Flat Tax System Imposed On Iraq

Washington Post ^ | 11/02/03 | Dana Milbank and Walter Pincus

[Pokey78]

U.S. Administrator Orders 15% Rate

The flat tax, long a dream of economic conservatives, is finally getting its day -- not in the United States, but in Iraq.

It took L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. administrator in Baghdad, no more than a stroke of the pen Sept. 15 to accomplish what eluded the likes of publisher Steve Forbes, former representative Jack Kemp (R-N.Y.), former senator Phil Gramm (R-Tex.) and former representative Richard K. Armey (R-Tex.) over the course of a decade and two presidential campaigns.

"The highest individual and corporate income tax rates for 2004 and subsequent years shall not exceed 15 percent," Bremer wrote in Coalition Provisional Authority Order Number 37, "Tax Strategy for 2003," issued last month.

Voila, Iraq has a flat tax, and the 15 percent rate is even lower than Forbes (17 percent) and Gramm (16 percent) favored for the United States. And, unless a future Iraqi government rescinds it, the flat tax will remain long after the Americans have left.

[nmh]

"Not to use it though- to wipe it clean. You see, if you could see clearly, you would know that WE ALREADY HAVE A VAT."

LOL! Clearly you have no idea of what you speak. Educate yourself on what the V.A.T. is ten you will not look so foolish.

[Libloather]

The flat tax, long a dream of economic conservatives, is finally getting its day -- not in the United States, but in Iraq.

If I had a cow now, will it hurt more than if I have it later?

[Principled]

Sorry, nmh. The characteristics of our graduated income tax system include those characteristics that add tax costs at every stage of production.

That very characteristic is the definition of VAT (Value Added Tax).

The fact that it is called something else by so many for so long is an indication that the propoganda is effective.

That it would fool you is an indication of the power of propoganda.

Please do some reading; as it is, you're part of the problem. I'd like you to be part of the solution. You are unwittingly part of the masses being fooled.

Our current system is a VAT. VATs are bad. It would be good to get away from any kind of VAT. The nrst (as proposed in H.R. 25 is the polar opposite of a VAT.

Why not take time to find out what you're talking about instead of slinging insults to make yourself feel smart?

[nmh]

"Sorry, nmh. The characteristics of our graduated income tax system include those characteristics that add tax costs at every stage of production."

By no stretch of the imagination is OUR tax the same as the V.A.T.. It highlights that you do not know what you are talking about.

The rest of your answer is chock full of garbage and insulting. I do not feel compelled to respond to your silly insults. Go waste someone else time with your nonsense.

[Principled]

I'm sorry you felt insulted. It was not my intent.

Regarding the subject; I do assert that our graduated income tax system adds tax costs at every stage of production.

A VAT is a tax that increases at every stage of production that "adds value", which is every stage- else it wouldn't be a stage.

I further assert that this characteristic requires that our graduated income tax be labeled "VAT", because our system adds tax costs at every stage of production.

Don't feel compelled to run off or to answer- but if you disagree with any of this, fine! Why not tell me what you disagree with AND WHY?

I have said clearly why I believe our system is a VAT. You have only said that it isn't - but haven't said why you believe such. In the absence of a reasoned reply, I am left wondering if you know what a VAT is.

I am interested in learning your point of view.

Now, if you could also tell me specifically what was "garbage" AND WHY, I would appreciate it. This phrase indicates that you believe there is something untrue in the post...what was it?

I can't do anything about how you "feel" about a post. I can only assert that no offense was intended.