Taxes
in sentence
2462 examples of Taxes in a sentence
Immigrants could come and work, pay
taxes
and social contributions, and gain free access to the public goods of the host country.
If the IMF’s analysis of global imbalances is not balanced, if it does not identify the US as the major culprit, and if it does not direct its attention on America’s need to reduce its fiscal deficits – through higher
taxes
for America’s richest and lower defense spending – the Fund’s relevance in the twenty-first century will inevitably decline.
Likewise, the choice between privately consumed and publicly consumed “goods” is often blurred, as politicians tend to reinforce citizens’ understandable tendency to demand public goods while rejecting the
taxes
needed to pay for them.
Nonetheless, the center right and the center left are arguing about the degree of redistribution, not about the need for some progressivity in
taxes
and transfers.
A 12.5% tax is levied on capital gains from government bonds, while entrepreneurs risking their own capital to launch new businesses must pay roughly 50% of their start-up costs in
taxes.
Others seek comfort in the expectation that Trump’s wildly contradictory plans – lower taxes, while raising infrastructure spending; helping the neglected working class, while slashing welfare and repealing the Affordable Care Act – will suck his administration into a swamp of infighting, incoherence, and incompetence.
Europeans are unwilling to pay higher
taxes
for their own defense.
Some countries – most notably Brazil – have also used
taxes
on international capital flows and other kinds of controls in an effort to guide the currency’s value.
In sum, the EU “federal” corporate tax should be thought of as a benefit tax, based on a broad measure of activity, applied at a moderate rate, and unrelated to current returns; nor should it be deductible from other
taxes.
This model leaves the assessment and administration of corporate
taxes
entirely in the hands of member states, and would not require harmonization of legal and accounting rules.
Since every dollar, euro, yen, rupee, or yuan borrowed today requires the same present value in future interest payments – and therefore future
taxes
– there are important long-term costs to balance against whatever benefits the deficits create today; there is no fiscal free lunch.
The level, composition, and growth of spending and
taxes
are the fundamental fiscal indicators.
Even with a balanced budget, there is still the issue of the effectiveness and efficiency of spending, as each dollar of government revenue costs the economy about $1.30, given the distortions to private decisions caused by
taxes.
Indeed, WTO rules prohibit export subsidies – which, economically speaking, are enrich-thy-neighbor policies – while placing no direct restraints on export
taxes.
And if Japanese companies and households believe this fiction, they should rationally respond by saving to pay future taxes, thereby offsetting the stimulative effect of today’s fiscal deficits.
The 1981 legislation was not true tax reform, but a rushed and poorly coordinated frenzy of fiscally irresponsible cuts to both corporate and personal income
taxes.
Taxes
on families earning less than $75,000 would rise, on average, relative to today.
In particular, there has been a surge in bans or
taxes
imposed on certain plastics or plastic products.
It is possible that last year’s stock-market boom may have been fueled partly by the expectation that US President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans would cut corporate
taxes.
Known as the “Bhagwati Tax,” it is of course “the American way”: US citizens and permanent residents abroad, like those at home, must pay federal
taxes.
It also subtracted federal taxes, which fell from 19% of pretax income for middle-income households in 1980 to just 11.5% in 2010.
But when they expanded the definition of income to include benefits and subtracted taxes, they found that the median household’s real income rose by 45%.
In order to offset this, the WHO has identified six policies – encapsulated in the acronym MPOWER – that can stamp out the tobacco epidemic: Monitor tobacco use and prevention policies; protect people from tobacco smoke; offer help to quit tobacco use; warn people about the dangers of tobacco; enforce bans on tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship; and raise
taxes
on tobacco.
But the last one – raising
taxes
on tobacco products – is deserving of careful attention.
According to the latest WHO Report on the Global Tobacco Epidemic, levying
taxes
on tobacco is one of the cheapest and most effective measures to prevent death and suffering.
In many cases, it suggests raising
taxes
on tobacco.
According to a WHO report, only 33 countries levy sufficiently high
taxes
on tobacco, amounting to at least 75% of the retail price of cigarettes.
Taxes
on tobacco cost little to implement and lead to a windfall of benefits.
Raising
taxes
lowers the burden of non-communicable diseases, improves public health, and reduces expenditures on tobacco-related illnesses.
In high-income countries, where
taxes
have increased tobacco prices, illicit trade is less widespread than in low-income countries with few
taxes
on tobacco.
Back
Next
Related words
Government
Spending
Their
Would
Higher
Income
Which
Public
Countries
Other
Raise
Fiscal
Governments
Should
While
Lower
Increase
Could
Raising
Carbon
