[ican'tbelieveit]

Repeal this law or what?

[Willie Green]

July 1 is 'VAT Day'

[Principled]

Just eliminate the income tax and go to a national retail sales tax. That would eliminate this issue entirely.

[ewing]

Boo-Hoo, the WTO can take its request and stuff it..

[DuncanWaring]

How about "United States gives WTO until Dec. 27 to take a hike..."?

[DoughtyOne]

I'd like to know one reason why the injured companies can't obtain compensation for the subtrifuge of their foreign competitors. This is madening!

The foreign competitors dump product, US companies are adversely affect. The foreign firm is fined. The US companies should be compensated. EOS

This just doesn't make sense.

I they don't like what they consider unfair advantage given to the company they tried to drive out of business by using unfair practices, they don't implement those unfair practices in the first place.

Now the offending companies basicly have an insurance policy that protects them from using unfair practices to run US business out of business.

If they calculate they can afford to do so, they implement the illegal practices, drive the US business under, pay the fine, go on with a lock on the market and raise their prices since they've killed competition.

It's this irrational mindset in international relations that has always made me object to the WTO. Europe dominates, we eat week old cake on every issue.

Isn't it nice to see Mexico is a part of this sheist!

[Arkinsaw]

The WTO is the EU's "sabotage the US" arm.

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

........

[sixmil]

Interesting, I thought all the free traitors believed that it doesn't matter whether foreign companies are dumping products; "We're getting cheaper goods, and they are losing money!". Kind of reminds me how they insist that 'free' trade does not cost jobs, yet they are willing to pay for retraining when workers' jobs are sent overseas. When will the free traitors get honest with themselves?

[MississippiMan]

The core issue here, as far as I'm concerned, is sovereignty. They're demanding that our elected officials, who are supposed to represent the voters' will, take certain action at the demand of foreign countries. Sickening that we're in a position that such a thing could even be taken seriously IMO.

MM

[RobbyS]

As if these countries didn't subsidize these exporters.

[Redbob]

Let's go back to the government did before income taxes: then ALL taxes would be import duties.

[Action-America]

This points out the idiocy of our lawmakers (on both sides of the aisle).

Their continued support of an income tax system that taxes the worldwide profits of its companies (and citizens) is driving US companies (and citizens) offshore at an alarming rate.  So, instead of changing the tax system that is causing the problem, they try to punish offshore companies, who don't suffer under that onerous worldwide taxation burden, for being able to sell their products for less than the US companies.  What's wrong with this picture?

Let's see.

• Our lawmakers create a condition in which our companies can't compete.
• Our tax handicapped companies respond by moving offshore.
• Our lawmakers fine foreign companies that they made more competitive, for being more competitive.
• Then they give the proceeds of those fines to the US companies, who pay the US taxes that caused the whole problem, in the first place.

Sounds like a sly scheme to apply the US worldwide tax to foreign owned corporations, as well as US corporations.  Is it any wonder why the rest of the developed world is upset?

Of course, this isn't the first time that the US government has ignored foreign sovereignty and attempted to levy taxes on foreign entities.  In 1996, Section 877 of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), which was passed by Congress and signed into law by klinton, claimed the right of the US to tax former US citizens for 10 years after they had renounced their US citizenship and were taxpaying citizens of another country.

If the US government were to go to a National Retail Sales Tax, it would not only keep US companies in the US, but would attract major investment in the US, by foreign companies, without attacking those foreign companies and render such sovereignty ignoring laws as HIPAA Sec. 877 meaningless.  It seems like such a simple solution, except for one thing.  The adoption of a NRST would mean a significant loss in the massive amount power over the taxpayers, that an income based tax gives our lawmakers, so you can expect our power-crazed lawmakers (on both sides of the aisle) to fight it all the way.

However, until that happens, we can expect even more of these oversteps by Dubya and Congress and to see the flow of expatriation of US companies and wealthy citizens to increase to a rush for cover by those companies and citizens, that will decimate our tax base, investment base and job market.  But, why should our lawmakers care?  They've got their power.