Any comments? Does it really make sense to queeze
the employees? The reduction of govt. safety-nets
is not analysed here, but guess who is better and
worse off...

>
> Two general groups of taxes can be distinguished: those which have steadily
> risen and those which have steadily fallen. The remarkable thing is that the
> same general trends have occurred in all the rich countries, whatever their
> political complexion--left or right--inside or outside Europe or America--in
> the Northern or Southern hemispheres.
>
> The group of taxes that have steadily increased are ...
> ...of the (employee) and include social security tax (18.2 to
> 25.0 per cent), income tax (26.3 to 29.7 per cent) and general consumption
> taxes (e.g. VAT)(1.7 to 17.1 per cent). The group of taxes that have
> steadily decreased in the same period include corporation tax (9.2 to 6.1
> per cent), property tax (8.0 to 5.5 per cent) and specific consumption taxes
> with beneficial intentions (e.g. alcohol, smoking, petrol)(23.2 to 11.5 per
> cent).
>
> One can immediately smell a plot here--that rich property owners and TNCs
> have been able to persuade governments by one means or another (bribery,
> lobbying, requests for subsidies) effectively to reduce their burden of
> taxation and heap more of it onto the average working and spending
> individual. This has undoubtedly been so, but this significant trend could
> not have been achieved blatantly without danger of exposure unless there
> were also some rather more plausible reasons.
>
> Economists and other apologists therefore talk in more objective terms about
> the transactional costs of collection--or, more simply, the ease of
> collection--as though these are totally unrelated to an evasion of social
> responsibility by large firms. So we have the situation in which personal
> taxes on employment, earnings, and general consumption are easily computed
> by being based on the sorts of patent financial records that employers and
> firms have to maintain anyway. Simple clerical or computer procedures are
> all that is necessary. In cases of dispute between the individual and the
> government, the circumstances of the former (where he lives, where he
> works)can be nailed down precisely and rapidly, and the demands of the tax
> inspector--peremptory at the best of times--have generally become more penal
> as the years have rolled by.
>
> On the other hand, taxes on corporation profits, property and other assets
> depend very much on the exercise of judgement and evaluation; and assessment
> of these can be costly in many cases, and sometimes interminable. Rich
> people and corporations employ highly-paid tax lawyers and accountants who
> have the expertise that is equal, or superior, to that of the government tax
> inspectors.
>
> The transactional costs of collecting these taxes are thus very high and
> there is much more scope for avoidance (legal), delay (legal) and evasion
> (illegal). This is now very much exacerbated by the globalisation of an
> increasing number of firms. While governments are trying to maximise tax
> yields within their own jurisdictions and making agreements amongst
> themselves as to common elements of taxation to avoid arbitraging, TNCs are
> increasingly transferring nominal debts to high tax countries and profits to
> low tax countries.
>

Well? Hungary is just following suit... tell me it makes sense...

I'm planning to visit Hungary from the end of May through early July with
my family (wife, child) and my expatriate Hungarian father, now living in
New Zealand.  This is something of a "roots" trip for us, so we're going
to be exploring round about for connections to family from way back.

I'm a composer by vocation, doing a little computer work on the side to
stay alive.  I know that Hungary has something of an electronic music
tradition; I'd be interested in meeting people involved in this area.

Please, let me know if you have any leads I might chase down while I'm in
the country.  Thanks in advance.

Robert Marsanyi )