2/end
2/end
As a measure of regressivity, at current deficit levels, the second approach (POMV 50/50) takes 2x more from the Low20% than the Top1%; the third approach (POMV 25/75) takes 11x more, and the fourth approach takes 36x more.
6/end
As a measure of regressivity, at current deficit levels, the second approach (POMV 50/50) takes 2x more from the Low20% than the Top1%; the third approach (POMV 25/75) takes 11x more, and the fourth approach takes 36x more.
6/end
As the charts demonstrate, the first approach spreads the burden proportionately among all #AKfams. The second, third & fourth are increasingly regressive ...
5/6
As the charts demonstrate, the first approach spreads the burden proportionately among all #AKfams. The second, third & fourth are increasingly regressive ...
5/6
* Restructuring the PFD as POMV 25/75, w/ the additional deficit (above POMV 25/75) filled through a flat tax,
4/6
* Restructuring the PFD as POMV 25/75, w/ the additional deficit (above POMV 25/75) filled through a flat tax,
4/6
𝙎𝙚𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙙, we then look at four ways of closing the deficit.
* Retaining the current law PFD and using a flat tax to close the deficit instead,
3/6
𝙎𝙚𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙙, we then look at four ways of closing the deficit.
* Retaining the current law PFD and using a flat tax to close the deficit instead,
3/6
2/6
2/6
2/end
2/end
2/end
2/end