this will not fly because, you cannot charge sales tax at the border. They want to charge customs and vat at the border.

then people will just ship every thing in.

Income Tax, tax the lawyers and doctors, they will charge less for their services and the public will like it.

VAT just robs Joe Schlemiel, we pay for it all, damn businesses will pay only 100 dollars for license, and then the businesses turn around and want to mark up the VAT, a non-existent business expense.

Give the guy a break.
He was a voice in the wilderness concerning VAT .
Guy has some quirk views, but he has the cojones to speak up.
Fert few business owners do.

Ah you might be right.

I am lucky to be in an HOA where we do have the freedom to fire the management company.

We already have the new "property manager" lined up, a $200 a week position, part-time.

VAT is crap otherwise, I agree, buy i only got one vote, except here on the tribyne where I get to vote multiple times

All they have to do is drop the management company. Might be cheaper for a large association to hire a full time property manager for $300 per week and pay the national insurance.

So, increase the fee by 20% to pay vat on garbage collection, landscaping and other services, and hire the property manager. Don't call him manager, call him physical plant associate.

when I read the white paper, and I see that VAT example with the man going to the forest to cut wood and make furniture, I smile and think of Little Red Riding Hood.

the examples delivered on the radio are pathetic.

But, the financial secretary tried to minimize the impact of VAT on the cost of living by suggesting that merchants would actually lower their prices by marking products up only on the customs duty, since they get the VAT back. Too bad that he did not counter the example with actual figures.

A couple of days ago on the Tribune, a car dealer was worried at not being able to mark up his price controlled product on the VAt paid to government.

Suppose a restaurant owner pays $50.00 for materials, 30% duty and marks it up by 30%. He will sell the meal to the client for 50x1.30x1.30= 84.5. The client pays 15% gratuity, for a total bill of $97.15

Under VAT, where now the merchant pays 15% customs duty and 15% VAT, the financial secretary says the owner should mark the product only based on the customs duty, so he should sell the same meal for $50x1.15x1.30=$74.75. Adding 15% gratuity and 15% VAT, the client's bill would now be $98.85, a marginal increase.

The restaurant owner is collecting less money on the same meal, for a reduction in revenues, the restaurant owner does not want that, so i believe,as darrol Miller seems to suggest that the restaurant owner will continue to mark his product up to $84.5, charge 15% gratuity and 15% vat and the bill will turn out to be 111.75.

Therefore, the increase on the cost of living will be staggering, who is going to police to say that the markup will continue to be on customs duty only.

I suspect they don't know what to do with the duty free shopping downtown.

If they charge VAT, the tourist will buy at the airport when leaving the us , or in other ports if in a cruise.

The solution would be to charge VAT only to locals on the jewelry, liquor and perfume.

the bahamians will stop buying locally and purchase stuff at the airport in Miami. i am sure the bay street merchants will be glad to give up the mother's day, christmas and valentines sales they make to locals.

Ok, y'all bahamians cannot gamble, and will pay more for perfume and liquors than the tourist. Nice.

Wikipedia sez:

> On the other hand, they incur increased accounting costs for
> collecting the tax, which are not reimbursed by the taxing authority.
> For example, wholesale companies now have to hire staff and accountants to
> handle the VAT paperwork, which would not be required if they were
> collecting sales tax instead. ***If> you calculate the added overhead
> required to collect VAT, businesses collecting VAT have less profits
> overall than businesses collecting sales tax***.

I suppose the business could try to mark up on VAT paid, but that sounds crooked to me because the VAT will be refunded to you.

The public will not take it. They will under-insure.

I keep the minimum third-party insurance on my car to comply with the law.
I dropped the catastrophic insurance on my house years ago, it is now only fire. I also reduced the insured value because, if i were to sell the home, it would not fetch the top price it fetched in 2008.

Finally, i dropped the health insurance, after years of bearing group health insurance premium increases, because my coworkers reserve the right to eat fried chicken and smoke.

I dropped life insurance, I am more valuable alive.

The white paper, is just that. Someone must have put it together by copying and pasting from some website.

Very few people are concerned with VAT. Many do not know it's coming, others do not understand that costs will go up.

The failure of the Government to reveal the content of legislation is abismal and, even the tribune blogger warriors have resorted to sarcastic comments (I included).

A number of radio ads have been released. I was astounded that one of them said something like:

"If your business is not subject to VAT registration, you cannot apply for refunds, however, you are entiltled to mark up the products to make your percentage profit"

Sounds like a recipe for inflation to me.