I thought I would start a new thread on this.I have read good and bad about this type of taxation. A lot of countries, about 150, use this model.The US scenario I saw had a multi-year transition from income tax to VAT.Another showed the depth it could be implemented at. The worst was "any time money changed hands". This was a little scary. A tax was levied when you rcvd a pay check, when it gets deposited by you, when you write a check, etc. Most agreed that this would not be realistic.It does show that the rules for it need to be made more bullet-proof than our current laws are, being changed each time a new congress gets elected.Here is one article from April, 2010:http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503983_162-20001918-503983.htmlGenehttp://www.taylortel.net/~gdett2/
Found an article from yesterday:http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/nov/29/vat-back-as-...Genehttp://www.taylortel.net/~gdett2/
being changed each time a new congress gets elected.This is a fundamental problem with our system of goverment and especially the way we finance election campaigns.Congress finds it useful to find certain issues with an interested constituency and then essentially extract political contributions from them to keep favorable tax laws in force.Congress does not want to keep the laws in place too long, and in fact is eager to find an excuse to enact yet another tax law (with still more complexity). This is the real way campaigns are financed. And it gives Congress reason to go again and again to issues with money behind them and ignore the business of the people, which may be more controversial (and thus risky) compared to the sure winner, sure payout like tax legislation.This is a cancer that eats at the core of our system of government.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provid