Where's a statement that says "we will support legislation introducing a comprehensive Fiscal Responsibility Act and Freedom of Information Act, and we will enact both of these important transparency measures upon becoming elected if the current government fails to do it now"??

What about Panama, Argentina, Barbados, Guatemala, Venezuela, Brazil, Mexico, Ecuador, Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Peru, Paraguay, Guyana, Uruguay... all with VAT and a VAT-inclusive pricing model.

The US has a sales tax. Canada has a mixed consumption tax model. Neither of these countries are comparable to our system.

What, like... Panama, Argentina, Barbados, Guatemala, Venezuela, Brazil, Mexico, Ecuador, Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Peru, Paraguay, Guyana, Uruguay... for example? All with VAT. All with retailers happily using a VAT-*inclusive* pricing model.

Restaurants, you say? Have you even read the guide?

The Bahamas VAT Guide (Ministry of Finance, Dec 23, 2014, page 13) states:

>"**Pricing**

>All prices displayed must include VAT. Labels on goods and prices displayed on the shelf must be inclusive of VAT. You must also clearly display a sign that states that your prices are inclusive of VAT. If you display a list of items (for example on a menu or a price board) the price must be inclusive of VAT and you must display a declaration that clearly states that your prices are inclusive of VAT. Restaurants with dine-in table service, however, *may publish menus with the VAT exclusive price and the amount of VAT shown separately*.”

Where do you think the VAT amount is shown...etched onto the underside of the table? On a separate document under the counter? No, on the menu, shown separately.

Are you now arguing that your retailers would like to do this too on your pricetags and shelf labels (given that clothing stores do not have menus)? If so then you can, go for it, you are welcome to, and you can do so within the existing law, because this is how its done:

**Item: $10.00 + VAT: $0.75**

**Total price: $10.75**

Have you also noticed that millions of retailers across the world display VAT-inclusive pricing, including hundreds now in The Bahamas, and have systems that are quite capable of doing so. Its hardly the governments fault that some retailers represented by your federation are using antiquated business systems. Many businesses here are fully compliant already.

That's about $200,000 in VAT revenue.

Neither the USA nor Canada have *pure VAT*. Again: the USA has a *sales tax* model. Canada has a *mixed consumption tax model* that involves combined 1. VAT *plus* 2. sales tax involving up to six different rates depending on the province *plus* 3. a large number of product lines that are exempt from either VAT or exempt from one of the sales taxes or exempt from both VAT and the sales tax.

So neither example you provide is relevant. There are 140+ other examples that are relevant, from 140+ countries that have the same *single consumption tax model* with almost no exemptions ("pure VAT") that we do. And **all** use VAT **inclusive** pricing.

You know all of this yet you talk yourself into believing otherwise because you cannot admit you are wrong. Just like you seem to want to deliberately fool prospective customers into thinking that a $120 advertised sweater is not in fact a $129 sweater until you have them with their wallet open at your cash register. A customer cannot buy your sweater and leave with it without paying VAT included in the price and in the payment. So you price it VAT-inclusive on the shelf. Its now the law.

That such deep ignorance of fundamental concepts continues to be displayed from certain quarters of the retail community regarding their obligations to customers and to the law should ring alarm bells within the community. If you and the BFR were genuinely interested in transparency you would price your goods in a format like the ones I've used as examples:

**"Price: $129.00 *(includes VAT of $9.00)*"**

or

**Item: $120.00 + VAT: $9.00**

**Total price: $129.00**

But you're not really committed to transparency are you. You expect customers to stand at your shelf or rack and mentally compute the final price, or carry a pocket calculator or abacus with them when they go out shopping.

If you think you should exclude VAT from the shelf price, why do you not also exclude, say, the variable cost of store lighting , or the cost of delivery of the item from the wholesaler's warehouse, from the pricetag too? Add that at the cash register along with the VAT? Plus plus plus everything.

I'm not your secretary, so feel free to count them yourself if you somehow think its relevant.
Price control has nothing to do with whether VAT is printed on (inclusive) or off (exclusive) the pricetag.

A VAT-inclusive pricetag that states something along the lines of:

**Item: $10.00 + VAT: $0.75**

**Total price: $10.75**

...complies with the law, tells customers precisely what portion is going to government, and it makes absolutely no difference whether the original $10.00 item was price controlled or not.

The government and its revenue advisers have followed 140+ other countries in the world with a pure VAT model (where there are no exemptions, and no variable added sales taxes), that all successfuly use **inclusive** pricing. Not one of these countries use exclusive pricing because VAT is not a sales tax. Our policymakers chose to follow a successful, tried and tested pricing model, rather than adopt the wishes of a handful of local retailers who would prefer to disguise from customers the true, final prices of products in their advertising material and on the shelf, right up to the point they open their wallets.

Inclusive pricing means **the price you see is the price you pay** and the receipt you get helpfully gives customers a subtotal of the tax component if they wish to keep a record of how much VAT they have paid to government. You cannot buy a product without first having paid VAT, there are no exceptions.

Citizens deserve transparent prices that are accurate and all inclusive, and that is why the Bahamas Federation of Retailers has comprehensively lost the argument for exclusive-pricing with both sides of politics.

Retailers who are genuinely interested in transparency and full disclosure in the interests of customers will simply price their products in this sort of format:

**"Price: $129.00 *(includes VAT of $9.00)*"**

Hardly complicated.

Using your logic there are millions of retailers in 140+ VAT inclusively priced countries in the world who are price gouging on a daily basis for the sole reason that VAT only appears on a final receipt and not on the individual shelf price of products. That is nonsense. VAT-inclusive pricing successfully operates everywhere that has a single rate/type consumption tax model in place.

What i have said is that BFR should accept the reality of a pricing system that has now been adopted, and get on with the business of protecting the reputation of members and advancing other winnable issues that affect members. At no point have I told BFR to take responsibility for individual price gouging retailers - by contrast I have suggested to him that he criticizes it loudly.
Lobby groups exist to advance issues and to positively influence future direction. You cannot advance an issue that has already been settled and for which there is zero appetite from either side of politics to change, and you cannot positively influence future direction when you act like an impetuous SHOUTY child who cannot accept that things have not give your way on this particular occasion, so you must attack, name call, abuse (as the poster did in a previous comments thread) and otherwise make yourself and your other views (many of which will have merit) easily ignored in future.

Where do I say BFR/you should "enforce" the law? Please quote me back.

I understand the role of government, business and lobby groups perfectly. If you did perhaps you'd be a little more effective at getting results.