Libertarian Party HQ (NEW) [NSG Senate]

[Joe Washington]

Guys, these are tax CAPS. Under this act, the socialist government cannot raise taxes ABOVE these values.

Agh, I always have trouble with compromise.

I suppose stealing less than 75% is better than stealing more :/

[Zurkerx]

Guys, these are tax CAPS. Under this act, the socialist government cannot raise taxes ABOVE these values.

Yes I know, but don't you think we should lower the cap so they can take less money? Alright, disregard my old numbers. How about 15, 30, 45? It's just a suggestion by the way.

[Battlion]

Tax caps if done correctly are something I could support, if done poorly then it's something which could ruin the country...

I'll be watching with keen interest

[Joe Washington]

Guys, these are tax CAPS. Under this act, the socialist government cannot raise taxes ABOVE these values.

Yes I know, but don't you think we should lower the cap so they can take less money? Alright, disregard my old numbers. How about 15, 30, 45? It's just a suggestion by the way.

Those are still less than ideal, but it's tolerable.

[Minarchist States]

Guys, these are tax CAPS. Under this act, the socialist government cannot raise taxes ABOVE these values.

Yes I know, but don't you think we should lower the cap so they can take less money? Alright, disregard my old numbers. How about 15, 30, 45? It's just a suggestion by the way.

I honestly don't think it'd pass if it were that low. We need the support of socdems and centrists. I see the act as a safeguard more than anything, imo.

Tax caps if done correctly are something I could support, if done poorly then it's something which could ruin the country...

Maybe, but I don't think anybody wants Aurentina to be in the position France is currently in, what with over 100% tax rates on some individuals. Nobody should have to pay that much, or owe more money than you get paid to the gov.

[Zurkerx]

Yes I know, but don't you think we should lower the cap so they can take less money? Alright, disregard my old numbers. How about 15, 30, 45? It's just a suggestion by the way.

Those are still less than ideal, but it's tolerable.

I would like it to be 5, 15, 25, but, it could be a good compromise, considering top rate can't succeed pass 45% if passed. The numbers I proposed would be the max I would go. I do agree with you on taxes, but we all know that's not going to happen.

[Zurkerx]

Yes I know, but don't you think we should lower the cap so they can take less money? Alright, disregard my old numbers. How about 15, 30, 45? It's just a suggestion by the way.

I honestly don't think it'd pass if it were that low. We need the support of socdems and centrists. I see the act as a safeguard more than anything, imo.

The 45% part I would assume?

[Minarchist States]

The 45% part I would assume?

Mostly. Be even the more moderate socialists want to increase taxes on the middle class until we are all sharing everything.

[Zurkerx]

The 45% part I would assume?

Mostly. Be even the more moderate socialists want to increase taxes on the middle class until we are all sharing everything.

Thanks for pointing that out. Well then, we got a lot work to do, but, I'm confident we can get something out.

[Minarchist States]

The Freedom From Taxation Act
Authored by: Minarchist States (LPA)
Sponsors:

Urgency: Low

Preamble: In several recent years it has come to our attention that even in the most affluent countries, some households are forced to pay high, debilitating taxes that harm the economy by driving away both the upper and middle classes while stagnating the lower class and forcing them to keep being poor. Also, we understand that large amounts of assets and debts that could push people - particularly the rich - into rates as high or higher than 75%, as exemplified by some households in France, while doing nothing particular for the economy but only add a few hundred million to the country's coffers. On that note, an act shall be drafted prohibiting the government from collecting too much money in taxes on different wealth classes, as well as preventing citizens to become too overwhelmed with tax levies.

We hereby propose these tax caps on the following wealth classes (defining wealth classes on the amount of income they earn TBA).

Tax Cap on the underclass: 10%

Tax Cap on the lower class: 25%

Tax Cap on the middle class: 50%

Tax Cap on the upper class: 75%

*Explain sales tax*

Since this is my first act, help would be appreciated! ^^

[Inyourfaceistan]

How about 2.5% flat tax, assuming we HAVE to have an income tax...

[Battlion]

How about 2.5% flat tax, assuming we HAVE to have an income tax...

Good luck trying to get that through the Senate, I personally think the first proposed caps have the most likelihood of being passed and gaining support from all sides of the Senate.

[Ainin]

Thoughts?

First Amendment to the Broadcasting Act
Author: Ainin [TR] | Urgency: Very Low | SIMBEDS: Domestic Development
Sponsors:

---

The Senate of the Aurentine Commonwealth,

Noting that the Aurentisë Televisënetwörk, as Aurentina's public broadcaster, was prohibited from carrying any form of commercial advertising by the Broadcasting Act,

Acknowledging that this clause was flawed and that advertising revenues are essential to keeping television networks profitable and financially viable,

Wishing to reduce the strain imposed by the activities of the Aurentisë Televisënetwörk on the Budget of the Aurentine Government,

The following act, to be referenced to as the First Amendment to the Broadcasting Act of 2013, is passed into law:

The clause of Section IV of the Broadcasting Act reading "ATN shall not carry any advertising, save for Public Service Announcements" is struck out and rendered null and void.

[Joe Washington]

How about 2.5% flat tax, assuming we HAVE to have an income tax...

2.5% is actually way lower than what most people suggest as an income tax, but I like it.

But first we have to shove this thing through to prevent leftists from taxing people up the palooza.

[Inyourfaceistan]

Thoughts?

First Amendment to the Broadcasting Act
Author: Ainin [TR] | Urgency: Very Low | SIMBEDS: Domestic Development
Sponsors:

---

The Senate of the Aurentine Commonwealth,

Noting that the Aurentisë Televisënetwörk, as Aurentina's public broadcaster, was prohibited from carrying any form of commercial advertising by the Broadcasting Act,

Acknowledging that this clause was flawed and that advertising revenues are essential to keeping television networks profitable and financially viable,

Wishing to reduce the strain imposed by the activities of the Aurentisë Televisënetwörk on the Budget of the Aurentine Government,

The following act, to be referenced to as the First Amendment to the Broadcasting Act of 2013, is passed into law:

The clause of Section IV of the Broadcasting Act reading "ATN shall not carry any advertising, save for Public Service Announcements" is struck out and rendered null and void.

Holy shit I might actually vote yes to this.

[Ainin]

Is that enough to get a sponsorship? Because right now, ATN's just randomly sitting there guzzling up £90,000,000.

[Inyourfaceistan]

Is that enough to get a sponsorship? Because right now, ATN's just randomly sitting there guzzling up £90,000,000.

Sure, why not.

[Battlion]

I still personally think you should just float ATN on the Stock Exchange Ainin

Allow the government to retain a majority government stake of course, but allow the access to private capital.

[Minarchist States]

Thoughts?

First Amendment to the Broadcasting Act
Author: Ainin [TR] | Urgency: Very Low | SIMBEDS: Domestic Development
Sponsors:

---

The Senate of the Aurentine Commonwealth,

Noting that the Aurentisë Televisënetwörk, as Aurentina's public broadcaster, was prohibited from carrying any form of commercial advertising by the Broadcasting Act,

Acknowledging that this clause was flawed and that advertising revenues are essential to keeping television networks profitable and financially viable,

Wishing to reduce the strain imposed by the activities of the Aurentisë Televisënetwörk on the Budget of the Aurentine Government,

The following act, to be referenced to as the First Amendment to the Broadcasting Act of 2013, is passed into law:

The clause of Section IV of the Broadcasting Act reading "ATN shall not carry any advertising, save for Public Service Announcements" is struck out and rendered null and void.

Oh boy. Yes, I would definitely support and sponsor this.

[Battlion]

Protection of Workers Act
Urgency: Moderate | Author: Battlion [NDP] | Category: Order
Co-sponsors: Gothmogs [PDP], NEO Rome Republic [NDP], Macedonian Grand Empire [RefP], Finium [NCP], Bering [NDP]

---

Preamble
An Act of the Senate of Aurentina to make it an offence to assault certain persons in the course of
or by reason of their employment; and for connected purposes.

Section I – Assault of Workers
1. A person, being a member of the public, who assaults a worker ––

(a) in the course of that worker’s employment, or
(b) by reason of that worker’s employment, commits an offence.

2. No offence is committed —

(a) under subsection (1)(a) unless the person who assaults knows or ought to know that the worker is acting in the course of the worker’s employment,
(b) under subsection (1)(b) unless the assault is motivated, in whole or in part, by malice towards the worker by reason of the worker’s employment.

3. In this section—

“worker” means a person whose employment involves dealing with members of the public, to any extent, but only if that employment involves —

(a) being physically present in the same place and at the same time as one or
more members of the public, and
(b) (either or both)—

(i) interacting with those members of the public for the purposes of the employment, or
(ii) providing a service to either particular members of the public or the
public generally,
“employment” means any paid or unpaid work whether under a contract, apprenticeship, or otherwise.

4. Evidence from a single source is sufficient evidence to establish for the purpose of subsection (1) whether a person is a worker.

Section II – Penalties
1. A person guilty of an offence under this Act is liable, on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 12 months or to a fine of which a Judge may determine upon sentencing.

Sponsors please x

[Joe Washington]

Protection of Workers Act
Urgency: Moderate | Author: Battlion [NDP] | Category: Order
Co-sponsors: Gothmogs [PDP], NEO Rome Republic [NDP], Macedonian Grand Empire [RefP], Finium [NCP], Bering [NDP]

---

Preamble
An Act of the Senate of Aurentina to make it an offence to assault certain persons in the course of
or by reason of their employment; and for connected purposes.

Section I – Assault of Workers
1. A person, being a member of the public, who assaults a worker ––

(a) in the course of that worker’s employment, or
(b) by reason of that worker’s employment, commits an offence.

2. No offence is committed —

(a) under subsection (1)(a) unless the person who assaults knows or ought to know that the worker is acting in the course of the worker’s employment,
(b) under subsection (1)(b) unless the assault is motivated, in whole or in part, by malice towards the worker by reason of the worker’s employment.

3. In this section—

“worker” means a person whose employment involves dealing with members of the public, to any extent, but only if that employment involves —

(a) being physically present in the same place and at the same time as one or
more members of the public, and
(b) (either or both)—

(i) interacting with those members of the public for the purposes of the employment, or
(ii) providing a service to either particular members of the public or the
public generally,
“employment” means any paid or unpaid work whether under a contract, apprenticeship, or otherwise.

4. Evidence from a single source is sufficient evidence to establish for the purpose of subsection (1) whether a person is a worker.

Section II – Penalties
1. A person guilty of an offence under this Act is liable, on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 12 months or to a fine of which a Judge may determine upon sentencing.

Sponsors please x

Isn't assault bad anyway?

[Minarchist States]

Protection of Workers Act
Urgency: Moderate | Author: Battlion [NDP] | Category: Order
Co-sponsors: Gothmogs [PDP], NEO Rome Republic [NDP], Macedonian Grand Empire [RefP], Finium [NCP], Bering [NDP]

---

Preamble
An Act of the Senate of Aurentina to make it an offence to assault certain persons in the course of
or by reason of their employment; and for connected purposes.

Section I – Assault of Workers
1. A person, being a member of the public, who assaults a worker ––

(a) in the course of that worker’s employment, or
(b) by reason of that worker’s employment, commits an offence.

2. No offence is committed —

(a) under subsection (1)(a) unless the person who assaults knows or ought to know that the worker is acting in the course of the worker’s employment,
(b) under subsection (1)(b) unless the assault is motivated, in whole or in part, by malice towards the worker by reason of the worker’s employment.

3. In this section—

“worker” means a person whose employment involves dealing with members of the public, to any extent, but only if that employment involves —

(a) being physically present in the same place and at the same time as one or
more members of the public, and
(b) (either or both)—

(i) interacting with those members of the public for the purposes of the employment, or
(ii) providing a service to either particular members of the public or the
public generally,
“employment” means any paid or unpaid work whether under a contract, apprenticeship, or otherwise.

4. Evidence from a single source is sufficient evidence to establish for the purpose of subsection (1) whether a person is a worker.

Section II – Penalties
1. A person guilty of an offence under this Act is liable, on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 12 months or to a fine of which a Judge may determine upon sentencing.

Sponsors please x

I don't think so. Shouldn't this already be covered by the Aurentine authorities? Who's to say that a mere insult to a worker would qualify?

[Inyourfaceistan]

Which ones? The ones who want to expand the power of the state at the expense of invidual liberty, weaken all political opposition and monopolize their standing in government, create a state-controlled economy with heavy regulations and possible nationalization of private property and restrict the right of the people to self-defense; or the ones who wear snazzy symbols and think absolutism is hip?

Both of them. By "on par" I mean "numerically" of course.

Yeah I know. It was just a jab at a certain region of the political spectrum that considers themselves the "furthest thing from fascism" that's all.

Also, I get the feeling the Iron Party is just doing what they do because "Lol! Totalitarianism bro!"

[Skeckoa]

The Freedom From Taxation Act
Authored by: Minarchist States (LPA)
Sponsors:

Urgency: Low

Preamble: In several recent years it has come to our attention that even in the most affluent countries, some households are forced to pay high, debilitating taxes that harm the economy by driving away both the upper and middle classes while stagnating the lower class and forcing them to keep being poor. Also, we understand that large amounts of assets and debts that could push people - particularly the rich - into rates as high or higher than 75%, as exemplified by some households in France, while doing nothing particular for the economy but only add a few hundred million to the country's coffers. On that note,

This Act shall be passed with the goal of prohibiting the government from collecting too much money in taxes on different wealth classes, overtaxing its citizens as well as preventing citizens to from becoming too overwhelmed with tax levies.

This Act hereby mandates these the following tax caps on the following wealth classes (defining wealth classes on the amount of income they earn TBA).

Tax Cap on the underclass: 10%

Tax Cap on the lower class: 25%

Tax Cap on the middle class: 50%

Tax Cap on the upper class: 75%

*Explain sales tax* <-- Please do, will this be included. If a sales tax goes above 10%, will people have a limit of how much they can spend?

Since this is my first act, help would be appreciated! ^^

-- some suggestions. Good luck good sir.

[Oneracon]

Which ones? The ones who want to expand the power of the state at the expense of invidual liberty, weaken all political opposition and monopolize their standing in government, create a state-controlled economy with heavy regulations and possible nationalization of private property and restrict the right of the people to self-defense; or the ones who wear snazzy symbols and think absolutism is hip?

You libertarians are so cute when you get all self-righteous~