Jagdish Bhagwati has an op-ed in yesterday's FT where he says the US
Congress's objections to that huge WTO ruling last month that declared we
are unfairly subsidizing our exports to the tune of $4 billion are
hypocritical, nationalistic and wrong.  No argument from me there.  But he
makes one argument I can't follow:

<quote>

Then others argue that the EU does it too.  Here, they are wrong again on
the economics.  Citing value-added taxes, they object to the rebates on
exports therefrom as a parallel offence.  But as my former student Gene
Grossman, now of Princeton, has shown, this tax system does not distort
comparative advantage.

<unquote>

I'm not sure I understand this:  At first glance, the critics' argument
looks quite plausible.  What makes value added rebates different than
income tax rebates?  Is Bhagwhati not elaborating because the counter
argument is now so obvious and well-known that he feels no need?  Or is he
being disingenous and passing off something long and complicated and
controversial as if it were an agreed fact?

Inquiring but ignorant minds want to know.

Michael

__________________________________________________________________________
Michael Pollak................New York [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to