|
| Back to Publications |
A COMPREHENSIVE TAX REFORM PLAN FOR ISRAEL
The Israeli tax system has not been lacking in proposals for its improvement. Appendix I provides a brief historical sketch of the system's development and a summary of two recent outside proposals for reform. The most recent outside proposal was submitted in 1988 by the Commission of Experts on Personal Income Tax, also known as the Sheshinski Commission. This proposal sought to introduce improvements while maintaining the existing system. Nevertheless, the basic deficiencies of the system remain. Our proposal takes, at least partly, a more basic starting position: What system would we design if we were starting from the beginning? Even so, it is heavily weighted by what exists.
We propose a tax system having as its direct tax source a single, global income tax that would replace the present company (business) income tax, personal income tax, and National Insurance Institute (NII) levies. This single tax would have a single flat rate and would be imposed on a tax base which comes very close to being the gross national product. All income, personal and business, would be taxed once, and only once. We propose a rate of 25 percent for this combined, single tax. This would raise the same amount of revenue that is presently raised by all direct taxes, including NII, and make our proposal neutral from the point of view of total tax burden.
Indirect taxes, especially value added tax (VAT), 1 would be left unchanged.
The single, comprehensive income tax we propose is simple and clean. Its calculation is similar to that for VAT. We propose that its collection be integrated with the collection of VAT on a monthly basis. Its characteristics make the collection of this tax on business income and on personal income (withholding) on a monthly basis exact and complete. There is, in principle, no need for end of year tax returns for companies or individuals.
The basic simplicity of our tax with its single parameter (the tax rate) would make it much more immune than other systems to the pressures of special interests that exploit the multiplicity of rates, brackets, exemptions, exclusions, allowances, etc., that are usually present.
We want to emphasize that one of the major benefits of our proposed system would be a large reduction in bureaucratic hassle and in the abrasive contact that typifies the relationship of the tax authorities and the taxpaying public.
This paper is divided into several sections:
Under the present system, revenues are derived from the following sources:
Table I
| Total Direct Taxes | 55% |
| Income taxes on salaries, including owner-managers | 21.0 |
| Income taxes on businesses, including companies, co-ops, and the self-employed | 18.6 |
| NII taxes | 13.9 |
| Other fees | 1.3 |
| Total Indirect Taxes | 45% |
| VAT on local production | 18.4 |
| VAT on imports, including defense imports | 8.8 |
| Purchase Tax, mainly on imports | 10.5 |
| Customs | 2.9 |
| Fuel impost | 1.8 |
| Other indirect taxes, net (after subtracting direct and indirect subsidies to local production) | 2.7 |
|
| Part II |