Little Red Riding Hood Chinese Sellier and Mary Catherine Louis , published Picquier . 
Word of the Day 
The buzz generated by the small book by Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez and Camille Landais is a sign that the public interest is finally not a moribund concept. It is rather the case of our tax system, whose defenders are scarce, "the income tax has become so unreadable that you can not reform it in the lowered still further . Better to hasten its end. " De Profundis. It is commendable method first. The simultaneous availability of a complete simulation environment ( www.revolution-fiscale.fr
) is a very significant innovation. Especially since the choice - Unconventional - to establish a set of virtual files containing 800,000 observations is the only one that allows access to all the variables necessary to simulate the overall tax burden. It is a remarkable contribution, complementing our tool for generating test cases (available at www.allocationuniverselle.com ).
In terms of family taxation, we read with pleasure on page 105: "We present the reform scenario, the simplest, which is to use a tax credit that would replace all at once the family quotient, the family allowances, the family income supplement, the allowance for school, the family support allowance and the provision of early childhood home base ". The amount proposed is 190 € monthly per child, equivalent to the 192 € we had calculated in 2009 for the universal benefit paid to minors. The benefit was clearly identified: "This system would have the advantage of being incredibly simple and readable and his administration would be less expensive than the current system." That lack does it mean?
A central proposition of the book is that of replacing the formula with the schedule of income tax by applying an effective tax rate to the entire income, not more as is the marginal rate case today. This practice leads to a complication, which preclude the deduction at source, as aptly described on page 81: "Where an employer - or any other body - pays an income stream, it is uncertain what rate to apply. For example, an employer pays a salary of 1100 euros gross and feels obliged to collect 2%. But he knows that his employees will receive higher wages at year end (perhaps with another employer) or that they have unearned income (perhaps more) in value so its true annual income is over 60,000 euros (5,000 euros per month) in which case the tax due is 13% rather than 2%. " The recommended solution is grotesque: "To address these issues, the tax administration must convey to employers the total tax rate actually practice the previous year. And in any case, a corrective statement was made early in the year following each receives a pre-filled declaration stating all income and deductions already made to the source, and corrects if necessary ". A similar mechanism is proposed on page 119 concerning social security contributions, without more convincing. Let
to Piketty and al the time to understand the immense value that represents a proportional sample of income, supplemented by a basic allowance calculated and paid monthly by the tax authorities.The second weakness of the book is how naive astonishment which is treated with the feasibility of a passage of an effective tax rate of about 15% to 60% of the highest incomes. The argument on pages 96-100 is dilatory, unable to reassure us about the risk of systematic avoidance of the richest.
In conclusion: congratulations for the work and the progress convincing on many points. There is still a small effort required to achieve a totally balanced proposal.
Marc de Basquiat
How
local banks to open new currency to local With Without Any interest? How to create
and share surplus?
https: / / docs.google.com / Doc? Docid = 0Aep0lmjLtiXzZHNrdmhteF8zNDFmcTJoNTRmdA & hl = en
How to create and share the surplus:
