What is the PNM's plan for the economy?

[Habit7]

Redman, Habit7, rfari and RASC ALL concede that the VAT reduction was done to benefit DOMA and the corporate fat cats in Trinidad

They ALL concede that it will ultimately hurt poor people and the country BUT - it is a PNM policy and election promise so they are fine with it.

I think calling them sheep is an insult to these noble animals

ingalook you drinking that mad juice?

[TriniAutoMart]

Anyone who owns more than Two properties should be Taxed in a much Higher bracket, say for a third property ownership- with current income-40% tax, 4th property ownership with income -55% tax and so forth, that for sure would encourage the glut of extra income properties being kept to maintain high real estate prices to lower.

Only the small man would be affected.
Big businesses would simply open holding companies for each property.

asked to pick up this bill via increased taxation, $6000 speeding tickets etc.

I don't see the issue with hefty fines for breaking the law.
Speeding has been the cause of many deaths on the nation's roads.

[ingalook]

No Tun Tun!

Is not that we talking bout boy... its the 2.5 - 3% REDUCTION in VAT

This would cost the country about $1.5 Billion A YEAR! That $1.5b goes largely into the pockets of retailers/merchants/DOMA

The citizenry would then be asked to pick up this bill via increased taxation, $6000 speeding tickets etc.

Ingalook ... are you saying that the merchant that is selling an item for 115 Vat Inclusive will keep his price at 115 but remit $12.5 vs the $15 and pocket the additional $2.5???

Pretty much... Though I used the example of $99.99 as the price, since I don't know when last I saw something selling for exactly $115.00

[Redman]

Why spend all that money to finish the Tarouba Stadium when the other stadia around the country are being under-utilized? To prove a point? To run racket?

When the PNM was in Opposition they were (and rightfully so) asking about a legislative agenda...what about now? There are so many legislative reforms that are needed yet all the present government seems to be doing in my opinion is laying blame and doing a poor job at making excuses for their seeming inability to run the country.

I was told Lara and Co are intending to use it as an academy and to host 20 20 cricket.

Private venture leveraging his name.

go figure

[De Dragon]

There are people who are involved in all these sectors, seek their views on the way in which these areas can be made to generate income for the country. Aggressively go after the tax evaders. How is joint venture more taxation? I mean get to the level where the State actually gets a share of the profits of the industry. If a company is paying you 25 % tax on profits, then there is 75 % left on the table. Also with regards to the RR, do you take loans that you don't need just because you can?
Listen, I don't have, or pretend to have the nuts and bolts for these ideas, they are not in my area of expertise, but I would think that is what a competent Government would facilitate through consultation and current expertise. That is what they get paid to do.

The way you criticize one would have thought you did know the nuts and bolts to be honest. It's like arguing without understanding sufficient facts.

When I asked you about JV it was also rhetorical as "getting more of the profits" is just more taxation. Why? The government doesn't do drilling with multinationals for example. The government taxes based on how much crude a company produced as well as taxing again (separately) the revenue stream of the said company. For the government to get more of the profits of the company the government would have to tax more e.g. Raise corporate tax from 35 to 40%.

In your scenario you said if they have 75% profit after paying tax there is more on the table implying you should just take it from said company by increasing their tax. Your proposal is the same thing you criticized initially: "just taxation".

I'll have to disagree with you on RR. At this point we don't know if RR is necessary and feasible or if it isn't so I can't agree with you asking about a loan in the context of it not being needed. Also consider the context of the new highway. A loan wasn't "needed" at the time. However look at where paying immediately out of pocket has left us rather than going thru a loan facility with proper checks and balances.

So to have an opinion or to make a suggestion you have to be a subject matter expert? Then the majority of the population should take a backstep while "experts" who have us in this current predicament be allowed to take us further into it? Also, I sense that you're having difficulty in understanding that if the Government partners with an industry, then the value chain is lengthened as co-owner, rather than simply increasing taxation which I never suggested increasing BTW.

[Allergic2BunnyEars]

There are people who are involved in all these sectors, seek their views on the way in which these areas can be made to generate income for the country. Aggressively go after the tax evaders. How is joint venture more taxation? I mean get to the level where the State actually gets a share of the profits of the industry. If a company is paying you 25 % tax on profits, then there is 75 % left on the table. Also with regards to the RR, do you take loans that you don't need just because you can?
Listen, I don't have, or pretend to have the nuts and bolts for these ideas, they are not in my area of expertise, but I would think that is what a competent Government would facilitate through consultation and current expertise. That is what they get paid to do.

The way you criticize one would have thought you did know the nuts and bolts to be honest. It's like arguing without understanding sufficient facts.

When I asked you about JV it was also rhetorical as "getting more of the profits" is just more taxation. Why? The government doesn't do drilling with multinationals for example. The government taxes based on how much crude a company produced as well as taxing again (separately) the revenue stream of the said company. For the government to get more of the profits of the company the government would have to tax more e.g. Raise corporate tax from 35 to 40%.

In your scenario you said if they have 75% profit after paying tax there is more on the table implying you should just take it from said company by increasing their tax. Your proposal is the same thing you criticized initially: "just taxation".

I'll have to disagree with you on RR. At this point we don't know if RR is necessary and feasible or if it isn't so I can't agree with you asking about a loan in the context of it not being needed. Also consider the context of the new highway. A loan wasn't "needed" at the time. However look at where paying immediately out of pocket has left us rather than going thru a loan facility with proper checks and balances.

So to have an opinion or to make a suggestion you have to be a subject matter expert? Then the majority of the population should take a backstep while "experts" who have us in this current predicament be allowed to take us further into it? Also, I sense that you're having difficulty in understanding that if the Government partners with an industry, then the value chain is lengthened as co-owner, rather than simply increasing taxation which I never suggested increasing BTW.

One can have an opinion on the wrong things if they don't know the details. It's like being upset with the government for not doing something without knowing how things work. No one will take you seriously if you don't at least familiarize yourself with how the basics work but want to vehemently criticize.

You may get the sense that I'm having difficulty understanding but you aren't even taking the time to try to understand why things are a certain way. JV sounds like a great idea but isn't as simple to implement nor is it guaranteed to gain profits for the government. There already are a few JV in the industry between the state and various companies.

And honestly yes, the majority of the population ought to take a step back in many things because if left up to the population we probably wouldn't have point Lisas estate for example and many other positive things we take for granted particularly now when things are looking dire.

[De Dragon]

There are people who are involved in all these sectors, seek their views on the way in which these areas can be made to generate income for the country. Aggressively go after the tax evaders. How is joint venture more taxation? I mean get to the level where the State actually gets a share of the profits of the industry. If a company is paying you 25 % tax on profits, then there is 75 % left on the table. Also with regards to the RR, do you take loans that you don't need just because you can?
Listen, I don't have, or pretend to have the nuts and bolts for these ideas, they are not in my area of expertise, but I would think that is what a competent Government would facilitate through consultation and current expertise. That is what they get paid to do.

The way you criticize one would have thought you did know the nuts and bolts to be honest. It's like arguing without understanding sufficient facts.

When I asked you about JV it was also rhetorical as "getting more of the profits" is just more taxation. Why? The government doesn't do drilling with multinationals for example. The government taxes based on how much crude a company produced as well as taxing again (separately) the revenue stream of the said company. For the government to get more of the profits of the company the government would have to tax more e.g. Raise corporate tax from 35 to 40%.

In your scenario you said if they have 75% profit after paying tax there is more on the table implying you should just take it from said company by increasing their tax. Your proposal is the same thing you criticized initially: "just taxation".

I'll have to disagree with you on RR. At this point we don't know if RR is necessary and feasible or if it isn't so I can't agree with you asking about a loan in the context of it not being needed. Also consider the context of the new highway. A loan wasn't "needed" at the time. However look at where paying immediately out of pocket has left us rather than going thru a loan facility with proper checks and balances.

So to have an opinion or to make a suggestion you have to be a subject matter expert? Then the majority of the population should take a backstep while "experts" who have us in this current predicament be allowed to take us further into it? Also, I sense that you're having difficulty in understanding that if the Government partners with an industry, then the value chain is lengthened as co-owner, rather than simply increasing taxation which I never suggested increasing BTW.

One can have an opinion on the wrong things if they don't know the details. It's like being upset with the government for not doing something without knowing how things work. No one will take you seriously if you don't at least familiarize yourself with how the basics work but want to vehemently criticize.

You may get the sense that I'm having difficulty understanding but you aren't even taking the time to try to understand why things are a certain way. JV sounds like a great idea but isn't as simple to implement nor is it guaranteed to gain profits for the government. There already are a few JV in the industry between the state and various companies.

And honestly yes, the majority of the population ought to take a step back in many things because if left up to the population we probably wouldn't have point Lisas estate for example and many other positive things we take for granted particularly now when things are looking dire.

I hope that is a typo, because everyone is entitled to an opinion of everything. The idea here being that those who know better can educate and enlighten through discussion. Also I never said that partnerships were an easy, or cheap thing to get into, but we have been in some of these industries for far too long to not be able to own, operate and manage our own wholly or majority owned enterprises.

[1UZFE]

Come nah fellas. Could we get back to the fact dat d pnm hav no idea wat dey doing n we are doomed.

[Redman]

No Tun Tun!

Is not that we talking bout boy... its the 2.5 - 3% REDUCTION in VAT

This would cost the country about $1.5 Billion A YEAR! That $1.5b goes largely into the pockets of retailers/merchants/DOMA

The citizenry would then be asked to pick up this bill via increased taxation, $6000 speeding tickets etc.

Ingalook ... are you saying that the merchant that is selling an item for 115 Vat Inclusive will keep his price at 115 but remit $12.5 vs the $15 and pocket the additional $2.5???

Pretty much... Though I used the example of $99.99 as the price, since I don't know when last I saw something selling for exactly $115.00

I thought the requirement is for the details on vat to be shown on the receipt?

[zoom rader]

Come nah fellas. Could we get back to the fact dat d pnm hav no idea wat dey doing n we are doomed.

PNM is bad for life and financial pocket

Citizens are being punished while PNM financiers are benefiting.

[Redman]

Come nah fellas. Could we get back to the fact dat d pnm hav no idea wat dey doing n we are doomed.

PNM is bad for life and financial pocket

Citizens are being punished while PNM financiers are benefiting.

Who say retirement getting close?
Membership has its privilege eh ZR?:D

[BRZ]

Their plan should be " steal Less than the previous administration" and take Wasa as a prime example of their new modus operandi , in dealing with investigations.

[zoom rader]

Come nah fellas. Could we get back to the fact dat d pnm hav no idea wat dey doing n we are doomed.

PNM is bad for life and financial pocket

Citizens are being punished while PNM financiers are benefiting.

Who say retirement getting close?
Membership has its privilege eh ZR?:D

Yeah I got a private retirement plan funded by myself. All folks should do the same

[Redman]

Come nah fellas. Could we get back to the fact dat d pnm hav no idea wat dey doing n we are doomed.

PNM is bad for life and financial pocket

Citizens are being punished while PNM financiers are benefiting.

Who say retirement getting close?
Membership has its privilege eh ZR?:D

Yeah I got a private retirement plan funded by myself. All folks should do the same

Jah bless de PNM education.

Their plan should be " steal Less than the previous administration" and take Wasa as a prime example of their new modus operandi , in dealing with investigations.

What kinda goal is that??

That would happen by default.

[zoom rader]

Come nah fellas. Could we get back to the fact dat d pnm hav no idea wat dey doing n we are doomed.

PNM is bad for life and financial pocket

Citizens are being punished while PNM financiers are benefiting.

Who say retirement getting close?
Membership has its privilege eh ZR?:D

Yeah I got a private retirement plan funded by myself. All folks should do the same

Jah bless de PNM education.

Their plan should be " steal Less than the previous administration" and take Wasa as a prime example of their new modus operandi , in dealing with investigations.

What kinda goal is that??

That would happen by default.

Sorry bro, I never had a PNM education.
I attended private secondary school.

Parents did not me with a PNM education or else I would be doing Cepep work by now

[1UZFE]

Thank d pnm for d increase in personal allowance. Now i hav a lil more morney to pay more VAT.
But wait!! i only wukkin for 5k ah month.
Fml. #poorpplproblems

[TurboSingh12]

Come nah fellas. Could we get back to the fact dat d pnm hav no idea wat dey doing n we are doomed.

PNM is bad for life and financial pocket

Citizens are being punished while PNM financiers are benefiting.

Exactly and making the country think we are in a recession.

[daas]

RED AND READY

[pete]

No Tun Tun!

Is not that we talking bout boy... its the 2.5 - 3% REDUCTION in VAT

This would cost the country about $1.5 Billion A YEAR! That $1.5b goes largely into the pockets of retailers/merchants/DOMA

The citizenry would then be asked to pick up this bill via increased taxation, $6000 speeding tickets etc.

Ingalook ... are you saying that the merchant that is selling an item for 115 Vat Inclusive will keep his price at 115 but remit $12.5 vs the $15 and pocket the additional $2.5???

Pretty much... Though I used the example of $99.99 as the price, since I don't know when last I saw something selling for exactly $115.00

I thought the requirement is for the details on vat to be shown on the receipt?

It could be on the bill but honestly I don't see anyone changing their prices. That coffee shop that sells a latte for $18 is going to continue selling at $18 or they going to charge $17.60 now?

In the US all the prices on the shelf are without tax so if the tax changes the companies don't change their markup without people noticing directly from the time they go into the stores.

Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk

[Redman]

So we are unchanged....seller sets the price....buy chooses IF to buy.

I dont see the big time conspiracy against the poor/people et al

[pete]

And I'm sure the businesses will say they're not reducing the price with the VAT as they need to cover the increases in green fund and business levy anyway.

This complaint is I guess as the reduction was touted by the government as a way to reduce cost of living when in fact it's just going to do the opposite. (As more items will now have VAT).

Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk

[ingalook]

So we are unchanged....seller sets the price....buy chooses IF to buy.

I dont see the big time conspiracy against the poor/people et al

Yes... that is true, but why is government making a change that will reduce VAT revenue PER YEAR by 1.5billion?

Especially when said change benefits mainly merchants

They are going to have to make up for that 7.5 billion (over 5 years) reduction in revenue from somewhere - are they going to get that from taxing business or the populous?

Even if they tax businesses an extra 7.5 billion - they will in turn raise their prices - THIS IS A NO WIN SITUATION FOR TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO!

If you can find an upside to this reduction - please, by all means elaborate

The government is creating a missive problem - WHERE NONE EXISTED! Why? For an election promise (made with shady motives)? Or is it that party financiers have to be repaid?

[Redman]

The upside is in what was said beyond your choice of focus.

That there is a stated intention to increase collections

So collecting a higher proportion of a 12.5% tax....is certainly better than leaving a 15% tax uncollected.

Isn't it a given that making compliance easier and cheaper improves collection?

Your PoV is valid but lopsided by not taking into account of the whole strategy.

[Trinispougla]

Ingalook get banned or what?He sent me a message on Sunday which was deleted by admin and i have not seen him since

[Redman]

Same here

[Country_Bookie]

The upside is in what was said beyond your choice of focus.

That there is a stated intention to increase collections

So collecting a higher proportion of a 12.5% tax....is certainly better than leaving a 15% tax uncollected.

Isn't it a given that making compliance easier and cheaper improves collection?

Your PoV is valid but lopsided by not taking into account of the whole strategy.

What mechanism to improve collections would they have been able to put in place between the budget and Jan 1, when the reduced VAT came into effect?
What incentive would businesses that do not currently collect the 15% VAT to now suddenly start collecting 12.5%?

Seems like the entire strategy was not well thought out. The govt should have given themselves a year to get the TTRA up and running which could've then been used to get greater collection of income tax as well as VAT. Then you should look at reductions in the rate, not before.

As it is, we have declining revenues from oil & gas, and much needed revenue from VAT & PAYE will also be decreased, making the deficit larger than it needed to be.

[Trinispougla]

Personally, I believe that this VAT thing is being rushed. I would have waited until the Revenue authority was up and running as well before I attempt the reduction on vat. But I understand the thinking. Firstly, most of the IMPORTED items that we buy at supermarkets were the items that vat was taken off of. e.g Yogurt, Sweetened Biscuits, meat soaked in brine, Vienna sausages etc(check de list). So the talk about paying back financiers is totally irrelevant. It is an established fact that our food import bill is way too high and no doubt contributes to the paucity of foreign exchange that is afflicting the country at this point. Hell, half of the ting we don't want finds markets elsewhere in the Caribbean(things that we produce). If you have local manufacturers producing these things, That money isn't going anywhere, it is in circulation in the country. This is why the farmers supported the reduction on VAT, because that levels the playing field. In addition, if vat is reduced on the NECESSARY things, then people will be more willing to spend their money. If more people are spending their money, economic activity will be stimulated because you have people spending and you also have competition between the suppliers. This is just ONE of the measures to stabilize the economy. Just like the housing scheme is one of many initiatives meant to stimulate economic activity. You cannot take any of them in isolation, which is what people seem to be doing, because then there is no plan, there is an initiative to stimulate economic growth which makes absolutely no sense.As i said though, bringing in the the initiative now is a bit reckless, the mechanisms must be in place before its attempted, not before. Remember too the government has a team of qualified economists advising them, they are not groping in the dark. Terrence Farrell is an internationally respected economist. As Roger Hosein said, that body has a critical role in saving us. When japan had it's industrial centers wiped out in the war, it was an advisory board that saved them

[ingalook]

[desifemlove]

if there is no efforts at diversification in two years time, and not just plans like she said, but actual contracts, factories, businesses, then Dr.R has failed. not saying i'd want UNC back, but if she has good plans that she WILL implement not jus talk, then maybe.

the world economy is not weak, as this oil price ting won't affect everybody. for some countries, it's a boon, like in the USA, China and most of Europe. http://www.bbc.com/news/business-29643612

As of NOW, Dr. R should be looking for joint ventures, assembly plants, and the like and by 2020 we should be seen buildings going up or at the least contracts signed. doing what she and UNC didnt do but had five years to do!

[racedriverpro]

how yuh does diss afros, but ah afro country flag is your avatar?[/quote]


To satisfy the mods. That's what's keeping him active atm.

Sent from my C6603 using Tapatalk