Fairly obviously, if the customer has to worry about whether his vendor is paying VAT in order to select the vendor, or otherwise get in trouble with the law, he has responsibility that extends beyond paying the bill and letting the vendor deal with his own tax obligation. It is a completely dumb and demotivating system.
It is interesting to note that the US is roughly 80% higher in its level of individual charitable donation as a fraction of GDP than any other country, and that the highest EU country is Italy, in ninth place. You probably noticed that Sweden is in fourteenth place, but I couldn’t say if that reflects the generosity of the Swedish or not, having never been there and being increasingly unlikely to ever do so.
I’d advise you to leave criticism of my personal charitable contributions etc alone, given that you lack any data whatsoever and that I’m not going to give you any 
You can be sure however that I’m very glad I’m not delegating any such thing to government and pointing ringers at others, versus being directly responsible.
Silvaire wrote:
I’d advise you to leave criticism of my personal charitable contributions etc alone, given that you lack any data whatsoever and that I’m not going to give you any
I’m not talking about your charitable contributions of which I indeed know nothing. I’m talking about what I do know of what you have written both in this thread and in the Covid-19 discussion.
We are discussing politics and government here. You seem to me unable to escape the paradigm that government is responsible for managing individual lives, and all societal functions. My view in relation to Covid and other things is that government in many nations is vastly overstepping its proper role within society, that solidarity and compassion as human attributes are not well suited for delegation to government, and that it is better and more effective for individuals to be responsible for themselves and their relationships to other people. Government is a relatively small, inflexible, slow to react and generally inept part of society.
There are plenty of forms of taxation, but none as dumb and demotivating as VAT.
God help us if we fall to thinking of government as the conductor of societies orchestra, versus a provider of services to society, limited properly in accordance with a constitution. Government is the provider of last resort where nobody else more competent can do it, a necessary evil. The FAA is a good example, they do the job better than any other comparable agency worldwide, and within a constitutionally valid role, but that doesn’t mean they are wonderful on an absolute scale.
Can the constant slagging-off of America end, please
Some of the best contributors on EuroGA of actually useful and relevant aviation content (not the constant left wing political drivel without posting something relevant to GA) are in the US.
The last post with this sarcastic anti-US drivel has been deleted whole. I can’t be bothered to edit posts, and in any case normally don’t because it usually changes the meaning.
If somebody slagged-off [insert your favourite big old mainland European country] we would have WW3 here and a mass exodus.
You can also add tax relief to club members for loans made to buy a plane..
Silvaire wrote:
Fairly obviously, if the customer has to worry about whether his vendor is paying VAT in order to select the vendor, or otherwise get in trouble with the law, he has responsibility that extends beyond paying the bill and letting the vendor deal with his own tax obligation. It is a completely dumb and demotivating system.
I can’t speak to the situation in other European countries, but this certainly isn’t the case in the UK.
You can pay someone via any means you like and there’s no requirement to satisfy yourself that they’re above board, paying VAT (or other tax) or anything like that. Quite simply you pay them, and if they are VAT registered they are supposed to pass on part of the sales price in VAT to the government. Whether they do so or not is up to them and none of your business as a customer.
When it comes to hiring a contractor, the only reason I’m looking for any sort of professional qualifications, accreditation or insurance provision is so that, in the event of a complete disaster, there is someone or some entity worth taking to court for redress. It’s nothing to do with the likely quality of the work, which I judge for myself based on my assessment of the person and their attitude. Equally I judge the safety of a light aircraft based on what I see with my own eyes and my judgement of those engaged in its operation and maintenance. Knowing what I do about our regulatory system, the paperwork issued by the authorities declaring the aircraft airworthy has zero value for me.
Malibuflyer wrote:
So what would be a better and motivating system to create some kind of evidence that a transaction has happened and therefore that the government has a chance to collect the applicable taxes
I believe the inference, which I agree with, is that taxing economic activity at the point it happens is a relatively dumb idea because it acts as a disincentive to such activity. The argument is not for a different system of monitoring the transaction so that tax can be collected, it’s for not taxing it in the first place.
Peter wrote:
Can the constant slagging-off of America end, please
If the constant slagging off of Europe, China and all other countries could end as well, please!
Graham wrote:
is that taxing economic activity at the point it happens is a relatively dumb idea because it acts as a disincentive to such activity
Even theoretically there’s only two possibilities for any government to put taxes on: Either on Assets that stay or on assets that move.
Taxation on assets that stay is typically the more difficult one because you have all sorts of valuation challenges plus the challenge that many assets are not divisible by nature and therefore questions can arise on what to pay the tax from.
Taxation on assets that move (which by definition is always “economic activity”) is the predominant and in my view the much less dumb way to do it. History shows that it is not the case that such taxation lead to people shutting down economic activity.
VAT is completely stupid mainly because the bureaucracy imposed on labor charges, and the associated barrier to starting a business, suppresses initiative and individual entrepreneurship – which is the starting point of all productive businesses. It is not stupid because it is a tax on trade versus assets held.
