• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Victoria 3 - Dev Diary #12 - Treasury

DD12.png


Hello and welcome to another development diary for Victoria 3! Today we’ll be covering a topic that tends to be very much in the mind of governments of all eras: Money! Specifically, we’re going to be talking about income, expenses and debt, and how they function on the national level.

As was mentioned all the way back in Dev Diary #2, Money is one of the principal resources you have to manage in Victoria 3. This in itself is of course nothing new (money of some form playing a role in almost every Grand Strategy game we’ve ever released), but the way money works is a little bit different than what you might be used to.

In most games, money tends to be a resource you accumulate for a specific goal, until you have enough of it to achieve that specific goal. For example, you might want to build a building that costs 100 money, and your monthly income is 10 money. That means in order to build said building, you have to wait for 10 months to accumulate the 100 money needed for the lump sum cost to order the construction of said building.

Now, you might be asking, why am I explaining such a simple and obvious mechanic that undoubtedly every single reader of this dev diary is completely familiar with? The reason for this is because in Victoria 3, there is no such thing as a lump sum cost - instead, it’s all about your weekly balance. At the end of every in-game week, your country’s income and expenses are tallied up and the result is then applied to your Gold Reserve or National Debt. This also means that all forms of expenses, such as construction, also work on a weekly basis - you do not need any cash ‘on hand’ to start construction of a dozen buildings at once, but if you don’t have the revenue to support it you may find yourself quickly going into debt.

America’s lack of an income tax in 1836 sharply limits its potential for government spending
dd12_1.png

The Gold Reserve is your country’s national stockpile of cash. If you are free of debt, any money that is left over in the weekly budget after expenses are subtracted is used to increase the Gold Reserve. Conversely, if your expenses exceed your income, this money is taken out of the Gold Reserve to balance the books.

Though it’s certainly never bad in itself to have a sizable Gold Reserve, it isn’t necessarily the best idea to continually run a large budget surplus - each country has a Gold Reserve Limit, which is a ‘soft-cap’ over which each surplus pound has diminishing returns on the Gold Reserve - if you have an enormous stockpile of gold, a surplus of £10k may only increase your stockpile by as little as £2k, meaning that you’ve simply wasted the rest of your money. Hence, a country that finds its gold reserves filling up may want to consider finding a way to reinvest some of that money to avoid such wastage.

The Spanish Gold Reserve has grown to the point where further stockpiling is becoming very inefficient, and they should really try to find better uses for some of that money
dd12_2.png

So what if you’re running a deficit and your Gold Reserve has all been tapped? Well, this is when debt comes into play. Beyond that point, each pound spent in excess of your income will result in automatically taking on debt. While this may sound like something that you should avoid at all costs, that isn’t necessarily true.

While you do have to pay interest on your loans, interest rates in Victoria 3 are relatively low, and so long as you avoid hitting your Debt Ceiling, growing your economy through deficit spending can actually be a very valid strategy. This is because the increase in revenues from minting and taxation may very well end up exceeding the interest payments, not to mention the benefits constructing new industries can have for your population.

The Debt Ceiling, unlike the Gold Reserve, is not a soft cap - once you hit it, your country will be in default, which is a terrible state to be in and can only be recovered from if you manage to slash your expenses enough to put your weekly expenses back in the black (or if another country steps in and takes on your debt, which can have its own undesirable outcomes for you… but more on that later). It’s also possible to simply declare bankruptcy, but because the money you are borrowing against is actually the cash reserves of your country’s buildings (which is actually what determines the size of your Debt Ceiling), this will have immensely negative consequences for your domestic industry.

Even though Britain has taken on several million pounds of debt, this isn’t too much of an issue - their advanced economy allows them a high debt ceiling, and the interest payments is only a small fraction of their spending
dd12_3.png


To wrap up this Dev Diary, I’m going to briefly touch on the main forms of income and expenditures, though this is by no means an exhaustive list! Some forms of income and expenses (taxes and salaries, specifically) also have a ‘level’ setting, where you can for example squeeze more taxes out of your population at the cost of reduced legitimacy and increased radicalization.

A massive hike of the tax level to the highest level is a sure-fire way to both raise money and create political radicals
dd12_4.png

Main Types of Income (not an exhaustive list):
  • Minting: All countries can generate some cash flow by printing or casting new currency in relation to their GDP. Minting provides all countries with some income - particularly those who have domestic Gold Fields - but is in itself insufficient for funding anything but the most minimalist of governments.
  • Income Taxes: A form of taxation collected on income, where a certain % of the wages paid to workers in buildings is paid to the government.
  • Poll Taxes: A form of per-capita taxation where a fixed sum of money is collected on each member of the workforce. Poll Taxes are very regressive since they collect the same amount regardless of income.
  • Land Taxes: A special type of Poll Taxes that are only collected on certain types of Pops, such as Peasants.
  • Consumption Taxes: A tax that is levied directly on a specific good that is consumed by Pops. Levying Consumption Taxes costs Authority.
  • Dividend Taxes: A tax that is applied to dividends paid to Pops with an ownership stake in a Building. Tends to be a very progressive form of taxation, as usually only well-to-do Pops have ownership of buildings.
  • Tariffs: Tariffs are something that we plan to have in the game as a way to profit from goods being exported from your market, but we’re not ready to talk about exactly how this will work yet.

Main Types of Expenses (not an exhaustive list):
  • Government Wages: The salary cost of employing Pops in your Government Buildings such as Government Administrations and Ports.
  • Government Goods: The material costs for your Government Buildings, for example the Paper needed by Government Administrations.
  • Military Wages: The salary costs of Pops serving in your army and navy.
  • Military Goods: The various goods needed by your army and navy, such as Small Arms for Barracks.
  • Subsidies: The cost of subsidizing specific buildings to ensure they remain competitive.
  • Interest: The cost of making interest payments on your loans, if you have any.
  • Construction: The cost of constructing new buildings, both in goods required for the method of construction and wages paid to Pops working in the construction industry.

Well then, that’s all for today. Next week we’re going to be talking about a topic that touches on both economics and politics - Standard of Living. See you then!
 
  • 229Like
  • 120Love
  • 16
  • 9
  • 7
Reactions:
If there’s a fleshed-out political system, and you have to get the permission of interest groups to change the tax laws (and perhaps face movements to force tax reform) that could be your cooldown. At that point, you could pick the level of tax from a slider, with high precision—but it’s have to be a level that you can sell politically, and you might be stick with it for a while.
 
  • 4Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I’m very confused by this comment. Again, this is the maximum taxation rate we’re talking about here. Aren’t you arguing for sliders that allow you to shift taxes anywhere between 0 and 100? Even if you think there should be max and min bars on that slider, are you really saying they should be lower than 60%?

Why not? Because it has a “+” in front of it?
I am simply saying that I don't think that meaning of that phrase is "60% income tax rate" and the actual value on the tooltip is part of my reason. I think +60% is a modifier to some base value (not shown in tooltip).

And talking about legibility and clarity, replacing "60% tax rate" with "+60% taxation level" would be exactly opposite :)
 
I am simply saying that I don't think that meaning of that phrase is "60% income tax rate" and the actual value on the tooltip is part of my reason. I think +60% is a modifier to some base value (not shown in tooltip).
We’ll find out when the game comes out, I suppose. I think the version you’re proposing doesn’t make a lot of sense, though.

EDIT: To make it clear why, consider the Payroll tax. It should start out regressive, right? Why would raising rates make it MORE regressive? The level of regressivity should not be dependent on how high taxes are. That’s what you’re proposing here.
And talking about legibility and clarity, replacing "60% tax rate" with "+60% taxation level" would be exactly opposite :)
Well if we actually had the game, it’d be easy to just hover over the other taxation buttons to see for sure. If you’re right, the two buttons to the left of the middle would have negative rates and the middle one would be null. If I’m right, then they would go “12, 24, 36, 48, 60.” Pretty legible to me (though I agree the tooltip could be phrased more clearly).
 
We’ll find out when the game comes out, I suppose. I think the version you’re proposing doesn’t make a lot of sense, though.

EDIT: To make it clear why, consider the Payroll tax. It should start out regressive, right? Why would raising rates make it MORE regressive? The level of regressivity should not be dependent on how high taxes are. That’s what you’re proposing here.
Why payroll tax would start out regressive? It can be progressive, regressive or flat and it's perhaps determined when the law is passed. I would assume that buttons that increase taxation would increase taxes while preserving progressive/regressive/flat characteristic. I take it as a kind of tool that fine-tunes previously passed laws (something the player can enact without going through the law passing procedure).
 
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
Why payroll tax would start out regressive? It can be progressive, regressive or flat and it's perhaps determined when the law is passed. I would assume that buttons that increase taxation would increase taxes while preserving progressive/regressive/flat characteristic. I take it as a kind of tool that fine-tunes previously passed laws (something the player can enact without going through the law passing procedure).
From the “Everything We Know” Reddit thread:

  • Income Tax: No Income Tax, Payroll Tax (more burden on the poor), Proportional Tax (everyone pays a flat percentage), Graduated Tax (more burden on the wealthy)
Your tax law sets whether it’s regressive, flat, or progressive. You then fiddle with the rates in the budget tab.
 
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
And actually, we don't even need to go to that Reddit thread. Look at what you wrote before as a hypothetical:

For example, the law might have been passed with 10% income tax on poor, 20% on middle and 40% on rich strata. Then this tooltip would mean the change in taxation to 16% on poor, 26% on middle and 46% on rich strata. I have asked for clarification on how this work earlier in the thread, but there were no answers so far.
Those two tax rates are not equivalent. The second is more regressive. The rich have gone from paying 4 times the rate of the poor to 2.875 times as much.
 
  • Land Taxes: A special type of Poll Taxes that are only collected on certain types of Pops, such as Peasants.

Could there be late game Land *Value* Taxes in line with Georgist thinking at the time?

A Land Value Tax could scale the Land Tax to become more progressive in proportion to urbanisation and GDP.

A land value tax in a poor agrarian country would function the same as a land tax. But as it grows richer and more urban the tax burden shifts to middle and upper income pops.
 
  • 9Like
  • 2Love
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Will there be a "state capitalist" way to get income where the country gets a certain percentage from industrial profits or is this what the "dividend tax" is?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
From the “Everything We Know” Reddit thread:


Your tax law sets whether it’s regressive, flat, or progressive. You then fiddle with the rates in the budget tab.
I am not sure if we can trust that conclusion from Reddit. It would be from much earlier build of the game and likely also based on the same unclear tooltips. Until more information is available I prefer to think that payroll tax simply used in its usual meaning and refers to the method of collection (regardless of what scale is used). In the present day it's typically progressive, because it starts to apply from a certain threshold. I am not sure how it has evolved historically.

EDIT: After some searching it appears that there is a lot of variety of payroll taxes between the countries and more often than not it's not a single tax, but a combination of multiple taxes, some having a floor and others having a ceiling, so the end result would be neither progressive, nor regressive, nor flat. It's probably too complicated (and unnecessary) to implement in the game in details.

And actually, we don't even need to go to that Reddit thread. Look at what you wrote before as a hypothetical:

Those two tax rates are not equivalent. The second is more regressive. The rich have gone from paying 4 times the rate of the poor to 2.875 times as much.
They are obviously not equivalent since they are expressed by different numbers :) Neither of them is regressive though - they are both progressive (in a regular sense of terms). The rate ratio you suggest to consider wouldn't be a useful metric. For example, if you raised tax on poor from 10% to 60% to maintain your ratio the tax on rich would have to be 240%. If I am not mistaken the economists are still arguing what is a useful metric of regressiveness.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
A great dev dairy! I'm impressed in the new treasury machanism, including debt and gold reserve. Personally, I'm confused about the gold reserve limit. In addition, I wonder if the government can get incomes from the state-owned factories.
 
I am not sure if we can trust that conclusion from Reddit. It would be from much earlier build of the game and likely also based on the same unclear tooltips. Until more information is available I prefer to think that payroll tax simply used in its usual meaning and refers to the method of collection (regardless of what scale is used). In the present day it's typically progressive, because it starts to apply from a certain threshold. I am not sure how it has evolved historically.

EDIT: After some searching it appears that there is a lot of variety of payroll taxes between the countries and more often than not it's not a single tax, but a combination of multiple taxes, some having a floor and others having a ceiling, so the end result would be neither progressive, nor regressive, nor flat. It's probably too complicated (and unnecessary) to implement in the game in details.
Wiz confirmed it earlier in the thread.
It's because the income tax law (Payroll Taxes) is a regressive form of taxation, there are also flat and progressive forms.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Wiz confirmed it earlier in the thread.
I guess it comes to clarity and legibility again - why not use the terms in their usual meaning? Of course, it might be WIP.

It would be interesting to learn how players will be able to define taxes. From dividend tax being separate from the income tax, I assume that each category can only contain one tax law.
 
My only hesitation is that mechanics which favor Pops at the (temporary) expense of the player, or vice versa, aren't clearly "good" or "bad" for the player which presents certain challenges in framing, explanation, and game dynamics. For example, a country that's deep in debt would pay a lot of interest to its captains of industry, who are quite pleased with that as the payments afford them greater luxuries (when actually they should perhaps be worried the debt will be defaulted on, and encourage government austerity and repayment). But if the country manages to climb out of debt, they're now punished by the factory owners who are mad their piles of gold are slightly smaller today.
That sounds like a great mechanic, to be honest. Debt interest directly benefiting the rich, but hooking them onto the steady revenue at the same time, with potential consequences if it stops... Tradeoffs and more complexity instead of "debt bad, interest is money sink" is very good.
The whole "rich living in luxury while the government struggles to repay debts with interest" is the story of the Netherlands from the end of their Golden Age well into the XIXth century - the state was basically paralyzed by extreme debt they took on at the end of the XVIIth century while trying to repel the French invasion, the overall living standards stagnated and fell, but the wealthy patrician families were richer than ever, living off the debt interest for generations (and no default or restructuring was possible since they basically controlled the politics as well). It was also one of the major causes of Belgium breaking away (the new southern provinces didn't enjoy having to share the debt burden with the North).
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I guess it comes to clarity and legibility again - why not use the terms in their usual meaning? Of course, it might be WIP.

It would be interesting to learn how players will be able to define taxes. From dividend tax being separate from the income tax, I assume that each category can only contain one tax law.
I mean, you’re right that payroll taxes can be either progressive or regressive when it comes to just payroll income depending on whether there is a cap or a floor, but taxing just payroll leaves out sources of income that skew towards the upper classes (interest on savings, investments, etc.) I think that is what the name of tax is supposed to reflect.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
In the sense that if you try to turn into money again you only get 20K. Also in the sense it is a gameplay mechanic that is there to fulfil a gameplay function, to to be an accurate simulation of reality.
Oh wow, a mechanic exists to fulfil a gameplay purpose? Very immersive flavour.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
it is the way to mask the lack of inventories (stockpiles)

gold bullions must be expensive only if the gold is scarce in the market. But this scenario can't be modelled without inventories.

this soft cap is an artificial and forced way to say there is a high demand of gold.
Sure, but if I have a squillion pounds of bullion in reserve, why wouldn't I be able to sell it at the high price I apparently have to buy it at? The flavour simply makes little sense.
 
This seems to be modelling national inflation in a roundabout way. If you have too much gold, the gold you have begins to be worth less. It should be circulating in the economy to have this effect but I can work my head around it that way if it helps the game in myriad other ways.
Knights of Honor tackled this problem in the same way, yeah.
 
  • 1Love
Reactions:
Sure, but if I have a squillion pounds of bullion in reserve, why wouldn't I be able to sell it at the high price I apparently have to buy it at? The flavour simply makes little sense.

You could potentially look at it as reflecting what would happen to prices if you tried to use those reserves, or what accumulating those reserves does for prices more generally (ie, a very, very rough inflation proxy). At the end of the day, accumulated 'money' is only useful if it can be spent on something - if there's so much money floating around that oodles and oodles can be locked up in a bank/Fort Knox, then it will have an impact on prices. It'd be more intuitive in terms of understanding just this factor to have some kind of price and inflation mechanism, but as Iachek has mentioned earlier, building in individual currencies (probably necessary for different prices in different nations) and then price and inflation mechanics could make things pretty hard to follow, pretty quickly (not least as even these days price and inflation isn't that well understood!)
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions: