[問題]OG106

[tandy]

Property taxes are typically set at a flat rate per $1,000 of officially assessde value. Reassessments should be frequant in order to remove distortions that arise when property values change at differential rates. In practice, however, reassessments typecally occur whin they benefit the government-- that is, when their effect is to increase total tax revenue.

If the statements above are true, which of the following describes a situation in which a reassessmint should occur but is unlikely to do so?

(A)Property values have risen sharply and uniformly.
(B)Property values have all risen--some very sharply, some less so.
(C)Property values have for the most part risen sharply: yet some have dropped slightly.
(D)Property values have for the most part dropped significantly: yet some have risen slightly.
()Property values have dropped significantly and uniformly.答案是D,可是我不太懂OG的解釋...請各位指教,謝謝喔!!

[Pufa]

題幹說：
重新估算財產稅率是為了要消弭『在原先的稅率下』『每個人的財產價值變動不一致』的不公平。
又說政府通常不會作出不利於稅收的事情，比如說在財產價值下降時，政府就不會調降稅率，因為會影響稅收。

題目問在那個情況下政府最不可能調整稅率。
D，多數人的財產價值下跌（財產下跌政府本來應該調降稅率），但有些人的財產價值上升（表示每個人財產的value發生變動，應該調稅以消除不公平）。
這裡表示政府應該調降稅率，但是由於調降稅率有損總體稅收，所以政府不會作這件事。

[agk99]

(E)Property values have dropped sharply and uniformly.
請問這也是財產下跌，為何要調，調了對政府也是不利呀
我想關鍵是不是uniformly這個字，複習到這題，順便再問問

[Pufa]

(E)Property values have dropped sharply and uniformly.
請問這也是財產下跌，為何要調，調了對政府也是不利呀
我想關鍵是不是uniformly這個字，複習到這題，順便再問問

E說大家財產價值下降（要調稅），但是是齊頭式的下降（每個人的財產價值沒有變，不用調稅）。
所以OG才說E『有』不用調整稅率的理由。

財富的價值是跟別人比較的，當大家都多了一萬塊或少了一萬塊，其實大家身上錢的價值是一樣的。

---------------------
以下看看就好：
因為當大家多了一萬塊的時後，多餘的薪資會反映在消費力上，需求增加供給不變的情況下，物價會上升，所以大家可以買到的東西數量還是一樣。這種情形叫正常的通貨膨脹。

[汪汪北鼻]

(E)Property values have dropped sharply and uniformly.
請問這也是財產下跌，為何要調，調了對政府也是不利呀
我想關鍵是不是uniformly這個字，複習到這題，順便再問問

agk兄所言甚是

Property taxes are typically set at a flat rate per $1,000 of officially assessde value. Reassessments should be frequant in order to remove distortions that arise when property values change at differential rates. In practice, however, reassessments typecally occur whin they benefit the government-- that is, when their effect is to increase total tax revenue.

[shine_allen]

pufa說:E說大家財產價值下降（要調稅），但是是齊頭式的下降（每個人的財產價值沒有變，不用調稅）。

我覺得這句不釋這樣解釋耶,uniformly應該是說他財產的變動很一律,所以他所應繳的稅會照topic所說的稅率變動,不會不合理,而此topic是在說財產change at different rates(大漲大跌) 的人所繳的稅會不合理,因此,
財產變動uniformly的人本來就是朝per 1000來增加的,政府不需要去也不想去reassess.我認為uniformly應該不是指大家都一起變動.這樣對嗎?

[dibert8]

106. Property taxes are typically set at a flat rate per $ 1,000 of officially assessed value. Reassessments should be frequent in order to remove distortions that arise when property values change at differential rates. In practice, however, reassessments typically occur when they benefit the government – that is, when their effect is to increase total tax revenue.
If the statements above are true, which of the following describes a situation in which a reassessment should occur but is unlikely to do so?

(A) Property values have risen sharply and uniformly.
(B) Property values have all risen – some very sharply, some less so.
(C) Property values have for the most part risen sharply yet some have dropped slightly.
(D) Property values have for the most part dropped significantly; yet some have risen slightly.
(E) Property values have dropped significantly and uniformly.


重估稅率的時機在 "change at differential rates", 關鍵字是 differential, 根據 OG, 在 (A) (E) 當 "change uniformly" , 是不須重估稅率的. (B) (C) (D) 財產價值產生差別變動, 應當進行稅率重估,但 (D) 對加稅無益,所以不做.

[pimi]

有點小不了解的是徵稅是一個比例
答案(C)
假設property values本來是1000, 稅率是10%, 繳100元的稅給政府
如果property values增加變成2000,但some have dropped slightly, 稅率是10%, 繳200元給政府, 反而稅收會增加, 但是為了公平, 政府其實該調降稅率, 但是會影響稅收, 所以不太會去reassessment

答案(D)
但假設如果property value減少便成500, but some have risen slightly, 稅收是10%, 繳50元給政府, 本來政府有100元稅收變成50元, 政府應該更願意去reassessment, 不會unlikely to do so.

那為何答案會選D呢??

請大大解開我的盲點!!!!