It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
I'm tired of asking what already. So maybe you would like to logically try and explain to me your thinking. Now I have never said this before, and purposely shied away from the subjects, but I happen to have 25 years of a finance and economic background, most of which involved international monetary policy. On top of which, my name is found is the annals of Ottawa relative to the debate on the GST. And there is nothing you can tell me about U.S taxation that I cannot correct you on. So please explain your position.
We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.
-- Winston Churchill
Originally posted by Umbrax
Cut the spending not raise the taxes.
How much BS projects are costing millions that the public is being kept in the dark about? All those projects that are classified due to national security. I think it is quite easy to pocket some tax dollars if you are conducting secret government funded projects.
Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Well now you are mixing apples with rotten oranges. The latter has to do with conservative legislation, the former, oh wait...the conservatives also.
Watching this debate in the US makes me chuckle, for as surely as those typical conservatives who lash out against Canada's taxation policies speak to the sales tax on goods, those who have visited Canada anyway, do accept the new VAT proposal state side.
Can you conservatives be any more confused than you already are? If you don't like it in Canada, how can you possibly argue for it at home?
The latter has to do with conservative legislation, the former, oh wait...the conservatives also.
I was beginning to think you went AWOL. And really? What exactly are the differences between a value added tax and a consumption tax, please enlighten me. I am more than happy to give you credit for the nuances of terms between countries, but I will be sure to be very tough on you as you describe the end result.
Originally posted by PhoenixI'm not the one trying to mix rotten apples with perfectly good oranges here - there is no confusion nor contradiction other than your mix up between what a VAT is and what a Consumption tax is.
Are these words yours or someone else's Phoenix? Further, since I already know the answer and because it is representaive of someone else's interpretation, I am going to heighten your stress, and ask you to explain to me the difference on a federal level the ST and VAT or Bush tax or whatever Bush chooses to call it as proposed, on shall we say, a computer?
VAT Should the United States enact a VAT? The tax has the same advantages that retail sales taxes have over the income tax: lower compliance costs, favorable treatment of savings and investment, etc. etc...
How so? I want you to post your own fears on this board, so how so?
There are dangers to the tax. For one thing, most VAT supporters see it as an add-on to existing taxes.
Ah! The Canadian sysytem as I mentioned. See? you are coming around already.
The Treasury study, completed for former secretary Paul O'Neill, included one proposal that would retain the corporate tax, retain the individual income tax for families earning over $100,000, and impose a 15 percent VAT. That is a dreadful option because the economy would be burdened with a new VAT infrastructure on top of the most inefficient parts of the existing income tax
So you are against a VAT? What is your government proposing that is different?
VAT while better than Income Tax is insidious because of its promotion of government spending through seemingly small increase over a broad spectrum of the economy.
Wrong! The VAT is an end-user tax.
VAT also constitutes multiple taxation on the same finished product as it moves through various stages of production.
As would this, but then you have answers to supply that is not propaganda as per:
Consumption Tax
If you want to present the propaganda from others then I want you to provide a reconciliation using the television as per above, with your plagiaristic statement, in terms of dollars and cents.
... For example, an NST should promote higher rates of economic growth by dramatically reducing the tax bias against work, savings, and investment....
The marginal tax rate on consumed income that workers and investors face would be much lower, and the return on savings and investment would not be taxed until spent. Moreover, an NST would reduce economically inefficient distortions in the pattern of investments that are now dictated largely by tax shelters, deductions, and special-interest loopholes.
Once more, if I wanted to sell you anything at all, I would not be flaunting the negatives, and would certainly be telling you what I want you to know. The reconciliatin please?
A properly constructed NST plan would replace all of the revenue from the individual and corporate income tax, transfer taxes, and most non-trust-fund excise taxes with a single 15 percent(now higher since the article was written in 1997) flat-rate tax on the purchase of final goods and services at the retail level.
isn't that nice? I mean truly, that is so sweet that you hunted this up. Now please address the present.
First Income Tax - 1812
President James Monroe - Republican (Liberals of their day)
I was beginning to think you went AWOL. And really? What exactly are the differences between a value added tax and a consumption tax, please enlighten me. I am more than happy to give you credit for the nuances of terms between countries, but I will be sure to be very tough on you as you describe the end result.
That’s odd, I asked you some questions, the answers to which you had to resort to definitions as provided by other sources, which did not adequately or effectively address the questions posed, and I am teh one with diminishing status?. If such easy to answer questions sent you into such a tizzy looking to create an infantile defense to cover for your lack of knowledge, what will be your recourse if you do decide to attempt answers?
Originally posted by PhoenixThe apparent lack of reading/linking to information already posted is having the effect of diminishing your expert status in my humble opinion, others may begin to feel the same after repeated questions where the answer lies in the preceeding posts.
Let's review shall we?
What exactly are the differences between a value added tax and a consumption tax, please enlighten me:
So you are against a VAT? What is your government proposing that is different?
Now re-examine my statement to which your inability at understanding what you read leaps to the forefront with your answer:
YOU- I'm not the one trying to mix rotten apples with perfectly good oranges here - there is no confusion nor contradiction other than your mix up between what a VAT is and what a Consumption tax is.
Two distinct statements were made, one to do with the conservatives in Canada, and the other on the VAT. Out of sheer impertinence and your being devoid of interpretive skills you presume to tell me that I confuse the two terms, and pretend to be knowledgeable by having to run to other sources to define that which you have been spouting off about, try obtaining your own knowledge of a subject before you speak on it Phoenix
ME- (A) Well now you are mixing apples with rotten oranges. The latter has to do with conservative legislation, the former, oh wait...the conservatives also. (B)Watching this debate in the US makes me chuckle, for as surely as those typical conservatives who lash out against Canada's taxation policies speak to the sales tax on goods, those who have visited Canada anyway, do accept the new VAT proposal state side.
Well now here begins your education. Lesson no. 1:The VAT is collected at each stage of purchase and sale, not production. It is not passed on to the next stage as it is identified and kept separate from the cost of the good. On the final sale to the ultimate consumer, after all of the relevant costs excluding the previously paid VAT, and markup, the tax is levied for the last time as a separate calculation and is not to be included in the advertised cost of the product or calculated on previously collected VAT. Who pays it then, Phoenix? The final consumer and only the final consumer, it is therefore a consumption tax.
VATs are collected at each state of production
Imagine that! Now what exactly was I confused about?
final goods and services at the retail level
As previously stated this is WRONG! There is no multiple taxation as you can see from above. The VAT previously paid is not a multiple taxation, in the tax collected at all stages is at the same rate and must be remitted by every seller at every stage. It is absolutely no different to proposing that flat tax you so endear which too is only on the final sale of the product that includes only natural costs and markup.
VAT also constitutes multiple taxation on the same finished product as it moves through various stages of production.