These numbers aren't as bad as I initially thought. Then again, I'm used to these sorts of tax rates:
http://www.ato.gov.au/youth/content.asp?doc=/Content/40811.htmThe vast majority of taxpayers in Australia are on the 30% rate, and only 3% are on the top rate, which incidentally is the same marginal rate as Lief's amendment (and I think the $1m means even less than 3% will be on this rate). Under the Lief amendment, very few people will be be on the top rate, and the rest will be paying no more than 27 cents in the dollar - which is less than the tax rate here.
The Government should have a goal of a budget surplus of about a steady 1% of GDP (keep it steady from year to year) and a tax rate of around 30 cents in the dollar. The Lief amendment satisfies at least half of this goal.
Reading over Afleitch's advice in an earlier post in this thread is invaluable:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=94375.msg1958456#msg1958456(Some of the following comments also answer some of my questions, I notice PiT has asked similar questions to me).
Having read over these previous Acts, I think we're heading down the path of most developed nations - complex tax acts in which various clauses are included in numerous acts and people pay more to their lawyers and accountants than they pay to the government in tax. This was the case in Australia prior to 1997, when the entire tax code was rewritten. Initially, our income tax was covered by the Income Tax Assessment Act of 1936 and a few other Acts scattered here and there, however the ITAA of 1997 repealed most of the preceding tax legislation and incorporated it all into a single tax act - there were a few changes, but not many, the most important thing was that it was all brought together in a single act.
I remember when I studied tax law, it took up I think four volumes. Maybe it was two, plus two text books... I forget, it was a few years ago. Anyway, here's the legislation here, we might be able to lift clauses here and there if that's how we wished to proceed. I think we should define income, deductions and probably look at the issues of residency and source for taxation purposes, possibly at some point reaching DTAs (Double Tax Agreements) with other countries.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/itaa1997240/I would suggest that we spend a little more time on this Bill yet and repeal those earlier Bills that Afleitch linked to, and instead incorporate them into this Act. I'd personally like to see the estate tax removed, and also take out the employer contributions to income tax (which is effectively a payroll tax) while increasing income tax generally to compensate for this.
Of course, it's not my Bill, and Lief and BaconKing may not want to wait around while we move the (in my opinion, necessary) amendments.
