NATION

PASSWORD

[Draft] Restricting Direct National Taxation

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13066
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

[Draft] Restricting Direct National Taxation

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Tue Sep 29, 2015 10:29 pm

Restricting Direct National Taxation
Category: Free Trade | Strength: Mild | Proposer: Imperium Anglorum

Aware of the social ills possible from the reckless imposition of taxes and excises by international organisations whilst recognising that actions must be taken to prevent the World Assembly from recklessly imposing those taxes directly on governments,

Believing that a centralised funding structure is better able to handle the day to day finances of the World Assembly instead of an ad hoc system of funding,

Conceding that the World Assembly has an extremely strong role in economic freedoms as it can set worldwide policy and strongly affect prices for goods and services,

This august World Assembly, subject to pre-existing General Assembly resolutions, hereby:

  1. Defines, for the purposes of this resolution,

    1. "World Assembly" as the World Assembly, all committees, and sub-committies thereof and

    2. "direct national tax" as any compulsory contribution imposed upon a member nation for any unconditional status (such as GDP, national wealth, possession of properties, etc);
  2. Derogates from the World Assembly and reserves to each member nation the right to impose direct national taxes;

  3. Expands the Impartial Mediation Foundation's scope to include the mediation of financial disputes between nations and the World Assembly; and

  4. Urges strongly that member nations take immediate action to enforce the provisions of this resolution, to cooperate such that double taxation is minimised, and to streamline relevant tax codes.

Parsons: I would like to point out that the definition in 1.c. does not interfere with the General Fund's assessments, since this resolution is subject to preexisting resolutions. If there are any more responses to this proposal, I'd love to hear them.

OOC: By the way, to all the stat-wankers out there, this proposal would help mitigate that social justice resolution which just passed, hence boosting your economy scores.

Edit 1: Wording changed.
Edit 2: Wording changed.
Edit 3: Corrected spacing error.
Edit 4: Added comment.
Edit 5: Changed text.
Edit 6: Wording changed.
Edit 7: Added above tag and spoilered changes.
Edit 8: Changed wording.
Edit 9: Fixed wording fail.
Edit 10: Fixed wording issue.
Edit 11: Changed strength from Significant to Mild.
Edit 12: Wording fixed.
Edit 13: Added above tag.
Edit 14: Reflected issue pointed out.
Edit 15: Changed definition for direct tax.
Edit 16: Accepted changes.
Edit 17: Made it clear that this has nothing to do with domestic taxation but levies imposed on member states.
Edit 18: Changed from 'social bads' to 'social evils'.
Edit 19: Added above edit tag.
Edit 20: Corrected above edit tag.
Edit 21: Changed the first few lines of the proposal. Prefatory clauses changed.
Edit 22: Changed the formatting.
Edit 23: Added the above tag...
Edit 24: Added horizontal line.
Edit 25 (2025-01-22). Removed clause banning payment of fee-for-service.
Edit 26 (2025-01-22). Modernise style.
Edits 27–28 (2025-01-22). In the title "Direct National Taxation" at the beginning insert "Restricting"
Edits 29–30. The above edit message.
Edit 31. Remove clause defining "member nation".
Edit 32. Omit "Applauding this Assembly's past resolutions on taxation and their role in protecting member nations from arbitrary levies of funds, but,". Style modernisation (double quotes for single). Insert hyphens in "preexisting" and "subcommittee".
Last edited by Imperium Anglorum on Wed Jan 22, 2025 8:08 pm, edited 31 times in total.

Author: 1 SC and 59+ GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
GenSec (24 Dec 2021 –); posts not official unless so indicated
Delegate for Europe
Elsie Mortimer Wellesley
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Twice-commended toxic villainous globalist kittehs

User avatar
Normlpeople
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1597
Founded: Apr 25, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Normlpeople » Tue Sep 29, 2015 10:50 pm

"This would seem to duplicate the General Funds clause already mandating domestic taxation is domestically controlled.

I really don't see what you are going for here that the WAGF doesn't already cover."
Words and Opinion of Clover the Clever
Ambassador to the WA for the Armed Kingdom of Normlpeople

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13066
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Tue Sep 29, 2015 11:10 pm

Normlpeople wrote:"This would seem to duplicate the General Funds clause already mandating domestic taxation is domestically controlled.

I really don't see what you are going for here that the WAGF doesn't already cover."

Parsons: Well, I would argue that it doesn't. The proposal says that the right of nations to impose direct taxes is not to be subverted. Here, direct taxes are levies on states for states of being. The proposal preserves that right to the states only.
Last edited by Imperium Anglorum on Tue Sep 29, 2015 11:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Author: 1 SC and 59+ GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
GenSec (24 Dec 2021 –); posts not official unless so indicated
Delegate for Europe
Elsie Mortimer Wellesley
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Twice-commended toxic villainous globalist kittehs

User avatar
John Turner
Diplomat
 
Posts: 961
Founded: Aug 21, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby John Turner » Wed Sep 30, 2015 12:28 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Normlpeople wrote:"This would seem to duplicate the General Funds clause already mandating domestic taxation is domestically controlled.

I really don't see what you are going for here that the WAGF doesn't already cover."

Parsons: Well, I would argue that it doesn't.


Well I would agree with Clover and argue it does.

WA General Fund wrote:8. Affirms the right of member nations to maintain full authority over domestic taxation policies, barring those that may include unfair discriminatory practices;


But you know what, go right ahead and do what you are doing. You aren't going to listen to advice so this will merely be strike one.
Last edited by John Turner on Wed Sep 30, 2015 12:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
Sir John H. Turner
Imperial Minister of Foreign Affairs, United Federation of Canada
Premier, The North American Union
World Assembly Resolution Author

Socialism is not Communism
John Turner wrote:Oh.... And it wasn't drafted on the forums. That makes it automatically illegal, doesn't it?

User avatar
Wallenburg
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 23004
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
Democratic Socialists

Postby Wallenburg » Wed Sep 30, 2015 12:57 am

"I too hold reservations as to what this actually does with the World Assembly General Fund in place. Then again, I've only had a few hours to familiarize myself with the nuances of World Assembly law."
She walked into my office on legs as long as one of those long-legged birds that you see in Florida – the pink ones, not the white ones – except that she was standing on both of them, not just one of them, like those birds, the pink ones, and she wasn’t wearing pink, but I knew right away that she was trouble, which those birds usually aren’t.

King of Snark, Real Piece of Work, Metabolizer of Oxygen, Despotic Hegemon, Old Man from The East Pacific, by the Malevolence of Her Infinite Terribleness Catherine Gratwick the Sole and True Claimant to the Bears Armed Vacancy

User avatar
Tinfect
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5235
Founded: Jul 04, 2014
Democratic Socialists

Postby Tinfect » Wed Sep 30, 2015 1:06 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Normlpeople wrote:"This would seem to duplicate the General Funds clause already mandating domestic taxation is domestically controlled.

I really don't see what you are going for here that the WAGF doesn't already cover."

Parsons: Well, I would argue that it doesn't. The proposal says that the right of nations to impose direct taxes is not to be subverted. Here, direct taxes are levies on states for states of being. The proposal preserves that right to the states only.


"While I am loathe to agree with Ambassador Turner, this proposal does seem to rather greatly duplicate the World Assembly General Fund."
Raslin Seretis, Imperial Diplomatic Envoy, He/Him
Tolarn Feren, Civil Oversight Representative, He/Him
Jasot Rehlan, Military Oversight Representative, She/Her


Bisexual, Transgender (She/Her), Native-American, and Actual CommunistTM.

Imperium Central News Network: EMERGENCY ALERT: ALL CITIZENS ARE TO PROCEED TO EVACUATION SITES IMMEDIATELY | EMERGENCY ALERT: ALL FURTHER SUBSPACE SIGNALS AND SYSTEMS ARE TO BE DISABLED IMMEDIATELY | EMERGENCY ALERT: THE FOLLOWING SYSTEMS ARE ACCESS PROHIBITED BY STANDARD/BLACKOUT [Error: Format Unrecognized] | Indomitable Bastard #283
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

User avatar
Araraukar
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15899
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:11 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Strength: Significant

*snip*

Urges strongly that nations take immediate action to enforce the provisions of this resolution, to cooperate such that double taxation is minimised, and to streamline relevant tax codes.


Aside from duplication, that looks like a strength violation. Something that only urges, should be mild. The other action clauses don't require nations to do anything, they're just bureaucratic fluff.
- ambassador miss Janis Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk. In IC in the WA.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13066
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:40 am

Araraukar wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Strength: Significant

*snip*

Urges strongly that nations take immediate action to enforce the provisions of this resolution, to cooperate such that double taxation is minimised, and to streamline relevant tax codes.

Aside from duplication, that looks like a strength violation. Something that only urges, should be mild. The other action clauses don't require nations to do anything, they're just bureaucratic fluff.

Parsons: Agreed.

Normlpeople wrote:"This would seem to duplicate the General Funds clause already mandating domestic taxation is domestically controlled.

I really don't see what you are going for here that the WAGF doesn't already cover."

Parsons: The General Fund's clause is on domestic taxation domestically controlled.

To establish a difference, all I need prove is that this makes something other than domestic taxation. This proposal speaks about direct taxes levied by the World Assembly.

Hence, it is not about domestic taxation and thus, the proposition above is true. Since it is not on domestic taxation, it does not duplicate the General Fund's mandate.

Secondarily, minor duplication is not without precedence.
Last edited by Imperium Anglorum on Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:45 am, edited 2 times in total.

Author: 1 SC and 59+ GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
GenSec (24 Dec 2021 –); posts not official unless so indicated
Delegate for Europe
Elsie Mortimer Wellesley
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Twice-commended toxic villainous globalist kittehs

User avatar
Flawdom
Attaché
 
Posts: 97
Founded: Aug 25, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Flawdom » Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:59 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Araraukar wrote:Aside from duplication, that looks like a strength violation. Something that only urges, should be mild. The other action clauses don't require nations to do anything, they're just bureaucratic fluff.

Parsons: Agreed.

Normlpeople wrote:"This would seem to duplicate the General Funds clause already mandating domestic taxation is domestically controlled.

I really don't see what you are going for here that the WAGF doesn't already cover."

Parsons: The General Fund's clause is on domestic taxation domestically controlled.

To establish a difference, all I need prove is that this makes something other than domestic taxation. This proposal speaks about direct taxes levied by the World Assembly.

Hence, it is not about domestic taxation and thus, the proposition above is true. Since it is not on domestic taxation, it does not duplicate the General Fund's mandate.

Secondarily, minor duplication is not without precedence.

We feel like you've failed to differentiate this enough from previous legislation (WAGF) to the extent that this is merely minor duplication rather than full-blown duplication. As such, we stand opposed to this legislation at this time.

User avatar
Araraukar
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15899
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Wed Sep 30, 2015 10:38 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:This proposal speaks about direct taxes levied by the World Assembly.

Where, exactly?

Preserves to the nations and the nations only the sovereign right to impose direct taxes;

That implies that only nations can impose direct taxes, not the WA. Yet your own definitions say that a direct tax is payment to the WA. The WA can't tax individuals directly (OOC: unless that has changed in the past year or so), and WAGF says nations can decide national taxation policies on their own, so either your definitions are badly written, or you're contradicting yourself, or you've just plain old-fashionedly written yourself into the illegality corner.
- ambassador miss Janis Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk. In IC in the WA.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.

User avatar
The Dead Parrot
Attaché
 
Posts: 96
Founded: Sep 03, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby The Dead Parrot » Wed Sep 30, 2015 10:50 am

Araraukar wrote:so either your definitions are badly written, or you're contradicting yourself, or you've just plain old-fashionedly written yourself into the illegality corner.

...or a combination of all three.

Let's put it this way. Exactly what "future wrongs" is this resolution trying to right?
-- Polly. Yeah, I'm a parrot named Polly, so what?

-- Founder, Monty Python region. My brain hurts, I'm not dead yet, I'm a lumberjack, etc. etc.

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13066
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Wed Sep 30, 2015 11:07 am

Araraukar wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:This proposal speaks about direct taxes levied by the World Assembly.

Where, exactly?

Parsons: The fact that it preserves to the nations and the nations only the sovereign right to impose direct taxes.

Araraukar wrote:
Preserves to the nations and the nations only the sovereign right to impose direct taxes;

That implies that only nations can impose direct taxes, not the WA. Yet your own definitions say that a direct tax is payment to the WA. The WA can't tax individuals directly (OOC: unless that has changed in the past year or so), and WAGF says nations can decide national taxation policies on their own, so either your definitions are badly written, or you're contradicting yourself, or you've just plain old-fashionedly written yourself into the illegality corner.

Parsons: That is a good point. It was missed by our drafting department in merging NEL into this draft.

Author: 1 SC and 59+ GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
GenSec (24 Dec 2021 –); posts not official unless so indicated
Delegate for Europe
Elsie Mortimer Wellesley
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Twice-commended toxic villainous globalist kittehs

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13066
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Wed Sep 30, 2015 11:08 am

The Dead Parrot wrote:Let's put it this way. Exactly what "future wrongs" is this resolution trying to right?

Parsons: The wrong which occurs when some ambassador proposes legislation which demands 1% of your GDP for their pet project.

(OOC: Sorry about double posting. I wanted to make sure that these posts didn't show up as edited).

Author: 1 SC and 59+ GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
GenSec (24 Dec 2021 –); posts not official unless so indicated
Delegate for Europe
Elsie Mortimer Wellesley
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Twice-commended toxic villainous globalist kittehs

User avatar
Araraukar
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15899
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Wed Sep 30, 2015 11:37 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: The fact that it preserves to the nations and the nations only the sovereign right to impose direct taxes.

But if it's about national taxation, it can't be about WA taxation, and if it's about national taxation, WAGF already has that covered.

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: The wrong which occurs when some ambassador proposes legislation which demands 1% of your GDP for their pet project.

But that wouldn't be a tax, unless called such. (OOC: Example of that happening/being seriously attempted, please?)

Also, I fail to see exactly how any of this pertains to the chosen category.
- ambassador miss Janis Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk. In IC in the WA.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 17008
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Separatist Peoples » Wed Sep 30, 2015 11:47 am

Araraukar wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: The fact that it preserves to the nations and the nations only the sovereign right to impose direct taxes.

But if it's about national taxation, it can't be about WA taxation, and if it's about national taxation, WAGF already has that covered.

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: The wrong which occurs when some ambassador proposes legislation which demands 1% of your GDP for their pet project.

But that wouldn't be a tax, unless called such. (OOC: Example of that happening/being seriously attempted, please?)

Also, I fail to see exactly how any of this pertains to the chosen category.

OOC: the WSA replacement had such a clause. A recent, as in two or so days ago, proposal also included such a line for .5% of the GDPs.

His Worshipfulness, the Most Unscrupulous, Plainly Deceitful, Dissembling, Strategicly Calculating Lord GA Secretariat, Authority on All Existence, Arbiter of Right, Toxic Globalist Dog, Dark Psychic Vampire, and Chief Populist Elitist!
Separatist Peoples should RESIGN!

User avatar
Araraukar
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15899
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Wed Sep 30, 2015 11:57 am

Separatist Peoples wrote:OOC: the WSA replacement had such a clause. A recent, as in two or so days ago, proposal also included such a line for .5% of the GDPs.

OOC: Ty, I tried to read through everything that was passed while I wasn't here, but obviously my memory is still faulty. Were those bits called taxation, though?
- ambassador miss Janis Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk. In IC in the WA.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13066
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Wed Sep 30, 2015 12:02 pm

Araraukar wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: The fact that it preserves to the nations and the nations only the sovereign right to impose direct taxes.

But if it's about national taxation, it can't be about WA taxation, and if it's about national taxation, WAGF already has that covered.

OOC: Well, your responses helped refine what I was speaking of. It is now about WA taxation of administrative districts.

Araraukar wrote:But that wouldn't be a tax, unless called such. (OOC: Example of that happening/being seriously attempted, please?)

Parsons: We've defined such an action as a tax in our definitions. We'd like to also thank Separatist Peoples for their timely example.

Araraukar wrote:Also, I fail to see exactly how any of this pertains to the chosen category.

Parsons: Our previous proposal, National Economic Liberties attempted the exact same thing based on the precedent set by National Economic Freedoms. It falls into Free Trade by reining in WA mandated taxation barriers and urging removal of internal cases of double taxation as well as streamlining tax codes to lower the labour burden of businesses.

Author: 1 SC and 59+ GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
GenSec (24 Dec 2021 –); posts not official unless so indicated
Delegate for Europe
Elsie Mortimer Wellesley
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Twice-commended toxic villainous globalist kittehs

User avatar
Araraukar
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15899
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Wed Sep 30, 2015 1:35 pm

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Concerned about the social bads possible from the reckless imposition of taxes and excises by international organisations,

"Social bads"?

Applauding this Assembly's many resolutions on taxation and particularly GA Resolution 68, National Economic Freedoms, but,

Best to not directly mention other resolutions by name, even if you're not directly building on top of them. Also, it might be helpful if you listed the "many resolutions on taxation" in your notes (not the proposal text).

Conceding that the World Assembly has an extremely strong role in economic freedoms

OOC: Except the majority of proposals walk over NEF as though it didn't exist...

as it can set worldwide policy and prices for goods and services,

Fairly impossible for it to set prices on goods and services, since there is no universal currency (OOC: and trying to create one is forbidden).

This august World Assembly, subject to preexisting General Assembly resolutions, hereby:

Pompous language like this is not needed. If you start the whole proposal with "The World Assembly", as you might want to anyway, since it's supposedly the WA that's concerned and whatnot, you can reduce this one to "Hereby".

'Assembly' as the World Assembly and all committees thereof,

The WA is made up of the member nations, the gnomes that sit on the committees, are not from the member nations, so this is a fairly weird definition. If you mean the bureaucratic entity that is the WA + committees, try leaving it at "World Assembly" and see how the sentence flows. After all, you're nowhere near character limit.

'nation' as member nations and all subdivisions thereof with the power to tax, and

This seems an odd thing to add, if you're not talking about domestic taxation. At least I consider state, regional or municipal taxation to be a domestic issue. The WA can only affect the member nations directly, not whatever bits and bobs they're made of.

'direct tax' as any compulsory contribution imposed upon administrative regions for ownership or any other unconditional status (such as GDP, national wealth, possession of properties, population, etc.);

I literally do not understand this definition after the word "regions". And what does population have to do with any of this? Wouldn't "as any compulsory tax imposed upon nations" work? Since you're trying to regulate WA taxation.

Preserves to the nations and the nations only the sovereign right to impose direct taxes;

This still contradicts the stated purpose of this proposal; if the purpose of the proposed resolution is to ensure WA can't, in the future, set direct taxes on member nations, just say so.

Excludes nations from future requirements to directly and individually pay for products or services rendered by the Assembly;

...I didn't know WA produced actual items. Unless you count the endless paperwork...

Also, this sounds very strange to me - since WAGF will in any case be funded by member nations, and is the funding source for any committees and such, you won't actually succeed in anything else but future proposals being unable to put in a percentage of GDP on their price tags. Nations will still end up paying according to their ability to do so.

Expands the Impartial Mediation Foundation's scope to include the mediation of financial disputes between nations and the Assembly;

Um, there won't be any disputes between member nations and the WA, because WA laws are absolute and override any national laws (OOC: those RPing noncompliance will do it anyway and no resolution can change that); the nations won't be able to dispute anything.

Urges strongly that nations take immediate action to enforce the provisions of this resolution,

This is unnecessary, as nations won't have any say in doing that anyway.

to cooperate such that double taxation is minimised, and to streamline relevant tax codes.

Aaaand we're back to poking at national taxation, it seems.
- ambassador miss Janis Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk. In IC in the WA.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13066
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Wed Sep 30, 2015 3:28 pm

Araraukar wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Concerned about the social bads possible from the reckless imposition of taxes and excises by international organisations,

"Social bads"?

Parsons: We mean deadweight loss from taxation of goods and manipulation of markets. These are, I hope you can agree, social bads.

Araraukar wrote:
Applauding this Assembly's many resolutions on taxation and particularly GA Resolution 68, National Economic Freedoms, but,

Best to not directly mention other resolutions by name, even if you're not directly building on top of them. Also, it might be helpful if you listed the "many resolutions on taxation" in your notes (not the proposal text).

Parsons: All proposals may mention other resolutions by name. This has been well precedented in time. It is not a House of Cards violation due to the fact that the resolution stands alone even if NEF were repealed.

Araraukar wrote:
as it can set worldwide policy and prices for goods and services,

Fairly impossible for it to set prices on goods and services, since there is no universal currency (OOC: and trying to create one is forbidden).

Parsons: The World Assembly can affect prices of international goods and services, as it did in Resolution 118, which, although repealed, does not invalidate the point that the World Assembly can affect the prices of international goods and services by imposing ad valorem tariffs.

Araraukar wrote:
'Assembly' as the World Assembly and all committees thereof,

The WA is made up of the member nations, the gnomes that sit on the committees, are not from the member nations, so this is a fairly weird definition. If you mean the bureaucratic entity that is the WA + committees, try leaving it at "World Assembly" and see how the sentence flows. After all, you're nowhere near character limit.

Parsons: Or, I would left saying 'the World Assembly and all committees thereof' over and over again, which would be a pain on whoever reads it.

Araraukar wrote:
'nation' as member nations and all subdivisions thereof with the power to tax, and

This seems an odd thing to add, if you're not talking about domestic taxation. At least I consider state, regional or municipal taxation to be a domestic issue. The WA can only affect the member nations directly, not whatever bits and bobs they're made of.

Parsons: The World Assembly can affect nations directly. Affecting nations means that they can affect subdivisions thereof. An example of this is Sciongrad's No Penalty Without Law, which affects 'political subdivisions thereof'.

Araraukar wrote:
'direct tax' as any compulsory contribution imposed upon administrative regions for ownership or any other unconditional status (such as GDP, national wealth, possession of properties, population, etc.);

I literally do not understand this definition after the word "regions". And what does population have to do with any of this? Wouldn't "as any compulsory tax imposed upon nations" work? Since you're trying to regulate WA taxation.

Parsons: I am not regulating any compulsory tax (since all taxes are compulsory). That would ban all taxes (and also contradict the General Fund). I have no intention of banning all taxes. I want to ban all WA direct taxes. It's very nuanced in that I want to ban all taxes which tax a state of being and not an action. For example, one could tax petrol. Now, that is an indirect tax, since one can simply not buy petrol. But, if one were to implement a head tax, that is a direct tax, since it is unreasonable to violate facilitative rights to avoid that tax.

Araraukar wrote:
Preserves to the nations and the nations only the sovereign right to impose direct taxes;

This still contradicts the stated purpose of this proposal; if the purpose of the proposed resolution is to ensure WA can't, in the future, set direct taxes on member nations, just say so.

Parsons: This wording skirts around an illegality mentioned by the Honourable Ambassador from Bears Armed in the drafting thread of National Economic Liberties. It accomplishes the same thing in the end.

Araraukar wrote:
Excludes nations from future requirements to directly and individually pay for products or services rendered by the Assembly;

...I didn't know WA produced actual items. Unless you count the endless paperwork...

Parsons: Products and services. Services such as: 'Providing actual meteorological services within any WA member nations that currently lack adequate agencies of their own for this duty, if those nations’ governments request this, in which case reasonable fees may be negotiated depending on those nations’ abilities to pay' which is mentioned in Resolution 87. (Parsons sits down, but then pops up again) And no, this doesn't contradict that resolution since this clause speaks about future requirements.

Araraukar wrote:Also, this sounds very strange to me - since WAGF will in any case be funded by member nations, and is the funding source for any committees and such, you won't actually succeed in anything else but future proposals being unable to put in a percentage of GDP on their price tags. Nations will still end up paying according to their ability to do so.

Parsons: As stated in the drafting thread for National Economic Liberties, the intention is to make funding go through general funds and general funds only. Since politically, any compulsory contributions named taxes are going to be voted down, this means that the WA is funded by 'donations' for which only the General Fund would then deal with.

Araraukar wrote:
Expands the Impartial Mediation Foundation's scope to include the mediation of financial disputes between nations and the Assembly;

Um, there won't be any disputes between member nations and the WA, because WA laws are absolute and override any national laws (OOC: those RPing noncompliance will do it anyway and no resolution can change that); the nations won't be able to dispute anything.

Parsons: Perfect compliance is not accepted by all as the standard of compliance in the World Assembly.

Araraukar wrote:
to cooperate such that double taxation is minimised, and to streamline relevant tax codes.

Aaaand we're back to poking at national taxation, it seems.

Parsons: Which doesn't violate the WAGF because it doesn't require anything of nations. I don't see what your point is on this matter.

Author: 1 SC and 59+ GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
GenSec (24 Dec 2021 –); posts not official unless so indicated
Delegate for Europe
Elsie Mortimer Wellesley
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Twice-commended toxic villainous globalist kittehs

User avatar
Povinksi
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 376
Founded: Jun 19, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Povinksi » Sat Oct 03, 2015 6:40 pm

Seems like a clone of the General Fund. But it's a bit late for that now, isn't it?
Founder of The Tenth Dimension
__________________________________________________________________________
June 19th, 2015 - February 21st, 2016.

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13066
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Sat Oct 03, 2015 6:46 pm

Povinksi wrote:Seems like a clone of the General Fund. But it's a bit late for that now, isn't it?

How so?

Author: 1 SC and 59+ GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
GenSec (24 Dec 2021 –); posts not official unless so indicated
Delegate for Europe
Elsie Mortimer Wellesley
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Twice-commended toxic villainous globalist kittehs

User avatar
Lewis Nightingale
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 2
Founded: Oct 03, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Lewis Nightingale » Sat Oct 03, 2015 6:50 pm

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Povinksi wrote:Seems like a clone of the General Fund. But it's a bit late for that now, isn't it?

How so?

You've all already said that.

User avatar
Araraukar
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15899
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:29 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Araraukar wrote:"Social bads"?

Parsons: We mean deadweight loss from taxation of goods and manipulation of markets. These are, I hope you can agree, social bads.

Deadweight loss from taxation? What exactly do you think taxes are for? And I think the term you're looking for is "social evils"? "Social bads" sounds like a child wrote it. Neither is a good solid term, mind you, and should probably be changed to something more professional.
(OOC: While I don't RP with the exact stats of my nation - I RP with population of about 2000 million, for example - I do RP with the policy choices. Araraukar's income tax percentage is 100%, but in return of work, the citizens get practically everything for free, as their taxes pay for it.)

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: All proposals may mention other resolutions by name. This has been well precedented in time. It is not a House of Cards violation due to the fact that the resolution stands alone even if NEF were repealed.

(OOC: I never claimed HoC violation or said that you can't mention other reasolutions. I just said it's best not to. Every resolution out there has its haters, and some of the haters are powerful delegates. So you'll be taking an unnecessary risk by mentioning the resolution directly. You could just leave the NEF out of it and your statement would still be sound.)

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: The World Assembly can affect prices of international goods and services

Affect, yes. Set, no. (OOC: Do you regularly RP as someone else but Parsons in GA? Because as long as you're talking as Parsons, you don't need to put the name before every single line you say. This is a roleplay forum, so you only need to separate things you say out of character, people will read the rest as in-character.)

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: Or, I would left saying 'the World Assembly and all committees thereof' over and over again, which would be a pain on whoever reads it.

You could just change the definition for the purposes of this proposal to make "The WA" stand for the World Assembly and all committees thereof.

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: The World Assembly can affect nations directly. Affecting nations means that they can affect subdivisions thereof.

You honestly believe that the WA should able to set municipal tax rates? Anything below the national level - which is the level the WA can affect - whether it's for a federation or a kingdom or whathaveyou, anything below it is that nation's internal taxation. (OOC: The subdivisions thing mentioned in the other resolution is there to say that people can't do X unless the nation's laws say thet can do X. It doesn't say WA can do X to people and subdivisions.)

Imperium Anglorum wrote:I have no intention of banning all taxes. I want to ban all WA direct taxes.

I repeat:
Araraukar wrote:if the purpose of the proposed resolution is to ensure WA can't, in the future, set direct taxes on member nations, just say so.


Imperium Anglorum wrote:
'direct tax' as any compulsory contribution imposed upon administrative regions for ownership or any other unconditional status (such as GDP, national wealth, possession of properties, population, etc.);

It's very nuanced in that I want to ban all taxes which tax a state of being and not an action. For example, one could tax petrol. Now, that is an indirect tax, since one can simply not buy petrol. But, if one were to implement a head tax, that is a direct tax, since it is unreasonable to violate facilitative rights to avoid that tax.

I don't understand what that has anything to do with WA taxation, nor do I still understand the definition in the proposal text. Plain English universal language, please?

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Araraukar wrote: ...I didn't know WA produced actual items. Unless you count the endless paperwork...

Parsons: Products and services.

But the WA doesn't produce products. As in physical things. It does procude services, yes. Although, mind you, if this is an attempt to get out of paying your WAHQ office's electricity bill, it doesn't work, as the maintenance costs don't go to the WA itself.

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Since politically, any compulsory contributions named taxes are going to be voted down, this means that the WA is funded by 'donations' for which only the General Fund would then deal with.

If everything with payments referring to taxes is going to be voted down, why is this proposal even necessary?

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: Perfect compliance is not accepted by all as the standard of compliance in the World Assembly.

(OOC: Like I said):
Araraukar wrote:(OOC: those RPing noncompliance will do it anyway and no resolution can change that)


Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Araraukar wrote:Aaaand we're back to poking at national taxation, it seems.

Parsons: Which doesn't violate the WAGF because it doesn't require anything of nations. I don't see what your point is on this matter.

I think we may have a communication mismatch here: when I say "national taxation", I mean "domestic taxation", the nation taxing its inhabitants and businesses and whatever it wants to tax. And that's something the WAGF resolution prohibits the WA from poking into. "WA tax" to me, means something the WA imposes on the nations in question, not the individuals or businesses or other taxable subjects within the nations.
- ambassador miss Janis Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk. In IC in the WA.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 13066
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:48 am

Araraukar wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: We mean deadweight loss from taxation of goods and manipulation of markets. These are, I hope you can agree, social bads.

Deadweight loss from taxation? What exactly do you think taxes are for? And I think the term you're looking for is "social evils"? "Social bads" sounds like a child wrote it. Neither is a good solid term, mind you, and should probably be changed to something more professional.
(OOC: While I don't RP with the exact stats of my nation - I RP with population of about 2000 million, for example - I do RP with the policy choices. Araraukar's income tax percentage is 100%, but in return of work, the citizens get practically everything for free, as their taxes pay for it.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_(economics)

Araraukar wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: All proposals may mention other resolutions by name. This has been well precedented in time. It is not a House of Cards violation due to the fact that the resolution stands alone even if NEF were repealed.

(OOC: I never claimed HoC violation or said that you can't mention other reasolutions. I just said it's best not to. Every resolution out there has its haters, and some of the haters are powerful delegates. So you'll be taking an unnecessary risk by mentioning the resolution directly. You could just leave the NEF out of it and your statement would still be sound.)

Parsons: That can be done.

Araraukar wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: The World Assembly can affect prices of international goods and services

Affect, yes. Set, no. (OOC: Do you regularly RP as someone else but Parsons in GA? Because as long as you're talking as Parsons, you don't need to put the name before every single line you say. This is a roleplay forum, so you only need to separate things you say out of character, people will read the rest as in-character.)

OOC: I do it because theatre. This (edit: meaning the phrase in the proposal) can be changed.

Araraukar wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: Or, I would left saying 'the World Assembly and all committees thereof' over and over again, which would be a pain on whoever reads it.

You could just change the definition for the purposes of this proposal to make "The WA" stand for the World Assembly and all committees thereof.

Parsons: We can put the World back into 'Assembly'.

Araraukar wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: The World Assembly can affect nations directly. Affecting nations means that they can affect subdivisions thereof.

You honestly believe that the WA should able to set municipal tax rates? Anything below the national level - which is the level the WA can affect - whether it's for a federation or a kingdom or whathaveyou, anything below it is that nation's internal taxation. (OOC: The subdivisions thing mentioned in the other resolution is there to say that people can't do X unless the nation's laws say thet can do X. It doesn't say WA can do X to people and subdivisions.)

Parsons: This is here to prevent the resolution from preventing nations and their political subdivisions thereof from being prohibited to tax, since I'm using 'Preserves to the nations and the nations only' in this proposal.

Araraukar wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:I have no intention of banning all taxes. I want to ban all WA direct taxes.

I repeat: if the purpose of the proposed resolution is to ensure WA can't, in the future, set direct taxes on member nations, just say so.

Parsons: It does say so. However, doing so is illegal, per Bears Armed's interpretation of the blocker rule.

Araraukar wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:It's very nuanced in that I want to ban all taxes which tax a state of being and not an action. For example, one could tax petrol. Now, that is an indirect tax, since one can simply not buy petrol. But, if one were to implement a head tax, that is a direct tax, since it is unreasonable to violate facilitative rights to avoid that tax.

I don't understand what that has anything to do with WA taxation, nor do I still understand the definition in the proposal text. Plain English universal language, please?

Parsons: If it is a compulsory contribution which is levied on something which all nations have, like existence or national wealth (that is, an unconditional status) or ownership of property (e.g. owning an embassy at the World Assembly), then it is a 'direct tax'. It's based off the definitions of direct tax on persons, which is a tax a person cannot avoid, of which the classical example is a head tax.

Araraukar wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: Products and services.

But the WA doesn't produce products. As in physical things. It does procude services, yes. Although, mind you, if this is an attempt to get out of paying your WAHQ office's electricity bill, it doesn't work, as the maintenance costs don't go to the WA itself.

Parsons: The World Assembly does produce products, like reports on data collected. It also provides services. This is really here to I don't need to define the word 'goods'.

Araraukar wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Since politically, any compulsory contributions named taxes are going to be voted down, this means that the WA is funded by 'donations' for which only the General Fund would then deal with.

If everything with payments referring to taxes is going to be voted down, why is this proposal even necessary?

Parsons: If everything which bans nuclear weapons is going to be voted down, why is Napa necessary? Yet, the more important facet here is that those taxes can be hidden in different forms, which this proposal would deal with. I honestly don't believe that anyone would write a proposal which directly levies taxes on a nation except in a way which would be opaque enough that it could be interpreted both ways.

Araraukar wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Parsons: Perfect compliance is not accepted by all as the standard of compliance in the World Assembly.

(OOC: Like I said): those RPing noncompliance will do it anyway and no resolution can change that

OOC: Then I don't believe you understood Mousebumples's statement here. They said that because resolutions are implemented by laws passed at the national level, perfect mandatory compliance is not at all guaranteed. Things like the Creative Solutions Agency allow for members to RP compliance in a bad faith manner whilst saying they are acting in good faith to the resolution.

Edit 1: Changed phrase in response 3.
Last edited by Imperium Anglorum on Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:51 am, edited 1 time in total.

Author: 1 SC and 59+ GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
GenSec (24 Dec 2021 –); posts not official unless so indicated
Delegate for Europe
Elsie Mortimer Wellesley
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Twice-commended toxic villainous globalist kittehs

User avatar
Nouvelle o France
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 119
Founded: Oct 05, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Nouvelle o France » Wed Oct 07, 2015 7:55 pm

We will be following this proposal closely as this seems to aim to protect the National Sovereignty of the States in all matters of taxation. Hopefully, this will become clear enough to earn our support if this ever get to vote.
Proud Member of The Anti Democracy League

It is not true that all Dictators are Psychopath, but it is true that most Psychopathic Rulers are Dictators.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads