“The Prime Minister has ordered that all hurdles to Federal Board of Revenue reforms be removed.”
“He can order all he wants, but…”
“Hey, if you are referring to his powers as enshrined in the constitution then stop right there.”
“No, no and again no. Why do you always take what I say in a way that reflects negatively on our system.”
“Referring to the powers of a PM as enshrined in the constitution reflects negatively on our system!?”
“I know well what you meant, so just stop it. A system that works is worth two in the bush that never worked, is what I say.”
“That makes sense in a way — the expression is a bird in hand is worth two in the bush. I am just curious: did you mean two birds, and if so which birds?”
“No I did not mean birds, I meant a system in place is worth an ideal system that remains in the bush and if with your limited IQ you must understand that…”
“Yes I do anyway going back to PM’s order to remove hurdles to FBR’s reforms, I reckon that unless the FBR is willing to undertake massive reforms, structural reforms, nothing will change – and by structural reforms I am referring to substantive changes or more precisely a shift from the 75 to 80 percent reliance on indirect taxes as remains evident today, whose incidence on the poor is greater than on the rich, to taxing the influential and the…”
“The FBR is going after sales tax evasion by large companies and…”
“Sales tax is also an indirect tax and it’s paid for by the end consumer, so if the FBR succeeds in ensuring that all due sales tax is collected as imposed by the FBR then two negative elements need to be highlighted. First that this would fuel inflation considerably which would further raise the poverty levels that today stand at 44.2 percent and second and equally importantly this indicates that income tax collections from those who are not salaried as their tax is cut at source…”
“Yeah, yeah, yeah.”
“And that means?”
“That means move on, the FBR under its chairman continues to focus on total collections as opposed to actual reforms and…”
“That’s against the PM’s directive, isn’t it? Off with the Chairman I say and…”
“Nah.”
“Nah what: that the PM’s directive has not been flouted because he too is focused on total collections or that the Chairman is not likely to be removed because…”
“Eureka — I begin to see some glimmer of hope in your ability to understand the ground realities.”
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Comments
Comments are closed for this article.