January 6, 2012
Akahata editorial (excerpts)
Prime Minister Noda Yoshihiko at the very end of last year announced his determination to increase the consumption tax rate in defiance of objections raised from within the ruling Democratic Party of Japan. He also intends to outline a plan for a “unified reform in taxation and social welfare services” early this year. In his first news conference of the year, he showed his eagerness for a consumption tax hike by saying that he will never give up on raising the consumption tax.
In violation of election manifesto
A consumption tax hike has always been a key issue in national elections held under the Liberal Democratic and Komei government and even under the Democratic Party government.
In the 2009 House of Representatives general election, the DPJ in its election manifesto promised to not increase the consumption tax rate during the 4-year term of office of elected House of Representatives members. In the 2010 House of Councilors election, the DPJ’s sudden announcement of a consumption tax hike received voters’ severe verdict of the party’s violation of its 2009 election promise and the party suffered a substantial reduction in the number of seats it held.
Aiming to evade public criticism concerning its breach of promise, Noda said that he will dissolve the Lower House after enacting a bill to increase the consumption tax rate.
Explaining the tax hike plan, Noda said that revenues from the increased taxes will be used to improve social welfare services. This does not make sense in the light of the very function of taxation and how tax revenues should be used.
The consumption tax is regressive because it weighs heavier on people with lower incomes. If social welfare programs are funded by a consumption tax hike, it will go against the very nature of social welfare.
Concerned with the unpopularity of the consumption tax hike plan, the prime minister said that as a precondition for the plan he will cut the number of Diet seats and government employees.
However, a reduction in the number of House of Representatives proportional representation seats will lead to cutting off the public presence in the Diet because it is the only election system that reflects the public will accurately.
Financial resources for social security programs should be secured by stopping the wasteful use of tax money such as on military spending and imposing fair share tax payments on large corporations and the wealthy, not by increasing the consumption tax rate. Our struggle to block Noda’s tax hike plan is entering a crucial stage.
Prime Minister Noda Yoshihiko at the very end of last year announced his determination to increase the consumption tax rate in defiance of objections raised from within the ruling Democratic Party of Japan. He also intends to outline a plan for a “unified reform in taxation and social welfare services” early this year. In his first news conference of the year, he showed his eagerness for a consumption tax hike by saying that he will never give up on raising the consumption tax.
In violation of election manifesto
A consumption tax hike has always been a key issue in national elections held under the Liberal Democratic and Komei government and even under the Democratic Party government.
In the 2009 House of Representatives general election, the DPJ in its election manifesto promised to not increase the consumption tax rate during the 4-year term of office of elected House of Representatives members. In the 2010 House of Councilors election, the DPJ’s sudden announcement of a consumption tax hike received voters’ severe verdict of the party’s violation of its 2009 election promise and the party suffered a substantial reduction in the number of seats it held.
Aiming to evade public criticism concerning its breach of promise, Noda said that he will dissolve the Lower House after enacting a bill to increase the consumption tax rate.
Explaining the tax hike plan, Noda said that revenues from the increased taxes will be used to improve social welfare services. This does not make sense in the light of the very function of taxation and how tax revenues should be used.
The consumption tax is regressive because it weighs heavier on people with lower incomes. If social welfare programs are funded by a consumption tax hike, it will go against the very nature of social welfare.
Concerned with the unpopularity of the consumption tax hike plan, the prime minister said that as a precondition for the plan he will cut the number of Diet seats and government employees.
However, a reduction in the number of House of Representatives proportional representation seats will lead to cutting off the public presence in the Diet because it is the only election system that reflects the public will accurately.
Financial resources for social security programs should be secured by stopping the wasteful use of tax money such as on military spending and imposing fair share tax payments on large corporations and the wealthy, not by increasing the consumption tax rate. Our struggle to block Noda’s tax hike plan is entering a crucial stage.
