This document (PDF) was sent to BU with the following text:
How many small businesses have found themselves facing closure because of the secret piece of legislation which is strictly enforced by CAIPO leading to deregistering?
Is the government really serious about a small business driven economy when such draconian laws are imported wholesale under the guise of the OECD. This secret law needs to be challenged via judicial review. A prime example of profiting from bad governance.
John A commented on the above as follows.
Barbados is already one of the most frustrating places to do business in and to add this nuisance requirement to small business means they now need to hire a corporate secretary on top of everything else. If CAIPO and by extension the state, so hard up for the $100, then CAIPO needs to introduce a simple form that requests the small business ONE question once they are already on file. This form for those selling under $750k annually, would replace the 5 page form with ONE simple question as stated below on a one page form.
HAS THE ENTITY HAD ANY CHANGE IN ITS DIRECTORS OR SHAREHOLDERS OVER THE LAST YEAR? YES OR NO IF YES PLEASE STATE THE RELEVANT CHANGE (leave a box below for them to state change).
Seeing that 90% plus of these small entities will have no change, tick the blasted NO box attached a cheque for the $100 money grab, sign the form and date it then drop the envelope in the RH collection box which should be placed at the door to CAIPO. Wunna could then mail out the receipt or request on each form that the entities email address be supplied on the filing. The receipt can then be sent to the entity by email 2 years later when wunna get around to actually filing the people return!
If the Minister of Finance said that the VAT returns for small entities was choking and slowing the system and hence raised the VAT threshold, how come the annual return with the $100 bill not chocking the same damn system now? Stupes.







The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.