I think income tax is the way to go ... you are likely to get a higher level of compliance and it could be structured so that the poor does not carry the bulk of the burden. Here is how I think it should be structured: if you make less than 10,000 p.a. = no tax; 10,001 - 15,000 = 15%; 15,001 - 20,000 = 16%,: 20,001 - 25,000 = 17%; etc up to a maximum of 25-30%. This eliminates the large leaps at certain threshholds which discourage upward mobility. I am sure (without doing the math) that it will bring in more money than VAT and cost less to administer. There is an existing structure (NIB) that can be expanded or replicated to carry out the collections without the need for every business incurring expense for accountants.
Das my 5cents.

I see your logic, but the jump from just below $10,000 to just above is too wide a gap. If you're making just under $10,000 instead of wanting a raise, you would more than likely wouldn't want a raise and if you get one you may look for a new job, because most raises wouldn't be big enough to see and increase.

Income Tax could be very easily implemented with some minor modifications through N.I.B. They already have the systems in place to account for NIB deductions, the same can be configured for Income Tax...let's just raise NIB fees by 15%, or have various bracket levels like those listed in the comment above. People already have the forms and the know how to adjust with NIB, it is an across the board thing, not just targeting big business. Can be done very quickly and effectively...assuming of course that your people PAY the NIB in the first place...oh wait...that goes back to the GOVERNMENT having to deal with the final debt collection...and make the people in arrears pay up...hmmmmm...we know they fail at collections...that's why we are here in the first place.

First instinct would be to dispatch a crack team of red shirts to Abaco, pleading for the return of the "Lawyer/Fisherman" from Cooper's Town. Comrade Red Shirts "Multiple-Positions" Leader Minnis must be convinced that confusing Bahamalander's will be seen as stepping stones leading him to occupying the powerful Prime Minister's office come the 2017 General Elections. I forget now, how many positions did Minnis take on the Numbers Rackets Vote? But then again my second instinct quickly reminded me that even former boss man Hubert couldn't make up his mind how to vote or not to vote on gambling? Maybe Comrade Brent is the only one that might give some faint hope to the reds saving their once so damn powerful party, from complete political extinction. I is so confused over these red shirts. Brent you need tell Bahamalander's how you voted/didn't vote on Gambling, cause you sure been quiet on that issue, before and after the Gambling Vote?

Rory or whatever you are (don't sound hetero), calling people animal names for no apparent reason than to be insulting is absurd....so WHO exactly is it that's crazy? DUH!

@ Rory....It is not respectful to refer to a rhinoceros as an elephant!

Most offensive indeed!

Before you jump on your high horse, your obvious next question is “how do we differentiate between an elephant, rhinoceros and hippopotamus”.

Consider displayed temperament or lack thereof makes it more palatable to refrain making references to that of a hippopotamus'.

We might also discover the relationship between a Jackass, warthog and rhinoceros to be quite amiable.

Just speculation as I see it...….LOL

SP must stand for supercilious prick because what you posted wasn't the least bit funny. It was unnecessarily disrespectful and unkind serving no purpose whatsoever. It's usually the most imperfect people who are the nasty ones. You probably have a face only a mother could love....please add a photo so everyone can laugh.