I think this is an excellent policy, and a long time coming. This is done overseas with good effect. While I don’t think it’s a magic bullet, it is definitely a step in the right direction.
I think this is an excellent policy, and a long time coming. This is done overseas with good effect. While I don’t think it’s a magic bullet, it is definitely a step in the right direction.
Why does that specific example need to be able to happen here in order for it to be relevant though? Do you not understand the concept of an example?
Why does that specific example mean that something equally as ‘bad’ will happen here. Do you not understand the concept of different implementations of policy?
It doesn’t it’s an example of what could happen
Genuinely thick, aren’t you?
Sure, anything could happen. But that doesn’t mean it will. Are we to give up on any progress if there is any risk of slight problems?
There is an absolute certainty this will result in extra admin costs as well.
And I disagree with the certainty. Oh look, we are at an impasse.
Do you genuinely believe this is will result in no additional costs to the administration of the GST scheme?
I think that it doesn’t need to, and that the benefits outweigh the downsides even if it does. I also think zero-rating certain foods has other benefits beyond money, and this should be taken into account.
How? How could you possibly make these changes without adding cost to the administration of the GST scheme?