We are living in a controversial world about whether people should retain their incomes instead of allocating them to the government as a fixed cost. From my perspective, I advocate this because of the imbalance in society and the corruption of administration officials.
Admittedly, there are some rational grounds why others reckon that they would have the right to retain their incomes. The first reason stems from their financial dedication. Apparently, people are required to contribute a part of their income as an overhead cost to support national prosperity. However, this could lead to a conflicting view based on low-quality public services such as the degradation of hospitals, poor public welfare, and so on, which means that their living standards would not be improved effectively. Further and even more importantly, the lack of financial resources would be an obstacle for citizens to pay taxes. It is understood that those who live below the poverty line cannot earn livable money to cover their living expenses, so they are not able to pay income taxes.
Albeit these persuasive arguments, I stand appalled by the sentiment that individuals should pay their income taxes. First and foremost, it is untrustworthy for citizens to budget their salaries since they are unable to know what their money will be used for. The fact that numerous government officials would corrupt citizens' income taxes for their purposes or interests, which do not have any beneficial effects on the public, lends credence to this assertion. To be more specific, in the first half of 2024, the number of cases of corruption in Vietnam increased to over fifty percent, which aroused an influx of inhabitants standing up against the ignorance of the administration. Another point that should be taken into consideration is the remarkable rich-poor gap. The explanation lies in the fact that governments reinforce income tax to pay international loans, which occurs regularly in developing countries and could put heavy pressure on wealthy people. Therefore, the tax reduction could subsidize underprivileged citizens to improve their living standards since they could put aside their incomes.
In conclusion, I am in favor of the stance that people have their right to hold their incomes in lieu of giving a part of them to the authorities on account of these aforementioned justifications.
Holt Educational Consultant - / 14985 
4814 Please avoid exaggerating the representation of the original discussion. The excessive negative presentation will result in a prompt deviation that will affect the preliminary task accuracy score. While the prompt restatement has problems. The writer's opinion and thesis statement is well developed and should help lessen the lowered scoring effect of the incorrect prompt restatement.
The discussion paragraphs can be shortened. You do not need to over explain things. Just keep it simple. 5 sentences with properly used transition words will be sufficient for the explanation. Keep the sentences short to avoid GRA deductions. The longer your paragraphs, the more error prone those will be. It is best to keep is simple but informative. Remember the LR and GRA scores should be balanced. You will still lower your score if your GRA score is less because of incorrect LR usage.
