Politician Archive
Thread: Need input on city taxation
Page 1 of 1
Jaspor
Thu Mar 10, 2005 2:08 pm
#1
I think it's very reasonable.
The amount that these increases will cost each individual player is relatively small, but the combined income will work wonders for your city budget.
As something of a small "compromise" to appease those who would be whining about higher taxes, here's a couple things to offer them to help cushion the blow:
* Offer "tax refunds" for citizens who really and truly are poor and can't afford the higher taxes. Think of it as a SWG welfare program or something. 
But, really, these taxes will only cost a few thousand credits more each week, and it only takes a few missions to make that amount. Hell, most players these days blow 15k on a single set of 3 hour buffs.
But, really, these taxes will only cost a few thousand credits more each week, and it only takes a few missions to make that amount. Hell, most players these days blow 15k on a single set of 3 hour buffs. * And speaking of missions.... Consider setting up a weekly "Citizens Earn Tax Money!" hunt. Group up, hit the mission terminals in town, and have at it. It shouldn't take long for peeps to earn their tax money. Oh, and it's a fun social event. 
* Sell town decorations! As long as your City is not capped on decorations, see if there's any interest in people renting decorations outside their house. It's sort of like a city donation, but they actually get something in return. And you might be surprised how much some of your more wealthy citizens would be willing to donate for a nice status symbol like a big statue named for them outside their house, hehe. 
But, no, your tax increases are not unreasonable at all. Some Mayors may argue "Well, OUR town has ZERO taxes and we survive just fine!" That's all well and good, but not everybody has billions of credit, and I think balancing the city budget using the taxes is a much more impressive accomplishment than simply pumping in millions worth of money.
Kinshi
Thu Mar 10, 2005 2:16 pm
#2
Town does have a weekly 'hunt' though its not directed at funding the treasury currently (at least not directly). We do also provide small houses and speederbikes to new citizens as a perk for living here. (its a bit hard to find out wherethe towns money comes from right now, as the current mayor doesnt keep any records, so I have to do a lot of legwork and ask aroud to find out what came from where)
Do my reasons for not wanting to be solely dependant on donations hold water? Ive had the impressions that some town fall apart when something happens to some big money person in town and the funds dry up.
Do my reasons for not wanting to be solely dependant on donations hold water? Ive had the impressions that some town fall apart when something happens to some big money person in town and the funds dry up.
Vilinius
Thu Mar 10, 2005 2:39 pm
#3
You might as well drop the city tax down to 0.
ITs broken, and has been for a VERY LONG time. Themoney that is being taken is going who knows where, but its not gone into the city coffers for over a year now.
Vilinius
Thu Mar 10, 2005 2:41 pm
#4
and by what i mean is the sales tax. like for instance....if the sales tax on an item is 7k....only 100cr is going into the treasury
Message Edited by Vilinius on 03-10-2005 01:41 PM
yoda101705
Thu Mar 10, 2005 3:21 pm
#5
Kinshi wrote:
Do my reasons for not wanting to be solely dependant on donations hold water? Ive had the impressions that some town fall apart when something happens to some big money person in town and the funds dry up.
Your reasoning holds plenty of water. I share your opinion about cities running on taxes alone. In fact, I run a city that is completely self sufficient on taxes. We are a Rank 3 city and we have most of the necessities like a garage, clonce center, med center, cantina, streetlamps, mission terminals, a bank, and trainers. It is all paid for with taxes (except the med center and cantina which are private structures). We have a 30% property tax and a 2,000cr income tax and I have had no complaints.
Yes, those taxes sound steep but when you look at the true cost to the player, it really isn't that much. Seriously, what is 2,000 credits in SWG??? Two missions that you can complete in about 5 minutes??? I mean, for what a player is being taxed weekly, it only takes a little work to make enough cash to cover the taxes.
Now, here is the honest truth about running a city on just taxes. It is a tradeoff, just like everything else in life. How do I run a city on taxes with all those necessities like the garage, clone center, mission terminals, and trainers???? My city doesn't have any gardens yet. Do I wish we had gardens??? Yes I do. But, I have also taken the time to explain to my citizens that our city is run on taxes and if the city is running in the red, I will not place more structures that add to the maintenance and I will remove unneccesary structures to bring us back into the black.
Keep in mind that this tradeoff is a sacrifice of sorts. I am sacrificing added beauty to our city in order to save my citizens some extra credits in the end. Not to mention that I feel running a city on donations is unfair to those who donate. And personally, I feel that if you can run a city in SWG on just taxes, you should be applauded for your work. Why??? Because you have taken the time to crunch the numbers and manage a city properly. Sorry, but I don't have much respect for mayors who are dependent on donations to run a city. In my eyes, they are just people who grant zoning rights.
I know running a city is costly, especially as you grow in size and start to want things like a shuttleport or city specializations or gardens. But, those are all things that I will bring to my city when we can afford it. Just because I can place a garden doesn't mean I have to. Sure, it adds to the city, but it also adds to the city maintenance. And here's the thing with my city, if the citizens really want something placed, then I will simply tell them to go get some good, quality citizens. The mayor isn't the only one who can invite people into a city and I try to encourage my current citizens to go out and recruit new citizens if they truly want that shuttleport or that large garden placed. If your citizens truly want something, then they'll work for it... or vote you out of office.
If you really want to run a city on taxes alone, you need to take the time to explain things to your citizens. Explain to them why you want to do it and how you want to do it. Yes, it is going to require a somewhat steep hike in taxes, but you need to show them how the extra money is going to help out. Personally, I think this job should fall on the mayor and if he doesn't want to do it, then you need to run agaisnt him and take his place (because it really seems like you have more motivation than your current mayor does).
Despite popular belief, it is possible to run a city on taxes. It just takes time, dedication, and a whole lot of effort to make it happen. Not just effort on the mayor, but by the citizens as well.
Kinshi
Fri Mar 11, 2005 1:51 am
#6
I live in a city of 114 registered citizens w/ 260 structures. Currently the city is funded almsot exclusively by donations. (it only has a 5% property tax and a 1000cr/week income tax.
The taxes dont come close to meeting the the cities spending (our town loves it tons of parks, streetlamps fountains, and duplicate sets of mission terminals and banks)
I have gotten some feedback of the opinion that raising the taxes would be 'oppressive' to the citizens and really squeeze the little guy, I ran some numbers on my own, and Im not seeing how it would be a squeeze or opressive at all.
What I want to do is up the proerty tax from 5% to 18% and raise the Income Tax from 1000cr/week to 2000cr/week. Given that property tax is paid out as an addon to the structures maintenance pool, having 260 structures (minus civic ones of course) would provide more than enough revenue in combination to pay the city's bills.
Now as far as the oppressiveness of this?
Well I looked up the costs of the various houses maintenance abd came up with these figures
Small House - 384cr/day maintenance + 18% Property tax = 453.12cr/day (increase of 69.12cr a day) - now is that oppressive to the little guy? I dont hink so, but I want to know what other mayors think about this.
The main argument I have heard is that this would tax small players into the ground but they way I figure it even if a small oeprater only had 100k in his bank, had his maintenance paid up and stopped playing for a year, hed be covered. Big operators, guys who have large houses, and lots of them, well they are in no danger of running out of money either.
Why do I want to move from donations to using taxes? Simple, the donation system only works as long as the donors are happy, plus it puts an unfair burden on the donors to be some kind of privately funded welfare system for the town. Every citizen should pitch in and pay their fair share. I dont want the city to suddenly be in the lurch because some donor decides they dont want to pay or cannot pay or just up and dissapears.
My plan is to eliminate the need for donations, to make donations the gravy instead of the meat in regards to funding.
SO heres my plan in a nutshell
raise property tax from 5% to 18%
raise income tax from 1000cr to 2000cr
If a surplus occures, tax rate will get lowered to bring the town to the break even point or close (flexible taxes, with the goal of not letting them go higher, and adding more citizens so the tax burden gets spread out even more)
only Gardens and Parks would be funded by donors (basically a sponsor, and tracked separately from the necessary structures (like shuttleport, and cloning center)
Also, I want to apply surpuls funds to buying player event perks, and getting the player event support going from SOE to bring people into town.
Does this sound reasonable? Do the tax rates seem to high or too big a burden for 114 citizens to bear? I am thinking it isnt, as the math seems to indicate it would require each person to spend much more than the do already in order to get the town to break even and break its deppendence on dontations
Please post you opinions and I would also like to know if you are funding your city this way as well
Also, id like to talk to other Mayors of metropolis ranked cities about their operations, so if I can PM you or in game email you w/ questions please let me know.
Thanks
The taxes dont come close to meeting the the cities spending (our town loves it tons of parks, streetlamps fountains, and duplicate sets of mission terminals and banks)
I have gotten some feedback of the opinion that raising the taxes would be 'oppressive' to the citizens and really squeeze the little guy, I ran some numbers on my own, and Im not seeing how it would be a squeeze or opressive at all.
What I want to do is up the proerty tax from 5% to 18% and raise the Income Tax from 1000cr/week to 2000cr/week. Given that property tax is paid out as an addon to the structures maintenance pool, having 260 structures (minus civic ones of course) would provide more than enough revenue in combination to pay the city's bills.
Now as far as the oppressiveness of this?
Well I looked up the costs of the various houses maintenance abd came up with these figures
Small House - 384cr/day maintenance + 18% Property tax = 453.12cr/day (increase of 69.12cr a day) - now is that oppressive to the little guy? I dont hink so, but I want to know what other mayors think about this.
The main argument I have heard is that this would tax small players into the ground but they way I figure it even if a small oeprater only had 100k in his bank, had his maintenance paid up and stopped playing for a year, hed be covered. Big operators, guys who have large houses, and lots of them, well they are in no danger of running out of money either.
Why do I want to move from donations to using taxes? Simple, the donation system only works as long as the donors are happy, plus it puts an unfair burden on the donors to be some kind of privately funded welfare system for the town. Every citizen should pitch in and pay their fair share. I dont want the city to suddenly be in the lurch because some donor decides they dont want to pay or cannot pay or just up and dissapears.
My plan is to eliminate the need for donations, to make donations the gravy instead of the meat in regards to funding.
SO heres my plan in a nutshell
raise property tax from 5% to 18%
raise income tax from 1000cr to 2000cr
If a surplus occures, tax rate will get lowered to bring the town to the break even point or close (flexible taxes, with the goal of not letting them go higher, and adding more citizens so the tax burden gets spread out even more)
only Gardens and Parks would be funded by donors (basically a sponsor, and tracked separately from the necessary structures (like shuttleport, and cloning center)
Also, I want to apply surpuls funds to buying player event perks, and getting the player event support going from SOE to bring people into town.
Does this sound reasonable? Do the tax rates seem to high or too big a burden for 114 citizens to bear? I am thinking it isnt, as the math seems to indicate it would require each person to spend much more than the do already in order to get the town to break even and break its deppendence on dontations
Please post you opinions and I would also like to know if you are funding your city this way as well
Also, id like to talk to other Mayors of metropolis ranked cities about their operations, so if I can PM you or in game email you w/ questions please let me know.
Thanks
Page 1 of 1