Some people think that the governments should take a large portion of people’s salaries to pay for necessary public services such as roads and schools. Others feel that high taxes are a bad thing.

Discuss both views and give your opinion.

My essay:

The idea that individuals should pay the majority of their income in taxes is received mixed reactions from the public; Some see it as a practical approach since the money could be allocated to finance essential public services such as transportation systems and education, others, myself included, believe it would only bring negative effect.

There are various reasons why allowing the government to take a large percentage of personal income is considered beneficial. First, the government can use the money to subsidize hospitals and schools, enabling access to affordable or even free treatment and education. This provides society with good health and high intellectual individuals, who in return benefit the community through working and paying taxes. Second, the governments can upgrade transportation infrastructure, which ensures everyday mobility of people and facilitates the production and distribution of goods. This also creates an environment that allows the economy to thrive.

However, there are still many oppositions to high personal income. They argue that this approach will decrease consumer expenditure, directly impacting businesses. This was due to people having less money and therefore began to spend less. In fact, recreational and luxury industries might face bankruptcy. In addition, the taxpayers might feel injustice as they did not receive the deserved money that they work so hard for, discouraging them from doing good at their job and even indulging in tax invasion. This can be seen in New Zealand, one of the world’s wealthiest countries, where the citizens had to pay more than half of their earnings in taxes. Although they have free access to education and healthcare, New Zealand is still in the top five countries with the most suicide rate.

In conclusion, while taking most of the individuals' salaries might increase the availability and quality of public services, it has a strongly negative impact on people’s psychological well-being.

1 2

- "such as transportation systems and education" should be removed in order to highlight the later clause

- "high personal income": "income" is not a synonym of "tax", income means "salary" or the money you earn, which makes this sentence become off topic, it should be a statement announcing reader that this is the paragraph talking about negative effects of paying tax

- "They argue that this approach will decrease consumer expenditure, directly impacting businesses. This was due to people having less money and therefore began to spend less.": "decrease consumer expenditure" is another way to say "to spend less", therefore, these sentences are repeating each other (result->reason->result again)

=> They argue that this approach will decrease consumer expenditure as people have spent a huge part of their income on tax. This result would directly impact businesses, leading to recreational and luxury industries might face bankruptcy.

- "as they did not receive the deserved money that they work so hard for": they are paying tax, not receiving money

- "indulging in tax invasion": Who is performing this? The people who pay tax or the government? Another subject should be added before this phrase. Also, this is a new idea as it is irrelevant to the idea of "injustice", so you should break it into another sentence and support it so that it becomes the third idea.

- Because your introduction is quite long, you should add more to your conclusion. Also, the main ideas of your argument should appear in the conclusion, too.

=> it leaves undesirable consequences on individuals' income and the nation's economy, leading to negative impact on people’s psychological well-being.

There might be mistakes, but I hope this helps you ^^

Hello minhhang1, do you still need help with that essay?

Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.

Yes, absolutely! Would you mind reviewing it, please? Thank you a lot!

Some people think that [ 1] the government should take a large portion of people’s salaries to pay for necessary public services such as roads and schools. Others feel that high taxes are a bad thing.

Discuss both views and give your opinion.

My essay:

The idea that individuals should pay the majority of their income in taxes is received controversial and gets mixed reactions from the public. Some see it as a practical approach since the money could be allocated to finance essential public services such as transportation systems and education, but others, myself included, believe it would only bring have a negative effect.

There are various reasons why allowing the government to take a large percentage of some are in favour of high personal income tax. is considered beneficial. First, the government can use the money to subsidize hospitals and schools, enabling access to affordable or even free medical treatment and education. This provides society with good raises the overall level of public health and the standard of education, which high intellectual individuals, who in return means healthier and better qualified individuals in society. benefit the community through working and paying taxes. Second, the government can use revenue from taxation to upgrade transportation infrastructure, which ensures everyday mobility benefits the majority of people and facilitates the production and distribution of goods. This also creates an environment that allows the economy to thrive.

However, there are still also many oppositions to drawbacks associated with high taxation. personal income. They argue that this approach First, it will decrease disposable income and consumer expenditure, directly impacting businesses. This [ 2] was due to people having less money and therefore began to spend less. In fact, recreational and luxury industries might face bankruptcy. In addition, the taxpayers might feel injustice as they did not receive the deserved money that they work so hard for, discouraging them from doing good at their job and even indulging in high taxation can be a disincentive for workers and can even lead to tax evasion, or may drive talented individuals overseas. invasion. This can be seen in New Zealand, one of the world’s wealthiest countries, where the citizens [ 3] had to pay more than half of their earnings in taxes. Although they have free access to education and healthcare, New Zealand is still in the top five countries with the most suicide rate. [ 4]

----------------------------------------------------------------

[ 1]: Use “the government” or “governments”.

[ 2]: I have no idea why you used the past simple there. Also, that sentence is repetitive.

[ 3]: Again, I don’t know why you used the past simple there.

[ 4]: Do not make up fake examples. Also, there is no correlation between high taxation and the rate of suicide.

Try to think of, or even search on the net for, better examples for that second body paragraph. Revise and post below.

The bold sentences are what is different from your review. Would you mind correcting my writing, please? Thank you a lot.

There are various reasons why some are in favour of high personal income tax. First, the money raised can be used to subsidize hospitals and schools, enabling access to affordable or even free medical treatment and education. This raises the overall level of public health and the standard of education, which in return means healthier and better qualified individuals in society. Second, the government can use revenue from taxation to upgrade transportation infrastructure, which benefits the majority of people and facilitates the production and distribution of goods. This creates an environment that is conducive to a thriving economy. Thus, high taxation benefits both the individual and society.

However, there are also many drawbacks associated with high taxation. First, it will decrease disposable income, consumer expenditure and private investment, causing a detrimental impact on businesses, especially recreation and luxury industries. In addition, high taxation can be a disincentive for workers and can even lead to tax evasion, or may drive talented individuals and high-income earners overseas. For instance, in 2012, French President Francois Hollande raised the top income tax rate to 75 percent. Following this, about two-thirds of the millionaires moved to lower tax jurisdictions, and one notable example of the migration is Gérard Depardieu, a French top actor. Consequently, along with the increased income and corporate tax, growth in France was approximately zero for the next two quarters as less money was available for investment. Therefore, the government should not collect high taxes.

In conclusion, although high income tax rate can improve individuals’ well-being and academic achievement, as well as the transportation system needed for economic activities, it also discourages work and investment while leading to human capital flight.

Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies

Thanks a lot. You are such a kind soul, and your review helps me immensely.

There are various reasons why some are in favour of high personal income tax. First, the money raised can be used to subsidize hospitals and schools, enabling access to affordable or even free medical treatment and education. This raises the overall level of public health and the standard of education, which in return means healthier and better qualified individuals in society. Second, the government can use revenue from taxation to upgrade transportation infrastructure, which benefits the majority of people and facilitates the production and distribution of goods. This creates an environment that is conducive to a thriving economy. Thus, high taxation benefits both the individual and society.

However, there are also many drawbacks associated with high taxation. First, it will decrease disposable income, consumer expenditure and private investment, causing a detrimental impact on businesses, especially recreation and luxury industries. In addition, high taxation can be a disincentive for workers and can even lead to tax evasion, or may drive talented individuals and high-income earners overseas. [ 1] For instance, in 2012, French President Francois Hollande raised the top income tax rate to 75 percent. Following this, about two-thirds of the millionaires moved to lower tax jurisdictions, and one notable example of the migration is was Gérard Depardieu, a French top actor. Consequently, along with the increased income- and corporate tax, growth in France was approximately zero for the next two quarters as less money was available for investment. Therefore, the government should not collect impose high taxes.

In conclusion, although high income taxes rate can provide extra money for improve individuals’ well-being and academic achievement, public services and infrastructure investment, as well as the transportation system needed for economic activities, it also discourages work and private investment while leading to human capital flight.

-----------------------------

[ 1]: I do not know whether that example is accurate. Be careful not to make up unrealistic fake/examples.

I found the example on this website

https://taxfoundation.org/france-s-75-percent-tax-rate-offers-lesson-revenue-estimating/

Can you give me another example that you certainly know it is true, please? Many IELTS teachers recommend making up fake examples as IELTS is a language test. I do not know if this is true.

Thank you a lot for your kindness.

Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Show more