The case portrays the need for a review of income and property taxes, highlighting information on which taxes should or should not have their exemption limits extended and how this affects the country's infrastructure.
Accordingly, we can answer the other questions as follows:
- Economic research is against increasing the income tax exemption limit, as this would harm the poorest population.
- The research states that the property tax is important for the growth of the country's infrastructure, in addition to falling on objects that are easy to identify and that belong to the richest population.
<h3>How does the survey present this information?</h3>
The research shows that the income import should matter the exemption in the poorest population and this is a way to promote more taxpayers for this tax. This is because by allowing poor people to be exempt from income tax, the State promotes economic ascension, allowing these people to reach higher economic levels and leave the lower classes, becoming taxpayers.
However, the research is in favor of extending the exemption limits for property tax. This is because these taxes must fall on people who own buildings and residences. These people have a higher economic standard and are easily identified since the properties are immovable assets.
Learn more about income tax:
brainly.com/question/17075354
#SPJ1
Answer:
if two people are part of a society and one of them has the right to work and earn for himself while the other one is prohibited to do so (i.e. they are unequal before the law), we can safely say that this is an unjust society.
Not the best at law, so i wouldn't completely depend on this^^
Explanation:
Answer:
Mainly, the greatest benefit of solving problems outside the judicial system is the cost, since every judicial process necessarily entails a high cost, both in taxes, costs, fees, etc. In addition, the resolution time is much longer, since it involves a whole series of procedural steps that necessarily imply a passage in time, which can be avoided through an alternative resolution of conflicts.
Those means of alternative dispute resolution include, among others, mediation and arbitration. Mediation, on the one hand, involves a series of meetings between the parties in conflict, with the assistance of a specialist, the mediator, who seeks to bring the parties closer together and achieve the resolution of the dispute. On the other hand, arbitration implies that the parties in conflict abide by the solution proposed by an impartial third party, the arbitrator, who will decide according to the rules of law or equity, as appropriate.
Answer:
Reasoned <u>Opinions </u>
Explanation:
<em>Hope this helps :)</em>
<em>Have an amazing day <3</em>
