fare@.ucalgary.ca (Michael David Farebrother) (08/22/89)
In article <380@torsqnt.UUCP> david@torsqnt.UUCP (David Haynes) writes: > The small time barterer was not seen as a problem >but a number of large corporations were also in the bartering business. >"you send a computer to our loading docks and we'll send two photocopiers >to yours." > >In a broad sense, the GST could be made to cover this since the tax is >on Goods and Services not the exchange of money. If the Government auditors >could show proof of a barter trade, it's possible that they could ask >for the GST on it. > >David Haynes Sequent Computer Systems (Canada) Ltd. But what about this argument? I buy 2 computers from SBCC (Some Big Computer Co.) for $16000, paying my 9 %. U. buys a photocopier from BSCC (Bob's Small Copier Co.) for $15000, paying their 9 %. I "sell" my computers to U, U sells their photocopier to I. Case 1: Selling price, computers: 2 @ $0.00 Selling price, copier: 1 @ 0.00 Is not the GST paid $0.00 in both cases (9%) ? Of course, I get burned, because I paid 9% on an extra $1000 originally, and I lose $1000 on the deal, but it's still better than paying 9% of $15000. (Especially if I don't need the computers.) Case 2: Selling price, computers: 2 @ $7500 Selling price, copier: 1 @ $15000 In this case, I assume that the GST is 9% of $15000, but both I and U recover our 9% of the original purchase price (because we get that back from the gov.) from the tax. Now I still get the short end, but that's no problem if I assume that the computers are worth < ~$14000. Anything wrong with my argument? I am an engineering student, not a Law student, but from the previous posted articles... Mycroft Farebrother.