Sentences with phrase «reduced by raising the tax»

It was gradually established that smoking prevalence could be reduced by raising the tax on cigarettes, and by banning tobacco advertising.

Not exact matches

The Liberals are also spending $ 80.5 million over five years starting this year to reduce tobacco use, particularly in Indigenous communities, and raising taxes on cigarettes by $ 1 per carton.

The budget predicted the fiscal year would end with a thin surplus of $ 197 million, a feat that would be achieved by reducing expenditure growth, raising taxes and selling off more than 100 assets determined to be surplus.

So Senate Republicans decided to comply with the rule by simply having all the most expensive individual cuts in the bill expire, and paying for permanent corporate tax cuts by reducing access to subsidized health insurance and using chained CPI to raise individual taxes over time.

«Even though the consumption tax is scheduled to be raised by 2 percentage points, a number of measures to mitigate the burden, such as a reduced tax rate and an increase in welfare benefits for pensioners, and the provision of free education are planned to be implanted,» the report said.

The different governments lead by Mrs. Thatcher restrain the emission of the monetary mass, raise the rate of interest, reduce in a drastic way the taxes on the highest incomes, abolish the control of the financial flows, strongly raise the rate of unemployment, provoke strikes, put in place an anti-unions legislation and cut the social expenses.

You reduce the debt down the road, sometimes by cutting spending, sometimes by raising taxes, but most often through economic growth.

In that time, New York has raised taxes, created a culture of out of control state spending, increased regulatory burdens, and stood by as thousands of New York businesses have closed, moved out of state or endured economic hardships that have forced them to reduce their investment in our economy and eliminate private - sector jobs.

The CEBR report found that if the Government raised the rate of corporation tax from 21 per cent to 26 per cent - the result of equalising the tax rate between big and small business - would cost around 100,000 jobs from the small business sector and reduce economic output by # 4.3 bn, while reducing the public sector deficit by only # 1.6 bn over 10 years.

«The choice for Republicans is clear: they can keep Richard Hanna, who votes to raise taxes, to extend U.S. debt to economically dangerous levels by voting with Obama, Reid and Pelosi to raise the debt ceiling while bankrupting our nation, or they can choose a commonsense Republican like me who has a proven record of voting to reduce taxes, voting against the implementation of Obamacare in New York, votes against funding an illegal database (including ammunition database) against legal gun owners, voting against increasing our debt ceiling in New York and supports countless initiatives to reduce the burdens of government red tape on individuals and small businesses, including family farms,» Tenney said.

It proposes new tax - raising powers for the Scottish Parliament, for which income tax in Scotland would effectively be cut in Scotland by 10p and the Treasury block grant reduced, leaving it up to Holyrood to make up the difference.

It is possible for one to actually raise more revenue by reducing taxes to stimulate production.

«Raising the stakes on tax avoidance», a consultation document published by HM Revenue and Customs, sets out a number of proposals relating to the promotion and use of so - called high - risk avoidance schemes, aimed at reducing the use of such schemes.1 Commenting, CIOT President Stephen Coleclough said: «Those members of the public who become end users of high risk avoidance schemes are sometimes misled by the promoters of such schemes and are not fully made aware of the risks or consequences of their decisions.

During the Dec. 4, 2012 budget vote, Republicans Kevin Hardwick, John Mills and Edward Rath; Democrat Tom Loughran; Conservative Joseph Lorigo and Independent Lynne Dixon proposed and confirmed a budget amendment package to reduce the $ 1.4 billion budget by approximately $ 8.5 million, the amount slated to be raised by a 3.4 percent property tax hike.

Across the U.S., states have reduced spending by $ 74 billion since 2008 and more than half raised taxes and fees in 2009, the National Association of State Budget Officers has reported.

The tentative plan would reduce state spending by more than 2 percent and would address a $ 10 billion deficit without raising taxes or borrowing money.

The statement by the NRCC touts Christie as «a true conservative, taking on big union bosses and working tirelessly to reduce budget deficits in New Jersey without raising taxes.

The way the mandated $ 10 million payment to reduce the deficit in this budget was covered was by raising the County property taxes by 2 % and $ 8 million was achieved by permanent cuts in the operations of the County.

By raising cigarette taxes and strengthening clean indoor air laws, states may not only reduce health detriments related to smoking, but also those related to drinking.»

The organizations» leadership thought other policies offered more promising ways to reduce smoking such as by raising cigarette taxes, imposing more severe restrictions on indoor smoking, and controlling tobacco marketing.

Reducing carbon use through carbon taxes alone will be extremely expensive because you have to raise those taxes by multiple of the cost of the reductions you are trying to get people to make.

A proposed change in the Minnesota school - aid formula would raise the level of state support for local districts by about 15 percent, but at the same time would reduce state - subsidized property - tax credits, thereby leaving the amount of money schools receive essentially unchanged.

Recent work by economists and other academic researchers — some of it presented at a recent symposium at Columbia University («The Social Costs of Inadequate Education»)-- concluded that such investments have large payoffs in raising national income and tax revenues and reducing the cost of public services.

When enrollments are rising, however, the dilemma faced by state governments is even more difficult, as maintaining the same level of funding per student necessitates either raising taxes or reducing other types of expenditures.

State Superintendent Tony Evers also criticized the expansion of voucher programs at a time when Walker's budget proposes cutting public education by $ 800 million and reducing how much schools can raise from property taxes.

They have already voted no to across the board teacher salary increases and continued the freeze on teachers» salaries that has been in place for 5 years (at the same time passed a tax break for the wealthy, and now, with reduced revenue can not give raises), increased class size, taken away additional pay for Masters degrees, eliminated most of the state's teacher assistants, gone after tenure and offered the top 25 % of the teachers in a district $ 500 to give up their tenure immediately, increased the number of charter schools (many funded by Republicans in the private school business) and finally, the most recent scheme pondered is to let kids go to any school in the state regardless of their home county.

Around two - thirds of local school districts are funded by the state; if the state has to reduce that aid, districts have the ability to make up the difference by raising dreaded property taxes — which is why, despite districts» constant complaints about «cuts,» total school spending rose 12.7 percent between 2006 and 2010.

He raised taxes at a time when the average family was near or in starvation mode, he confiscated all of the nation's privately - owned gold and then promptly devalued the dollar by 40 % (reducing the buying power of any saved dollars by almost half overnight), he raised bank reserve requirements numerous times (taking yet more cash out of the real economy so it could be hoarded in vaults), he actively supported a trade war with tariffs that created massive global imbalances (some would argue ushering in the rise to power of fascist regimes that would have had no chance in times of prosperity), and perhaps most damning, rather than plowing most of those raised tax dollars back into the stalled economy, he instead bought gold on the global markets for the government and sequestered it, keeping it from backing new dollars (monetary expansion, which most understand is required to turn a recession around) and instead further crushing the economy — and not just the US economy.

If you want to give yourself a raise by reducing the amount of taxes withheld, simply claim as many allowances as you legally can.

Well, the political gridlock in Washington has led to a game of brinkmanship around the debt ceiling (which needs to be acted on in the next two weeks), a failure to pass a solid budget, and no consensus whatsoever about how to start reducing the deficit by either cutting spending or raising taxes.

Changes will likely be made to the system by either raising taxes (such as by lifting the cap on income subject to Social Security tax), reducing benefits for high - income individuals, increasing the retirement age, or doing something else that will allow Social Security to be fully funded.

Although sovereign debt will always involve default risk, lending money to a national government in the country's own currency is referred to as a risk - free investment because with limits, the debt can be repaid by the borrowing government by raising their taxes, reducing spending, or simply printing more money.

The federal government has more than enough money to raise personal taxes, especially from high income individuals, by reducing some of the following: the small business tax deduction ($ 3.2 billion), lifetime capital gains exemption ($ 600 million), donation credit related to gifted securities ($ 52 million), flow - through shares ($ 125 million) and bringing capital gains tax rates in line with the top tax rate on dividends ($ 1.25 billion).

If you raised $ 10 billion in taxes then you could reduce an income tax or payroll tax by $ 10 billion and we would be better off.

Now, though the ambitions remain, the wind industry has been reduced to trying to convince the less than ambitious House of Representatives not to raise its taxes by refusing to renew its production tax credit (PTC) when it expires at the end of 2012.

We expect, given the finding that Retail taxes produce less of a drag on the economy than Income taxes that if a government decides it must raise new taxes (perish the thought), then it ought by the Precautionary Principle do so by reducing the Income Tax rate so low as possible and raising the Retail Tax rate to meet the needs of the state — for instance to pay off debt accumulated by fighting foreign wars.

A carbon price that rises linearly to 82 US$ / tCO2 by 2030 reduces emissions by 40 % by 2030 if the tax is introduced in 2020 and raised sharply, but by 55 % if it is introduced in 2000 and increased more slowly.

To create an honest market, we need to restructure the tax system by reducing taxes on work and raising those on carbon emissions and other environmentally destructive activities, thus incorporating indirect costs into the market price.

The money raised by the tax will be used to reduce income taxes, increase pensions, and welfare.

Consequently, to raise $ 100 billion in revenue from a new tax on carbon, in order to reduce labor and capital taxes by $ 100 billion, would end up causing more distortion in the economy.

Rather than go in this direction, however, Gillespie argues that «A better route to reducing carbon emissions runs through technological innovations that are adopted uniformly by all industries in all countries,» and that «A carbon tax that raises the cost of traditional fuels does not get us there.»

When we tax pollution, for instance, polluters with the cheapest ways to reduce emissions rush to adopt them, thereby avoiding the tax... Every dollar raised by taxing harmful activities is one dollar less that we must raise by taxing useful ones.

If these intangibles are owned by, say, Aplle (Ireland) then Apple (USA) will have to pay them to use them - whatever amount those two companies agree on will reduce Apple (USA)'s profit and raise Apple (Ireland)'s profit - the tax rates in each of these countries is not the same.

One analysis, provided by Evan M. Liddiard, senior federal tax policy representative for the National Association of Realtors, maintains that if you raise the standard deduction dramatically, «itemized deductions become less relevant» and previously valuable and distinctive «tax incentives [for] home ownership evaporate even while taxes are not necessarily being reduced.»