Reuters somehow can't recognize a 100% tax rate even when it is right under their noses in their own article. Reporter Marc Frank apparently thinks that going to a 35% tax rate would somehow be more of a burden for Cubans than their current tax rate which is 100%. Frank even wrote about the 100% tax rate but absurdly didn't recognize the fact that total confiscation of revenue is the same thing:
Under the old system, large and small state-run companies, which accounted for more than 90 percent of economic activity, simply handed over all their revenues to the government, which then allocated resources to them.
Talk radio host Kevin McCullough also noted the bizarre reasoning in the Reuters story:
So when the state controlled industry, businesses endured a 100% tax rate, and the nation never rose to prosperity, never saw an increase in take home pay, never really ever saw a modern way of life take hold.
Having run out of money, the government is now releasing those holding and the 100% tax rates:
...the writer of the piece seems to be reacting to all of this as some sort of new oppression that will strap the Cuban people with greater burdens.
Here's hoping that Reuters reporter Frank finally gets a clue and realizes that total confiscation of revenue is the same thing as a 100% tax rate. Or what did that call it at your former employer, People's Daily World, Mr. Frank?
