Marketplace
Anyone see news tonight am i right that government is pushing ahead with the 10% gst.
I thought it was forgotten about?
On what i thought it said after 1st just they are trying to force ebay.com,amazon.com all big retailers your all familiar with.
Ebay has or is protesting against it by not allowing to buy from overseas.
And other companies may follow suit. So does this mean if ebay and others do this we will not be able to buy from other ebay sites or amazon or other various retailers online.
I hate the fact paying extra 10% on stuff ordered but to stop us buying internationlly will be crap.
I often buy from overseas ebay sites and amazon sites and most items i buy are cheaper or are a better version than found here.
If retailers had the same choice of items and same prices then great but they don't.
What's your thoughts on this.
@try2bhelpful:
"The goods are coming into the country - why shouldn't they be able to tax them?"
Barbecue they have no right to tax them.
"You really think that people like Amazon are actually paying their fair share of tax dollars? "
I wouldn't know, rich people and corporations never seem to pay a 'fair share' of tax (whatever that means). But seeing how the government wastes and abuses most of the tax they do grab for the the people that earn it then I wouldn't begrudge anyone who can legally keep hold of some their hard earned money, especially when the government is a hindrance more than a help in making that money anyway. And I'm not referring to essential services like roads, schools and hospitals etc either. :) Chipping in for those kinds of things is fair enough.
"Can you please show me the links that show how reducing taxes increases revenue to the government; I really would be interested in seeing that?"
You are looking for 'The Laffer Curve', example here: https://taxfoundation.org/does-lowering-taxes-increase-gover…
"The idea that lowering taxes can raise revenue, or that the tax cuts “pay for themselves” as some say, is not new; it’s been around since at least the 1980s, and it’s a fundamental tenet of supply-side economics. The argument is that it’s possible for tax rates to be so high (and therefore such a burden on the economy) that lowering them allows the economy (and the tax base) to grow fast enough that the extra revenue from the larger base is more than the lost revenue from the lower tax rate. During the Nixon administration, the economist Arthur Laffer, who was later a member of Reagan’s Economic Policy Advisory Board, created an illustration now known as the “Laffer Curve” Hardly anyone disputes the basic concept shown here. At a tax rate of 0%, the government gets no revenue. It can increase revenue by increasing tax rates, up to a certain point, called the “revenue maximizing point” (labeled t* here) beyond which increasing tax rates any further damages the economy enough to cause revenue to go down, all the way back to zero at a rate of 100% (where the government takes everything you make, eliminating your incentive to work at all.)"
More at the link.