)

I don't have data on a dollar figure basis. When (spit) Donald buys a jet airplane I'm sure he pays more in sales tax than any person below the poverty line. But he may not even then on a percentage basis.

---

On sales tax, maybe I should get my niece, who's a dentist, explain about who pays the absolute minimum for dental care and how pays for the best repairs and cosmetic surgery.

Even though the UK has its NHS we still pay for dental care. http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/AboutNHSservices/dentists/Pages/nhs-dental-charges.aspx

---

Who do you believe spends a higher percentage of their income on goods that would be subject to sales tax/VAT,
a) the less well off,
b) the more well off, or
c) they spend about the same
?

Do you have data to support your belief?

As the wealthy spend less of their income on goods by a large margin that fact swamps any attempt to make the tax progressive on a percentage basis. (They don't live paycheck to paycheck.)

I don't have data on a dollar figure basis. When (spit) Donald buys a jet airplane I'm sure he pays more in sales tax than any person below the poverty line. But he may not even then on a percentage basis.

Well, owing to the fact that frequently those receiving Government Benefits are not charged sales taxes on eligible purchases (for instance in Texas, some food items (candy bars, for instance) are taxed if one pays cash, but are NOT taxed if bought with a SNAP benefit card), and also those benefits are not really 'income'...

The group that is 'hurt' the most by sales taxes would be the upper end of 'working class' + the lower end of 'middle class'. In other words, those too well off to receive much in the way of Government Benefits, yet not well off enough to not greatly miss that money. Them, and those on fixed incomes such as retired people on Social Security.

THEY are the ones hurt the most by sales taxes. Not the very poor... And not the rich... But, they are the ones hurt the most by other taxes as well.

---

https://youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE

#Texit

Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson(L) in 2016.

Truth is dangerous... especially when it challenges those in power.

Move candy bars, chips and soda out of the food category and into luxuries.

If more money is going into benefits then along side increasing benefit payments increase the upper threshold for receiving them.
In the UK Social Security to retired people is classed as and paid by the same department as other benefits.
Is Social Security not classed as a benefit there?

---

Move candy bars, chips and soda out of the food category and into luxuries.

I am in 100% agreement with you on this one.

If more money is going into benefits then along side increasing benefit payments increase the upper threshold for receiving them.

That has been done already. You can still get SOME of the Benefits at 3x the Federal Poverty Level, which would work out on my family as somewhere around US$90,000.00/year (+/- a couple of thousand US$... I haven't done the exact figures in a while).

In the UK Social Security to retired people is classed as and paid by the same department as other benefits.
Is Social Security not classed as a benefit there?

Yes and No.... Social Security pretty much functions as an annuity supported by a direct payroll tax on your wages/salary. It is an EARNED 'benefit'. Your monthly benefits depend on your average earnings, up to a cap.

Also, under certain circumstances, Social Security benefits are taxable income...

---

https://youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE

#Texit

Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson(L) in 2016.

Truth is dangerous... especially when it challenges those in power.

Increasing the tax on tobacco doesn't stop people smoking, it just stops poorer families from buying fruit.

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

That's the way addiction works.

---

Increasing the tax on tobacco doesn't stop people smoking, it just stops poorer families from buying fruit.

Seems the data suggests the reverse is true.

"Most studies found that raising cigarette prices through increased taxes is a highly effective measure for reducing smoking among youth, young adults, and persons of low socioeconomic status. However, there is a striking lack of evidence about the impact of increasing cigarette prices on smoking behavior in heavy/long-term smokers, persons with a dual diagnosis and Aboriginals." (source).

Reducing smoking amongst the young is highly effective, most smokers in the US, started before turning 18. (source).

More data.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

So once every smoker on the planet has given up, either voluntary or because of the hefty costs, what will governments tax heavily to replace all that lovely lost revenue?

So once every smoker on the planet has given up, either voluntary or because of the hefty costs, what will governments tax heavily to replace all that lovely lost revenue?

Perhaps the costs associated with smoking are greater than the tax revenues from sales.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

So once every smoker on the planet has given up, either voluntary or because of the hefty costs, what will governments tax heavily to replace all that lovely lost revenue?

Perhaps the costs associated with smoking are greater than the tax revenues from sales.

When dealing with politicians, they don't like lost revenue, so what will replace the Tobacco Tax?

So once every smoker on the planet has given up, either voluntary or because of the hefty costs, what will governments tax heavily to replace all that lovely lost revenue?

Or everyone's turned to the black market. I visited Pripyat last year and found that a pack of 20 cost about 35 pence*. Although given the setting the health risk from smoking isn't really the dominant issue.

*10 units of Ukranian currency, which i have no idea how to spell or pronounce.

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.