Join the new world

Import Tax Discussion for iron and wood.
铁/木进口税讨论：全球竞争低 价 市场？ 还是高关税 低效率产业？

Discussion between high import tax or low import tax on inefficient-productive iron and wood will not end.

As we all know, we have no high iron regions and no high wood regions, but we have medium iron regions and medium wood regions. There always are debates on we should set a high import tax or low import tax on iron and wood. Whether or not we should develop medium resource regions?
That's a complicated problem. Each side has its supporters.
We should make it clear each side's views and then make judgement.

Supporters on Low Import Tax for iron and woo😛
Someone argues that we should not develop medium resource regions.
Firstly, medium resource region means low productive efficiency on per worker's productivity. If we let works work in medium resource regions, it is a waste in production power. If you locate our limited workers on high resource regions or other industry, they can produce more value for society.
In this view, people discourage company owners to open raw materiel company in non-high resource regions and discourage workers work in. Though these local iron and wood companies pay more taxes to our country, but they make production price higher, and make all citizens have to consume high price production.

Secondly, and local manufacturing companies owners won't buy local high price raw material, as businessman they will fly to other high resource country to seek cheapest price raw material productions.
So the result is a raw material company's production will not be bought by manufacturing companies owners whatever we have a low or high import tax, only if their cost and price is higher than world average cost and price standard.

Thirdly, under Low import tax, many eChina citizens' organisations fly abroad to high iron and wood regions to open companies and pay eChina 20 Glod for Licence to export productions back into eChina.

Fourthly, people say more tax means nothing to common citizens. The important issue is to make citizens rich. If low import tax can bring us low price production and make workers rich, we surely welcome it.

Supporters on High Import Tax for iron and woo😛
Local companies pay tax to eChina.
When wars occur, it's necessary to own local industry.
Local companies' owners' passion should be protected.
Local companies provide job positions.
Low import tax will kill local iron and wood companies.
My friend Aamto mentioned me that he observed local Q2 iron market. He noted that in Q2 iron ore market, there is a company from Greece providing cheap iron ore (I do not know if or not it is run by a eChina player's organisation who went to Greece opened business then again export to eChina), while eChina local companies are apparently unable to compete on price. He hopes to raise the import tax. eChina-based companies pay taxes to eChina, while the eGreek-based company to the eGreek. His opinion is that a certain representative.

I think it will still be in the long term to discuss for citizens and legislators to get a common agreement.

High import tax: Both eChina player or other eCountries' players overseas companies will not pay 20Glod for licence and to import important resources. Smuggling and black-market take place of import. We can not force every manufacturing company owner to buy high price materiel in local market.

Low import tax: Both eChina player or other eCountries' players overseas companies would like to pay 20Glod for licence and to import important resources. Businessmen can buy global produced
cheap material in local market.

What kind of tax we need?

Arguments will continue, because any side have a vested interest. If you own a overseas company and is importing iron and wood to eChina, you must support low import tax. If you own a local company, you must support high import tax. Any change of economic policy will has new beneficiaries and new victims of the change.

Is there a compromise could be to both sides to provide opportunities? Of course, two sides and both declared they are accounted for in the national interests. We should not ignore voice from both side.

Welcome to post your views.


关于非自高产资源的低关税 还是高关税 收到 Aamto 一封来信供讨论

关于铁矿石的中国市场, 他注意到市场上 Q2 铁矿石有一家来自希腊的公 司在提供便宜的铁矿石 (我不知道这个是不是 eChina 玩家去希腊开了然后又来中 国出口) , 而中国的铁矿石公司则显然 在价格上无法与之竞争。 他希望提高进口税。 中国公司向中国 Gover.nment 交税, 而希腊公司向希腊 Gover.nment 交税。 他的这个意见也是有一定代 表性的。 但是也牵扯到很多问题。

一方面, 从国家产业发展和税收角度 去看, 支持国内公司发展是有道理 的, 即使它是在非高资源地区的 低效率公司。
另一方面, 一些 eChina 玩家也确实正在国外高资源 地区开公司并且向中国出口 便宜的资源, 当然国家会损失一些税收。

我想这个问题在长期内仍然 会成为国民和议员讨论的一 个关键点。

高关税, 无论是 eChina 玩家还是其他 eCountry 玩家的外国公司就没有积极 性向国内出口资源, 但玩家在国内可能会设置低 效率公司, 只要能给他提供平均利润。
低关税, 无论是 eChina 玩家还是其他 eCountry 玩家的外国公司都有积极性 向国内出口资源, 比如铁矿、 木材、 钻石这些非自产高效率资源 , 但本国的此类公司就不可能 设立。

问题是国内的低效率公司, 即使生产了产品, 价格也肯定是比国际平均价 格高的, 有人问, 那些高价原材料真的有人买 么？ 国内开制造业的老板, 基本都会把组织号飞到国外 去买低价原材料的。

争论会持续, 因为任何一方都有既得利益 者, 低关税下的外国公司持有者 会希望国家可以支持其以稍 高利润得到购买出口许可证 的回报 (毕竟花了 20G 来向国内出口产品) , 而本地公司则会抗议。 高关税下本地公司会高兴起 来, 但是海外公司的产品输入就 受到了打击。

至于 Aamto 提到的问题, 他关注的只是 Q2 铁市场上两家公司之间的竞 争, 目前代表性还不是很大, 但是以后这个问题的争论迟 早会扩大。 任何政策都有既得利益者和 利益受损者, 任何政策的改变又会有新的 受益人和新的受损害者。 所以利益代表的各方都会在 此问题上有自己的看法。

如果经济研究者们能从国家 层面详细计算一下得失, 给更多人一个能得到广泛认 同的解释是比较好的。 Aamto 站在国内低效率资源公司的 代表的立场上, 会提出这个问题, 我想其他人如果站在正在向 中国出口产品的国外高效率 公司的代表的立场上, 会有不同观点。

当然双方又都是占在国家利 益和全民利益的立场上来讲 话的, 高关税增加国家税收, 保护了个别本土商人；低关 税税收便宜了其他国家和个 别在外开公司者, 但是在中国市场上增加了便 宜的商品, 藏富于民。 哪一种更有利于国家整体？ (似乎取决于在外开公司者 多, 还是在本土开公司者多, 但又没那么简单下判断。 ) 我想目前支持低关税的还是 会多一些。

是否有一种折中方案, 可以给双方都提供机会呢？ 适当的关税, 将高资源外国公司的价格和 低资源国内公司的价格拉到 一个差不多的水平线上。
如果没有折中方案, 那么是否对个别本土低效率 公司的诉求也给予一定考虑 (虽然我们认为他的劳动力 资源配置效率较低, 目前政策并不鼓励, 但毕竟他们也花了钱在开公 司, 要保护积极性) ？

他希望我听取他传达的这个 信息, 于是我把他的信贴在这里。

大家可以在这里发表看法。