Regarding taxes and income distribution.

Conservatives like to complain about the tax burden in Brazil. But it's not higher than the average in other countries. They complain because, in most cases, they are wealthy people who don't use public services. Therefore, they prefer a minimal state and advocate for tax reform so that people pay less tax, leaving each individual responsible for the costs of health, education, transportation, security, and other services. For the rich, that's fine. For those without resources, it's total abandonment.

In any case, tax reform is indeed necessary. Just not the kind they want.

The necessary tax reform is not exactly about reducing the tax burden, although that is possible. Rather, it's about reforming the tax collection structure and making income distribution fairer.

Unlike most First World countries, in Brazil the majority of taxes are indirect, collected along with the products consumed, and not on income or property. There, this means that when buying a glass of water, the poor pay the same tax as the rich. Here, the result is that the poor pay more taxes than the rich.

Let's go to the numbers.

Forty percent of the national income is appropriated by 1% of the population in Brazil, those who earn more than 20 minimum wages. But this group, which appropriates 40% of the income, is responsible for paying only 7,3% of the total taxes. This information comes from the Brazilian Institute of Planning and Taxation, whose website provides other important data.

Furthermore, from 1980 to 2000, the five thousand wealthiest families possessed wealth equivalent to two-fifths of all income generated by the country in a year. This was equivalent to 42% of Brazil's GDP. The data comes from the Atlas of Social Exclusion in Brazil.

Economist Márcio Pochmann, president of the Perseu Abramo Foundation, has drawn attention to the fact that, in addition to being insufficient, direct taxation on assets or properties, such as the Urban Property Tax (IPTU), is not progressive: "There are strange cases in which those who live in favelas and in more precarious urban conditions end up paying, in relation to their income, something higher than those who live in upscale neighborhoods." (interview with Rádio Brasil Atual, on 9/7/2013, transcribed on the station's website).

Who, honestly, can defend a situation like this?

Bills to tax large fortunes and heavily tax inheritances have been shelved in Congress for some time. They simply aren't moving forward. And, it should be noted, the first of these is provided for in the Federal Constitution (article 153, item VII).

Even income tax is full of distortions. Salaried workers who earn up to R$ 1.787,77 are exempt from payment. Those who earn between R$ 1.787,78 and R$ 2.679,29 pay 7,5%. Those with a gross income between R$ 2.679,30 and R$ 3.572,43 pay 15%. Those who earn between R$ 3.572,44 and R$ 4.463,81 pay 22,5%. Finally, those with a gross salary above R$ 4.463,82 are subject to a tax rate of 27,5%.

There is much to say about these tracks, but let's limit ourselves to two observations.

First: charging income tax on someone earning R$ 1.787,78 is absurd. This amount is extremely low, equivalent to less than 2,5 minimum wages. And, to give you an idea, the minimum wage calculated by Dieese to meet constitutional requirements and be sufficient for a family to survive with dignity is R$ 2.915,07. This is far above the income threshold for those who are exempt.

Secondly, it is astonishing that the table stipulates the same rate of 27,5% for someone earning R$ 4.463,82 and for someone earning, for example, more than R$ 100. This makes no sense. In any First World country there are other brackets with much higher rates, so that those who earn more effectively pay more.

But the absurdity doesn't stop there: the table with the tax rates for calculating the tax payable is almost 65% out of date ("DCI Online" of 5/21/2014). It remained frozen, while salaries were adjusted annually for inflation. As a result, a worker who is exempt will pay income tax the following year without having had a real increase in salary. The "DCI Online" article, already cited, gives a concrete example: "Someone earning R$ 3 in salary will pay R$ 114,97 monthly in income tax this year. If the table were up-to-date, this same taxpayer would be exempt."

There is also the case of workers who were in a lower tax bracket and moved to the next higher bracket without having received a real increase in their salary.

This is called confiscation of workers' income.

Finally, despite the progress made in recent years, we are still far from being a just country.

There is still much to change.