Example collocations logo

Taxes in sentence

2462 examples of Taxes in a sentence

International cooperation should also be strengthened to prevent multinationals from avoiding taxes by shifting profits among jurisdictions.
Others tried to pay but would not levy the taxes needed to do so.
Others, like Massachusetts, tried to levy taxes, but its citizens refused to pay them.
Hamilton knew that the wrong kind of taxes would weaken the already-fragile economy.
As a result, many states feared federal assumption would mean that their taxes would go to pay northern speculators or to retire the debt of big borrowers, like Massachusetts.
To make that happen, the British government would have to establish a regime of low taxes, light regulations, and favorable treatment toward both skilled and unskilled immigrants working in and around financial services.
Some 1,200 items and almost every imaginable service were slotted into a rate category, though not before being shifted around in response to popular opposition (for example, to high taxes on previously exempted goods used by the disabled).
It is undoubtedly a relief that the farrago of central and state sales taxes that had previously bedeviled Indian businesses will be replaced by the GST.
When things are paid by the state budget, more money must be collected in taxes and substantial sums are consumed by such transfers.
Differences in indirect taxes such as VAT pose another way in which borders become obstacles to trade.
One reason why Europeans work less is because they pay more taxes, and high taxes are necessary to support those who do not work - an obvious vicious circle.
Rather than carefully balancing the benefits of each government expenditure program with the costs of raising taxes to finance those benefits, the right seeks to use a sledgehammer – not allowing the national debt to increase forces expenditures to be limited to taxes.
The remedies to the US deficit follow immediately from this diagnosis: put America back to work by stimulating the economy; end the mindless wars; rein in military and drug costs; and raise taxes, at least on the very rich.
The “yes” campaign hoped to win supporters with a utopian vision of an independent Scotland that included European Union and NATO membership; a currency union with England, but no fiscal union; improved public services and social benefits; and lower taxes.
But the same cannot be said for her threat to hit back at the EU by slashing UK taxes and regulations.
Moreover, May has pledged to help the working class, strengthen labor rights, and ensure that global businesses pay their fair share of UK taxes.
But almost all economic models imply that a cut in expenditures today should lead to higher GDP in the long run, because it allows for lower taxes (and thus reduces economic distortions).
If public debt is owed to domestic investors, it can be serviced with the taxes levied on GDP.
While fiscal austerity may be necessary in countries with large deficits and debt, raising taxes and cutting government spending may make the recession and deflation worse.
For decades, Brazil’s economic policy has drawn on the strength of its huge domestic market and protected local industries through a complex system of subsidies, taxes, and tariffs.
(If one worried about double taxation, one could allow a credit for corporate taxes on individual tax returns.)
It may also be possible to impose taxes on luxury goods (many of which are imported), thereby promoting equity without stifling growth.
This latest surge of American populism is financed by some extremely wealthy men, including a couple of oil billionaires named David and Charles Koch, who favor cutting taxes for the super-rich and abolishing government subsidies for the poor, such as Social Security and President Barack Obama’s health-care plan.
Arguably, since the government has not reined in other expenditures or increased taxes, the expenditures have been debt financed, and the interest costs on this debt add another $98 billion (conservative) to $385 billion (moderate) to the budgetary costs.
Many developing-country governments failed to learn the lesson of earlier crises, which should have prompted regulations and taxes restricting and discouraging foreign-currency exposures.
Stop Taxing the SickWASHINGTON, DC – The debate over access to affordable medicines in emerging and developing countries frequently overlooks a critical issue: Governments in these countries routinely slap tariffs and other taxes on vitally important drugs.
With tariffs and other taxes increasing drug costs by as much as two-thirds in some areas, even the most basic generic drugs become unaffordable for the poorest people.
Many countries also levy hefty sales taxes.
Brazil imposes a 28% rate on prescription medicines, while medicines in India are subject to 5% value-added tax and a 3% education tax, on top of state taxes that range from 5% to 16%.
Developing countries justify these taxes by claiming that they fund social spending.
BackNext