the case of missing taxes
most strikes the reader of Colombian press is the audacity with which it lies, as if those who do feel such profound contempt for readers who do not mind being discovered forcing absurd interpretations, providing data on all silencing invented and the real. And that's like a bombing, every week there is a new theme and soon hundreds of columns amplified and participating in forums, where what comes out the least informed believe blindly. Did he have any discussion about it? No, critical analysis is so foreign to the slopes of the Colombian and science.
One of the favorite themes lately is that of tax exemptions: in the minds of Most people are always present suspicion that someone is cheating so that things are not perfect, which is shown watching the great possessions of others and scarcity around him one. Why is the president, said Christian, divided their estates among the poor, as suggested Professor Moncayo? Because it is always part of the rich and for that I forgive taxes, to become richer while the poor are getting poorer. Who has lived long enough concludes that in the early centuries lived a sinful opulence, because despite many decades one has seen the poor poorer no one doubts that each days are over.
That is the material from operating thinkers as the dean of the Faculty of Economics at the Universidad Jorge Tadeo Lozano, Kamanovitz Solomon, author of numerous works on the Colombian economy. In a recent column dedicated to family businesses presidential !, The renowned economist deals with tax exemptions:
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Tea Ok While Fasting For Blood Test
So, the sources of prosperity of the children of President are the ability to generate government favors certain enterprises and transfer of public assets (more precisely of tax collection) to the free zones Portable. The Government is clear from tax capacity, even in times of crisis, for the achievement of maintaining investor confidence supposedly the lucky few.
These benefits are substantial business base of the dolphins and the increase in the contracts of the companies in which they participate. It is also exemptions that damage the public property for private companies , still caught some by the undue influence of the president's sons. What has not satisfied the government for all these tax advantages granted amounted to $ 5.8 billion a year, as well as the injured parafiscal employment. And if that much money, why not share tris in a family?
respect of investments and earnings of the children of the president, much has been written and I have nothing to add to those reported by Saul Hernández . What is interesting is the construction of plunder of public resources from rhetorical fallacies. Rigorously, Kalmanovitz is instilling in the reader's consciousness certain that you are committing a huge embezzlement by encouraging the creation of free zones by lowering taxes. The technical language is just euphemistic: nothing changes the meaning of "embezzlement" if we speak of "transfer of public assets." Rather, does change: the graft is a legal concept, therefore no one could accuse Kalmanovitz slander because he said "transfer of public assets." In the next paragraph repeats the pearl, and even offers a number of disappointed by the president, his sons and their friends in business.
would be exhausting, and source of an article even longer list the amount of writing in the press and dedicated to protest for the same reason. Let me quote just one of the most eloquent, characteristic of the kind of mentality that flatter the columnists. Is a column of Francisco Leal Buitrago , one of those thinkers who would lead to steady the ship of state if they finally reach a negotiated political solution of the social and armed conflict, a man whose virtues are demonstrated by its long career of service to the University:
investor confidence and social responsibility from tricks like tax exemption to the rich , free zones for private gain and management of the Ministry of (un) Social Protection.
The depth of thought of this sage is shown by findings such as the Ministry of (un) Protection. But the interesting thing in any situation not what part of the special outside but what is common and shared by most people. What is the exemption of taxes for the rich? The associated tax cuts for investors, within which is included in free zones. You still have to explain that investments are made "for private gain? Is that most readers have been through college (but that should not be understood as most of the graduates read the press, which is far from the case). In college have learned to distinguish the public benefit of private profit and to consider any particular prosperity as a theft to the public interest.
But back to the main issue of blatant lies in the press, compounded by the fact that Mr. Kalmanovitz is Dean of Faculty of Economics, the matter of benevolence with certain investment tax has many washers and difficult to evaluate (published about former Minister Alberto Carrasquilla an article in El Espectador, article expanded into a discussion on Blog Alejandro Gaviria), but the results he is Kalmanovitz simply the result of bad faith. If a shopkeeper
applies a margin of 40% of the purchase price will note that standard in assessing sales in the month, but if the last day he decides he needs money and does a promotion with only 20%, this margin is profit. If sales that day are much higher than the other days, your earnings increase. How would understand that the member of the shopkeeper were to claim the 20% margin that stopped charging? A thorough investigation can determine whether that day anyway, or increase sales, by contrast, would have been much higher without any special circumstances. Bad faith would be considered "losses" what is left of winning.
I am convinced that tax cuts for free zones result in higher collection, because I believe that most investments would not have occurred without these advantages. But it is only an opinion without evidence: Kalmanovitz is a blatant lie, part of the assumption that all investments have taken place, which is absurd and just shows the kind of education provided at their university.
But the question has many washers. Teachers and columnists rummage through a strong sense of the readers, that lower taxes "the rich" is immoral. The dubious role of the state as an agent of justice is taken for granted, while the question of the need for resources to finance the activity production is evaded. While most countries, especially developed ones, compete to attract investment and be pleasant for the rich in Colombia trying to scare them away, no doubt because his example and economic development would lose control to the caste of doctors:
waiver policy and free trade zones deserves our support: beyond the question of the collection, which is all that matters to people like Kalmanovitz, such exemptions favoring the creation of the business, which is the basis for development. Many may believe they would build the same number of hotels with high taxes with very low taxes, but the reason not tolerate such an assumption. How important is that there hotels? This is a high risk investment in a country very discredited by the violence, but it is related to one of the industries that provide resources to countries with attractive landscapes.
What everyone needs to decide is whether to live in a prosperous country full of hotels and industries, or one in which Chavez manage royalties from commodities taking every alms to force the submission of the henchmen. In the first case the critical point is to attract investment and build infrastructure. And maybe what it takes to be a fiscal policy effectively levied all the rich and not only those who produce and risk. The State may suffer a more severe deprivation and more burdensome to the interests of citizens by the 25% exemption from tax enjoyed by Kalmanovitz and most of those who jalean that benevolence practiced with those who build factories and hotels.
By Jaime Ruiz. Atrabilioso columnist.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment