Anonymous
11 years agohow is tax calculated?
if happiness goes down tax drops from 20% to 14.. 10 and so on but what does 20% represent? and how is it calculated. ive boosted my population by 30k, and my tax income has hardly increased by 400...
here are some samples I took:
pop tax revenue %
5564 2964 53.271
5741 2990 52.081
5876 3010 51.225
6306 3075 48.763
6517 3106 47.659
7405 3239 43.740
8052 3335 41.418
10765 3740 34.742
10961 3770 34.394
11683 3877 33.184
14389 4282 29.758
16346 4574 27.982
20198 5149 25.492
28528 6393 22.409
30856 6741 21.846
....
As you see that the more population you have the less you get per citizen. It seems that specialization, land value or home value doesn't matter (I've tested, but I might be wrong) .
@Aprigul wrote:here are some samples I took:
pop tax revenue %
5564 2964 53.271
5741 2990 52.081
5876 3010 51.225
6306 3075 48.763
6517 3106 47.659
7405 3239 43.740
8052 3335 41.418
10765 3740 34.742
10961 3770 34.394
11683 3877 33.184
14389 4282 29.758
16346 4574 27.982
20198 5149 25.492
28528 6393 22.409
30856 6741 21.846....
As you see that the more population you have the less you get per citizen. It seems that specialization, land value or home value doesn't matter (I've tested, but I might be wrong) .
This is kind of strange if you think about it. If you take reality as an example and assume 60% of the population is employed and you tax rate is fixed at 20% then as the population goes up the tax revenue should go up at least the same rate. So there has to be more to how it is calculated than that. Assuming wages per working sim is fixed and 60% of population works; using your data collected at the beginning of the list that's 4.44 revenue per working sim. And since 20% is a constant by the time we get to the bottom of your list there is a 92% loss in work force because otherwise at 60% of population workforce would generate 82,200 revenue. Now if we assume that every sim is concidered to contribute to the tax revenue then we have about 0.53 revenue per sim. So at the bottom of the list this same fixed 20% should be 16,437. So you data has a recorded loss of 41% from the top of the list. Either case very bad math being used in the game or far too many unknown variables that don't match basic reality much.
The tax is apparently also based on the land usage as it increases with the number of residential areas.
Hey using Aprigul's data points you can fit a regression line to it and it seems to be simply a formula. The R squared value is 1 so I am guessing this would be the correct method within his data. However I tested this with a population of 77496 and it projected a much higher tax income than what I receive.
Anyway best way to figure out the method would be to post population and tax income at the 20% bracket for enough data.
The the equation from the regression line for Aprigul's data is Income=0.1493(population) + 2132.8
Doesn't work at higher level, my pop is 525378 and taxes are $19321
wow that is 5 times my current population and yet only maybe 50% more in tax revenue than I get. Has anyone discovered any more specific details?