29 ms·
It's mainly a try at introducing a VAT, populist UBI stuff is probably secondary goal
by gedy 7y ago
It's mainly a try at introducing a VAT, populist UBI stuff is probably secondary goal
- mcv 7y agoVAT seems an odd way to fund Basic Income. It should be part of the income tax system. I believe Friedman called it a negative income tax. If it's a livable BI, it should replace welfare and similar benefits.
- ameister14 7y agoI actually think income tax is a pretty odd way to fund UBI. VAT makes more sense to me as it's a use tax
- AnthonyMouse 7y ago> VAT seems an odd way to fund Basic Income. It actually makes a lot of sense, because the primary benefit of using income tax is the progressive rate structure, but for a tax funding a UBI you actually want a flat rate because the tax is the de facto phase out of the benefit. We currently have two systems that basically invert each other. On the one hand, we have a progressive tax. On the other hand, we phase out assistance for the poor as incomes increase. These two things cancel out. With a UBI you "pay more tax" but you don't lose the assistance. When the assistance is cash that's a no-op. Except that administratively it's dramatically simpler -- you don't have to vary the tax based on how much money anybody makes, you don't create arbitrage opportunities for rich people to pay lower tax rates intended for poor people, you don't accidentally create poverty traps by imposing de facto higher marginal rates on lower income people than higher income people due to overlapping benefits phase outs, etc.
- zoonosis 7y agoI believe the US already has a negative income tax, the EITC.