• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • European VAT Tax Evasion No Selling Point

    A big reason Europeans adopted a value-added tax (VAT) was to raise enormous sums to underwrite their social welfare state, but another was that the VAT was supposed to be much more difficult to evade than most other taxes. Europeans have a well-deserved reputation for tax evasion and so their governments need a tight, reliable, auditable, mighty revenue source and the VAT seemed to fit the bill. Well, maybe not.

    According to a recent study commissioned by the European Union, Member States lose more than $150 billion annually to fraud. This represents about 12 percent of total VAT revenues. This is a startling large figure when one considers the decades of experience Europeans have in auditing and enforcement of their VATs.

    The design of the VAT imposes enormous paperwork burdens on businesses specifically to facilitate auditing and enforcement. Every business levies VAT on its sales, but it also pays VAT on its purchases. It then tallies up the VAT paid as shown on its purchase invoices and subtracts the total from VAT owed on its own sales; hence the name the “credit-invoice VAT”. The benefit that is supposed to flow from this crediting mechanism is a paper trail to prevent evasion. A 12 percent evasion rate suggests it’s not worth the effort.

    By way of comparison, the federal income tax raised $2.155 trillion in 2005. It was supposed to raise $2.445 trillion. The difference of $290 billion is called the “net tax gap” as estimated by the Treasury Department and represents just under 12 percent of total collections. For all its complications and flaws, the clumsy and inefficient federal income tax administered by the IRS does about as well as the vaunted VAT. The VAT has few virtues. It now has one less.

    Posted in Economics [slideshow_deploy]

    3 Responses to European VAT Tax Evasion No Selling Point

    1. J.C. Hughes, Texas says:

      I strongly believe the 16th Amendment should be repealed as it was constitutionally erroneous as is Obamacare. A consumer based tax would be a more preferable approach regardless of JD's findings. This said, my personal thought is states, not individuals, should be assessed federal taxes to cover items like defense and other needs promoting the common welfare of independent states. The latter would be responsible for addressing domestic services, to include healthcare, as desired by their respective residents. What I'm discussing is federalism as envisioned by our nation's founders.

    2. terry l rogers says:

      I would like to comment because being an exmilitary veteran I truly believe that if we don't secure our borders now completely I am so affraid our freedom is in jeopardy.

      I remember when I was eighteen my family moved to San Diego, CA.. Of course I was off to a career of my own by joining the military. I did this because I was so proud of my mother and father who both serviced time in WWII.

      I have two bothers and a sister and when I joined the Navy back when I was very proud to show my country that freedom can't just be taken over or handed to an enemy so we would never be able to make another discission of what we do in our lives and dictate how we live.

      I wish to thank the military for my time I served and today even though I am totally disabled both mentally and physically I will never forget how proud I was to be able to thank this great country I was born and raised in.

      Sincerely,

      ExNavy Terry L. Rogers (BATIZ)

    3. Pingback: » Financial News Update – 05/04/10 NoisyRoom.net: The Progressive Hunter

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×