AS the March 3 Budget looms closer, more and more readers will be taking an interest in taxation matters.
This is certainly true of Mr Jefferson P. Vanderwolk, a lecturer at the University of Hongkong, and Mr Mark Kovalevsky, of Causeway Bay, who have taken issue with comments in this column earlier this month on Hongkong's tax system.
In letters to this newspaper, Mr Vanderwolk disagreed with the contention that Hongkong's lack of representational democracy was the main reason its tax system had remained simple and transparent, while Mr Kovalevsky said our system was not, as describedin Monitor, efficient.
Business Post has had a closer look at the subject, and can offer readers more information.
Mr Vanderwolk said: ''There is no clear evidence of any connection between democratic government and high taxes on business.'' He used Singapore as an example of a ''high-tax country with an extremely interventionist government'', and said democratic governments around the world had, in fact, lowered corporate income taxes over the past decade.
Several have, but the trend is not iron-clad. Singapore, arguably a democracy in practice, is cutting its maximum corporate tax rate to 30 per cent from 31 per cent this year, and continues to offer special incentive packages to industry in a bid to attract companies setting up regional headquarters.
In contrast, the world's most powerful democracy, the United States, has a new leader whose first economic package includes a strong move to raise more revenue from big personal and corporate taxpayers.