The IHT-thing was inspired, hats off to him on that.
But Gideon has now reverted to usual public schoolboy, EU-philiac mediocrity with this in today's FT, when he said "... he preferred to shift taxes from personal and corporate income to consumption and pollution"
Taxes on pollution, fair enoughski, but Gideon, you poorly educated and/or lying shithead, taxes on consumption are much the same as taxes on income ... but worse. One man's consumption is another man's income. At least with taxes on business profits, the producer can deduct his expenses, but with a tax on consumption, i.e. VAT which is a flat turnover tax*, there is no deduction for expenses so this puts businesses, well, out of business.
Hmm ... so why do we have VAT? Because of the EU! That's why no politician dares talk about reducing taxes on consumption. Because we can't! Well, not much anyway, from 17.5% to 15% is allowed by the Bureaucrats In Brussels.
* Any f***ing smartarse who says it isn't, because you can reclaim input VAT is a f***wit with knobs on. If the business has already paid the input VAT to his supplier, why should he pay it again to the taxman, bearing in mind that his supplier in turn has to paid over that VAT to the taxman. That's why they never did the obvious thing and exempt business-to-business supplies - it would make it bloody obvious that it is a turnover tax, even to the most uneconomically minded businessman.
"Yes, It Worked! I Got The Attention I Was Craving!"
59 minutes ago
0 comments:
Post a Comment