Rick Lowe
As we point out in the "About Us" tab, "We are several Bahamian Bloggers, and we might not agree with each other all the time." And this post is one of those times.
Columnist and fellow blogger Adrian Gibson says that in order for the government to eliminate the budget deficit they should simply tax the rich more in the form of higher property tax.
First, the government can force every citizen to pay whatever they wish to take from us. After all, they run the country! The question is, should they be allowed to spend so much money over and above the taxes they collect, and then simply come back and take more taxes to "balance" things out? Hardly!
Secondly, The Nassau Institute pointed out in this recent piece that economic "recovery depends on private sector growth and shrinking the size of a government (expenditure, borrowing, taxes, regulation) that is now beyond the capacity of the private sector to support."
As long as the government continues to spend beyond it's means and taxes and regulates the individuals that make up the private sector beyond their willingness and ability to pay, it creates an uncertainty in the entrepreneurial class and they retrench and dare not risk their hard earned money on new investments. And you guessed it, this causes the government to tax and regulate even more, exacerbating the problem their over spending caused in the first place.
Third, H.L. Mencken says it better than I ever could: "When a new source of taxation is found it never means, in practice, that the old source is abandoned. It merely means that the politicians have two ways of milking the taxpayer where they had one before."
And this all makes everyone worse off.
Regretfully, suggesting more taxes on a certain segment of the economy, creating envy of the productive sector of the economy, is improper and bereft of economic logic.
Sorry but over spending is the problem, not under taxing.
Finally, for someone that uses a lot of ink decrying the effectiveness of government it seems odd to encourage it to take more money from taxpayers to do more of the same.
“Tax the Rich” policy is the self evident failure of government bureaucratic management, i.e. spending beyond its means.
It plays off the human foible of envy and hatred of the good for being good.
Politics brings out the worst in human beings, and those promoting tax the rich policy should step back and re-examine their own philosophy for living.
Our present system, basically a consumption tax,already taxes on a sliding scale based on goods consumed by the individual/family unit.
Even though it is collected upon import, the wealthier already pay more.They also employ more, invest more, and risk more.
Pray they do not stop.
has anyone figured out the net increase to the governments slush fund (NIB) yet via the contribution ceiling increase? ($400 to $600)
The .5% per employer/employee (1% tot.) was chicken feed compared to the increased revenue this will net them, and courtesy of other incremental future increases, we are well on our way to 18% like say Barbados.
Income tax through the back door.
Sure have Chris: http://www.nassauinstitute.org/articles/article837.php
And this…http://www.nassauinstitute.org/articles/article831.php
Rick, when did I say “that in order for the government to eliminate the budget deficit they should simply tax the rich more in the form of higher property tax”? I am appalled and completely and utterly perplexed by this!
I said no such thing. I said in a column that the government should collect outstanding property taxes, which stand at some $400 million. I never said anything about the government taxing the rich more in the form of a higher property tax….a complete misrepresentation the truth, of me and what I stated in my column.
Moreover, as it concerns the very wealthy, that is the uber wealthy in the Bahamas, I merely said that the government should follow the American format–adopted by both the Republicans and the Demoncrats–when possibly proposing a plan for taxation for this class. I clearly stated that the government should look at and follow the American outline.
Nothing more.
Furthermore, in the past, I have suggested, as first suggested by the IMF, that if we are to streamline our current tax structure, maybe we should heed the IMF recommendation of a value added tax while eliminating certain other taxes.
We can have debate about these things, but please lets debate on what someone actually says.
Sorry Adrian. You did say collecting the $400 in million in property tax.
However, the gist of your piece regarding the Junior Minister for Finance was/is to tax people and businesses more more, and pass it to the Bahamian people…whatever that means.
Rick, that is not the gist of my piece. I said all I wanted to say, and never suggested nor gave the gist of wanting the government to tax businesses and pass anything on to the Bahamian people. Again, a misrepresentation of what I said.
The only time I spoke about tax on business was levying a higher corporate tax on banks, which make colossal profits per year. And I explicitly stated that a proviso should be included in such a tax to prevent these banks, that earn high interest rates, from passing on addition increases to the Bahamian people. I said nothing about taxing businesses and then passin it on to the people, neither did I give the impression or the gist, as you put it, that I wished to see that.
Boy I’m really confusing what you said.
How can you or me determine what a company or individual should be taxed and what should be passed on in charges or not?
It’s populists rhetoric, leaving out the very important questions of what government does with tax dollars in the first place.
Did you not say this?
“It is high-time that taxes are applied to, and raised (following the American format), on the wealthy…”