 |
|  |
 |
|
DanS
|
 |
Kickball Capital of the World
Jan 1970 time: 00:15
|
|
God, I'm taking a look at ef's '95/'00 data and its a freaking ( ) minefield due to the US population revisions.
OECD seems to do some "tweening" on the population figures, since their estimates of 1995 is 266.4M versus the Census Bureau's estimate for 1995 is 262.7M using the 1990 Census as a base.
There is a lot of things going on when the EU-15 numbers '95 v. '00 are disaggregated. Austria, Belgium, Germany, and France did poorly versus the US. Spain, the UK, Ireland, and the Netherlands all did well.
On an exchange rate basis, everybody got their hat handed to them, except Ireland, Mexico, the UK, Turkey, and central European countries. This would seem to make everybody feel like they're being left behind, when in actual fact, they're all treading water.
Last edited by DanS on 08-03-2002 at 23:24
|
|
|  |
 |
|
el freako
|
 |
Bristol, European Union
Oct 1999 time: 05:15
|
|
DanS,
Might I call your attention to the notes at the bottom of my spreadsheet where I state "Population data is taken from the OECD labour force statistics, except for the USA which uses the latest estimates which I got at the BEA site." - According to the BEA their data for 1991-2000 "are consistent with the 2000 Census of Population".
The OECD is still using population estimates based on the 1990 census - I have used the BEA data as a proxy and whilst they are not exactly the same the difference before 1990 was around 70,000 (or 0.03%).
Looking at the difference between reported growth and the shares of the USA's GDP at PPP's in 1990-2000 it looks like the EU's growth was understated by around 0.4% a year - interestingly this is exactly the amount that the 'hedonic deflator' added to US growth between 1990-97 (data is not available for the old measure from 1998 onwards).
Indeed if you adjust GDP per person for PPP's and the economic cycle (using the OECD's estimates of the output gap) then the Euro Zone caught up faster during the 1990's than it did during the 1980's:
USA's 'Trend' GDP per head at PPP's as % of Euro Zone's:
1980: 158%
1990: 151%
2000: 140%
Last edited by el freako on 09-03-2002 at 00:52
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
DanS
|
 |
Kickball Capital of the World
Jan 1970 time: 00:15
|
|
"What are you talking about ? VAT ?"
In Germany, 3% customs (reasonable) + 16% VAT (unreasonable), which is collected upon entry.
"Final consumer, or distributor ? Or Einfuhrumsatzsteuer at the importer ?"
Distributor.
"What, no sales taxes, nowhere ?"
On the whole, no. I import boards from Korea. No tax. Then I buy another board from California. No tax. After assembly, then shipping it to any customer in the US (ex-DC) is tax-free. I'm not ruling out the possibility that somebody in the chain might pay some small taxes on a component (in Korea?), but I know the bulk of it US-side is tax-free.
I slept on this. Yesterday I was pretty peeved that demand would be shot in places like Germany (I do about a 1/4 of my business in Germany!), but today I'm most concerned about the disparity in prices. Who do you think the German end-consumer is going to blame, when they see that they can get the board for $530 in the States, but over $700 in Europe? The government? 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DanS
|
 |
Kickball Capital of the World
Jan 1970 time: 00:15
|
|
"You advertise a tax free price ?"
Of course.
Re advertising the net price, that's impossible. My customers are not the end consumer. In the US, they will advertise the price at which they're selling the board to the American end consumer.
Once the Germans start comparison shopping, they'll readily see the difference.
Last edited by DanS on 11-03-2002 at 21:09
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15. Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|