Gov't fails to heed tax 'buy in' warning

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

The Government has seemingly failed to act on the Tax Coalition’s spending and compliance recommendations to ensure reform buy-in, and outright rejected calls for their to be “proportionate reductions” in border taxes.

The Coalition for Responsible Taxation, in its final position paper submitted to the Government on fiscal reform, warned that matching a low-rate Value-Added Tax (VAT) to a simultaneous proportionate reduction in Customs and Excise Taxes would ensure the greatest compliance and ‘buy in’ to the restructured tax.

Instead, while acceding to the Coalition’s call for a low-rate (7.5 per cent) VAT that is simpler and with “fewer exemptions”, the Government has decided to maintain the existing Customs and Excise Tax rates - a move that represents an increased cost of living burden for middle and lower income Bahamians.

“The Coalition holds the position that VAT must be implemented at the lowest possible rate with proportionate reductions to duty,” its position paper said.

“Under these circumstances, the tax has the potential to be broadly accepted, and therefore have greater compliance and generate greater revenue than many other inefficient existing taxes such as Business License fees, duty or property tax.”

And it added: “The Oxford Economics report presents various VAT rate scenarios, and given the stated objective of keeping the rate as low as possible to keep our tourism and other international competitiveness at the fore, and to foster continued economic recovery, the Coalition directs the Ministry of Finance’s attention to Scenario 6 (VAT at 5 per cent) and Scenario 3 (VAT at 7.5 per cent).

“Both have narrow exemptions, which allows the tax to be far simpler to administer and thus significantly widens the tax base and revenue potential.”

While the private sector and Coalition appear to have scored victories here, a concern too many is that the Government announced little that was new on the spending front, other than to promise a move to an accrual rather than the existing cash-based accounting system - something Tribune Business and accountants such as Raymond Winder have been calling for for years.

The Government, though, appears to have virtually ignored four of the five recommendations contained under the section ‘Tax reform must be accompanied by fiscal reform’ in the Coalition’s paper.

“Given the public discourse over tax and fiscal reform, it is clear that the private sector and wider populace are not in favour of any additional taxes, without clear demonstration from the Government of improved expenditure control, tax compliance and accountability,” the Coalition warned.

“Accordingly, the following commitments are necessary if there is to be consensus from the private sector on the introduction of new taxes.”

Top of this list was “the implementation of an act that, amongst other things, provides limits to capital and recurrent expenditure relative to Gross Domestic Product (GDP); requires comprehensive reporting of projected costs and benefits of planned programmes as a condition precedent; requires a balanced budget; and mandates reductions in the national debt and the building of national reserves”.

The Coalition also later added that a low VAT rate was “only viable with expenditure control and improved collection rates in other taxes, which the Government must commit to in order to demonstrate that all sectors, private and public, and the wider citizenry, must work together to make this happen – the burden cannot fall to any one sector”.

As for the Coalition’s other recommendations, it called for a Freedom of Information Act and protection for whistleblowers, plus the only thing on the list the Government has pledged to do - legalise and tax web shop gaming.

The others on the ‘to do list’ are energy reform and improved compliance rates on existing taxes.

“While this is a longer term initiative, there must be demonstrable efforts to modernise the processes and imbed greater accountability for a failure to achieve increased compliance, and greater penalties imposed on those businesses and individuals found to be evading taxes,” the Coalition added.

“Energy reform must be prioritised, with the appointment of a representative from the private sector to the committee charged with selecting an appropriate entity with which to enter into a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) and devising the structure of the PPA.”

The Coalition also conceded that its proposed payroll tax would be a short-term measure, as it would be unable to compensate for all the border taxes that will be lost with the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

Comments

Straight_Talk_Bahamas says...

The Government uses Cash Based Accounding.

below shows the advantages of Accrual Based Accounting vs. Cash Based Accounting and also reveals why the government has been using cash based accounting for so long.

**************************
The difference between cash and accrual basis accounting has to do with the time frame in which revenues and expenses are recorded and reported. **Cash basis accounting will suffice if your business is a simple one.** However, the accrual basis will give a more accurate picture of the results of business operations.

Comparing cash and accrual basis accounting

**Cash basis accounting is a very simple form of accounting**. When a payment is received for the sale of goods or services, a deposit is made, and the revenue is recorded as of the date of the receipt of funds — no matter when the sale was made. Checks are written when funds are available to pay bills, and the expense is recorded as of the check date — regardless of when the expense was incurred.

The primary focus is on the amount of cash in the bank, and the secondary focus is on making sure all bills are paid. **Little effort is made to match revenues to the time period in which they are earned, or to match expenses to the time period in which they are incurred**.

Accrual basis accounting matches revenues to the time period in which they are earned and matches expenses to the time period in which they are incurred. **While it is more complex than cash basis accounting, it provides much more information about your business. The accrual basis allows you to track receivables (amounts due from customers on credit sales) and payables (amounts due to vendors on credit purchases). The accrual basis allows you to match revenues to the expenses incurred in earning them, giving you more meaningful financial reports.**

************************************
The items in **bold** are my own emphasis. Do you see why cashed based accounting has been the preferred method of accounting by government?

Do you think Government will change this any time soon?

We can only hope...

Posted 2 June 2014, 11:09 a.m. Suggest removal

ohdrap4 says...

Only government?
I think there are many business owners who operate just like that. Reason why they are always late with national insurance, business license and property tax.

Many years ago, when an employer had just purchased a building, I went to the post office and saw a real property tax bill, which i presented to the boss and we paid it off before December 31st.

Subsequent to that, I was relieved of post office box duties. Years later, many bills are unpaid and the Bank is in the process of relieving my boss of the business.

Posted 2 June 2014, 2:17 p.m. Suggest removal

Log in to comment