Fed Issue #23 - Federal Liberals eye tax on private health and dental plans, grabbing $2.9B

[trimmer21]

i'm going to read up on what's been posted later when I have a quiet minute, sure there'll gonna be some nuggets in there.
what surprises me a bit while glancing over the posts is the level of detail
isn't the bottom line that we pay increasingly more taxes (direct and indirect) and have less disposable income, which inevitably results in decent people having less opportunities to make good choices for them and their families?
so what is good tax code in light of that?
as it seems that equalizing is the concept some consider fair, why are we not talking about a simple flat tax rate - no exceptions for anyone on anything. it's fair, predictable and very cost effective

Flat tax rate? I'd sure vote for that. Let's remove all tax exemptions and peg it at 10% no matter what the income level. Sounds fair to me. While we're at it,let's enact a law that no government can run a deficit and all cost over runs must be paid by the political party that did it.

[Noseyarentcha]

Flat tax rate? I'd sure vote for that. Let's remove all tax exemptions and peg it at 10% no matter what the income level. Sounds fair to me. While we're at it,let's enact a law that no government can run a deficit and all cost over runs must be paid by the political party that did it.

Excellent plan!
When are you or Mosquito running?
Got my vote

[JBen]

Mosquito:
There are always, always more than one way to look at things. It doesn't make it "right or wrong", it's just a different angle from which to approach or view the topic in question. I'm going to respond to your points with a couple points and questions. It's not about "saying" your wrong, or I'm (this angle) is right. Its about viewing things from as many angles as possible.

1) Removing child tax credits: They are nice and help families. That's important because we need to encourage people to procreate. Our birth rate is low and we are a small country. See also immigration. But now contrast the two credits.

Both will go to about 40% of the population ( actually kind of doubt 40% of the population has children under 18 but lets say its the same). Many of the child tax credits benefit those who are "better off" and can afford such things as hockey, Gymnastics, etc, etc, likely people with good paying jobs and good benefit plans already. This will help people who have less and have to pay for their own private plans. Are you suggesting kids don't need health/dental?

Two) One reason many feel a flat tax rate is the future is that Canada's tax code is insane with soooooooo many credits, deductions from income, etc, etc. It has, inarguably created different classes of people, helped widen the gap between the have's and have nots.

The more money you make, the more you are able to take advantage of various tools. There is NO arguing that the middle class is getting hammered. They are finding it extremely difficult to "live" (subjective term). I forget the exact statistic, but very very few people have much money in RSPs. Why? Well quite simply, the cost of living and taxation is leaving them with little money to save. Why do think virtually every level of government and every party is looking very hard at CPP...........

Back to persons A and B.
Both make comparable gross income. A has a pension and benefits B) doesn't.
A) Will pay off their mortgage and debt far faster, years faster
B) Will struggle
A) Will save tens of thousands in interest
B) will struggle
A) Will retire years earlier
B) Will struggle

Both have heart attacks or car accidents that see's them on LTD for 6months to a year.
A) no problem, we have money saved
B) Goes further into debt because they use a credit line to pay the bills.

What good is an RSP if you don't have money to sock away to begin with.
Then, as you go down ( or up in tax brackets) theres diminishing returns. In short a person who earns say 100,000 not only has far more disposable income, each dollar they contribute to an RSP defers far more income tax, than the same dollar contributed by someone in a lower tax bracket. And then when the money comes out its taxed as income in that calendar year. So the well off or rich pay less tax ( they are in a lower bracket now) and the middle class (pays about the same) in short, its done squat for them. Its a mechanism that by far helps the rich far more than it helps anyone in the middle class...You were saying?

Many years ago when my Mother died. She was a secretary, always in the lowest brackets. But for various reasons I won't reveal she was able to accumulate a 100,000 in and RSP. Guess what, it all comes out at once and instead of paying 25% as she did all her life, she (rather the estate) paid closer to 40%..Funny that.

TFSAs I quite agree.

In theory if we have a flat tax rate and do away with many of the credits that require an army of tax accountants and lawyers at Queens park and Ottawa to decipher. Everyone is on equal footing. The well off and rich will still pay far more in taxes helping than the middle class, because or due to all the consumer and sin taxes etc. Who pays more tax

A person that buys $100,000 Hummer or a person that buys a ford escape. Then has to fuel both both, maintain both....

A person that buys and furnishes a 3,000 square foot house or a person that buys and furnishes a 1,400 sq foot house

A person that eats at high end restaurants and pays 80 for a steak and 100 for a bottle of wine further tips 15% or a person that eats at kelsey and pays 25 for the same steak and 15 for wine...
And so on.

And because everyone is taxed the same, the rich and well off aren't trying to shelter as much ( lol, the tools they have to shelter money...it was our business btw, I've mentioned more than few times I am about legal tax avoidance). Instead, they spend more, creating jobs, helping the economy (instead of big brother and bloated civil service).

Don't get me wrong, I am no fan of taxation. but if you don't think our current code, set up, way of life doesn't heavily favour the well off and rich. I don't know what to say and the proof is in the pudding.

The middle class is getting hammered and is shrinking and gaps are widening.

[Waftrudnir]

not sure what to say, because most of what is relevant has already been said one way or another.
the thing that bothers me is that the truth is often not very palatable and does not necessarily promote significant change - unless you've reached the very bottom and then it becomes self-correcting - pushing the pendulum full speed in the other direction.

when I think of a flat tax, I have to think of Turkey. They tax gasoline heavily (ca. $1.50/l) - because tax evasion is so extreme and that is the only way to tax everyone somewhat equally. So, carbon tax is nothing different - except we pay taxes on everything else on top of it.

[terrym]

Carbon taxes will shrink the economy and fund government growth and wages. This is why the left love it as it a source of funds for public service expansion. Governments need public service union money to stay in power. It is proven to not help the environment except for the decreases size/activity of the economy. When your tank of gas rises to $100 in a Honda Civic and a Cauliflower costs you $6:00 at the grocery store it will be too late to go Hhhhmmm.

[JBen]

Carbon taxes:
Who burns more gas.
1) A farmer
2) A middle class family ( lets define that as any family that grosses combined $60,000 to $90,000) that lives in Rural Ontario.
3) A middle class family that lives in a big city and has public transit, and easy access to all necessities and amenities
4) A well off person ( lets define that as anyone who alone makes the combined median inc of $70,000) who lives in either 2 or 3.

Oh and who can afford $80,000 Electric cars, and that are subsidized $15,000? And where do they live?

I don't mean this as "offensive" to anyone, but as mentioned I think a great many people have lost perspective. About just who the middle class are, and what they do, don't have. You can't squeeze blood stone as the saying goes. And yet we do.

Taxation is utterly killing the middle class (imo).
And while we are all taxed very heavily ( stats show that near everyone lose more to taxation than we spend on housing, food and clothes) and I am all about legal tax reduction, spent a good 20 years in a business that helps both people and companies reduce their tax loads. Ultimately lost my job because of 5 or 6 people in Germany bending tax law and the german authorities deciding they needed to make an example of a small foreign company.....

As I said, there are certain truths or laws in this world. One is when something goes down, something else goes up. Like any teeter totter.
Since the 60s and that statistics are very clear.
The poor are still the poor. Not much has changed despite all the taxation and programs.
The rich are still the rich despite all the taxation ( and the sheer amount of ways to reduce taxes/shelter money has spawned entire industries and armies of tax lawyers, tax accountants everywhere)

The middle class is taking it on the chin, shrinking.
So whats gone up
?

[mosquito]

Upper Income .... tax increases and removal of tax credits
Middle Income .... tax increases and removal of tax credits
Lower Income .... tax increases and removal of tax credits

The Liberals are the robbers and all brackets are the victims. As for tax credits they are intended to encourage people and companies. Clearly the Liberals don't care about children's programs, after all Justin has two tax paid nannies etc. For example the SR&ED tax credit has kept me employed on maybe 1/4 of my jobs, on several a big priority of my work has revolved around documentation. Talking to the company I was at there are two CO-OP's earning their pay because of that tax credit.... without it companies wouldn't take the risk. With a flat tax and no credits you will see the death of many charities, research and innovation and a huge impact! As for it impacting if people have more kids, that is just silly, credits just allows a better quality of life for those kids born and Trudeau kids with their nannies, baronesses, chauffeurs, trust funds etc. clearly don't give a rip.


Oh and the costs of food are already predicted to rise 5+% in the new year and funny they don't include the carbon taxes in that.

Average Canadian family to spend $420 more on food in 2017: report
http://globalnews.ca/news/3108159/av...n-2017-report/


Looking at Alberta's
Alberta's NDP government is hiding the true effects of the carbon tax, which could cost families at least $1,000 more each year, Wildrose Leader Brian Jean said Monday.

Although low- and middle-income Albertans will receive rebates on the tax when it starts Jan. 1, 2017, Jean said they still will pay up to $700 extra.
..
Jean cited data from the Canadian Tax Journal that said a $30 carbon tax will increase electricity prices by 7.5 per cent, food costs by two per cent and the shelter costs by 1.2 per cent.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...says-1.3541177

and in Ontario Wynne is even charging HST on the cap and trade tax....

Anything that let's a person or business keep a $1 in their pocket is good in my book. I remember reading a report about where $1 left in a companies pocket produced $4 in growth over time, while $1 in the gov'ts pocket ..... .70Cents in economic impact.

[fratri]

[COLOR=#000000][COLOR=#000000]Carbon tax is just a money grab. Canada's contributions can't make a difference in the world regarding pollution. (look at the numbers below Canada is 90) The only way to make a difference in the world is to get the big polluters to stop polluting. How do we do that? not sure, maybe we don't allow Companies to import unless the products come from green (clean) countries.

Look at it this way, the world is like a bingo hall. Everyone is welcome, the place is packed but the smoke (from smoking cigarettes) is thick.
The bingo establishment recognizes this so decides it is going to charge anyone smoking in the SW corner for smoking. Now a few of them might decided to stay/pay (too lazy to move-or just comfortable) but the majority of them will just move to the non-taxed areas. (so they don't have to pay the tax)
Will this new tax in the SW corner of the building reduce the amount of smoke in the entire place? (boarders have no walls) No it does nothing to keep the others from doing what they have been doing because there is no fee to smoke in the rest of the building.
Unless everyone in the bingo parlor gets taxed (to reduce the amount of smoking that is taking place) it will never work.

Our government is using this scare tactic (Global Warming Phrase) as a means of taking our money, not fixing the pollution problem.

Pollution Index for Country 2016

Search:

Rank	Country	Pollution Index	Exp Pollution Index
1	Egypt	96.05	174.17
2	Lebanon	91.88	165.17
3	Mongolia	90.96	167.98
4	Monaco	90.11	163.54
5	Bangladesh	88.27	158.56
6	Peru	87.91	158.18
7	Azerbaijan	87.04	155.51
8	Vietnam	86.09	153.20
9	Myanmar	85.62	156.90
10	China	85.54	155.89
11	Macedonia	85.29	156.32
12	Iran	84.21	154.11
13	Bolivia	83.14	147.86
14	Jordan	82.72	146.82
15	Cambodia	82.57	147.82
16	Bahrain	81.73	149.20
17	Nepal	81.19	143.85
18	Qatar	80.96	144.26
19	Venezuela	77.68	138.57
20	Trinidad And Tobago	77.22	136.40
21	India	77.02	135.55
22	Pakistan	76.64	134.73
23	Algeria	76.17	135.20
24	Dominican Republic	75.33	132.42
25	Malta	75.18	132.63
26	Indonesia	75.14	131.84
27	Tunisia	75.12	132.33
28	Albania	75.08	131.72
29	Philippines	73.12	127.73
30	Saudi Arabia	72.20	128.09
31	Jamaica	72.16	126.27
32	Kazakhstan	72.00	131.53
33	Thailand	71.51	124.15
34	Zimbabwe	71.20	127.72
35	Georgia	69.90	124.96
36	Ukraine	67.84	118.78
37	Malaysia	67.53	116.58
38	Chile	67.21	123.27
39	Hong Kong	67.17	121.08
40	Morocco	66.87	116.83
41	Turkey	65.75	115.18
42	Sri Lanka	65.21	113.27
43	Mexico	64.64	111.24
44	Russia	64.49	111.34
45	Colombia	64.44	117.34
46	Taiwan	63.37	110.74
47	South Africa	63.29	109.49
48	Tanzania	62.59	108.13
49	Israel	61.46	109.21
50	Brazil	61.18	104.63
51	Bulgaria	60.35	107.77
52	United Arab Emirates	59.54	102.71
53	Ecuador	59.32	100.99
54	Bahamas	58.60	100.19
55	Argentina	58.46	101.72
56	Bosnia And Herzegovina	57.95	101.63
57	Belgium	56.61	97.91
58	Italy	56.56	97.11
59	Panama	56.02	100.48
60	Serbia	55.14	94.33
61	Costa Rica	53.09	92.88
62	Puerto Rico	50.67	87.04
63	Romania	50.50	84.14
64	Poland	49.87	85.34
65	South Korea	49.65	89.02
66	Slovakia	48.43	82.59
67	Mauritius	47.38	84.65
68	Greece	47.22	79.54
69	Hungary	46.70	80.40
70	Spain	46.58	77.23
71	France	46.31	77.49
72	Libya	45.42	75.02
73	Uruguay	42.93	73.48
74	Czech Republic	42.49	72.23
75	Singapore	38.83	66.81
76	Latvia	37.14	61.99
77	United Kingdom	35.02	56.99
78	United States	34.94	60.23
79	Japan	34.04	54.90
80	Belarus	33.70	53.71
81	Cyprus	33.37	54.75
82	Netherlands	32.79	53.29
83	Portugal	31.85	51.56
84	Lithuania	30.94	51.13
85	Ireland	30.85	53.16
86	Austria	30.77	52.14
87	Croatia	30.42	49.92
88	Denmark	29.93	46.55
89	Germany	29.91	47.80
90	Canada	29.48	48.07
91	Slovenia	28.20	50.94
92	Switzerland	23.02	37.46
93	Australia	22.88	35.59
94	New Zealand	19.04	31.62
95	Sweden	18.30	29.00
96	Norway	18.21	30.05
97	Finland	17.84	30.68
98	Estonia	16.45	29.81
99	Iceland	13.10	22.98

[Waftrudnir]

when it comes to carbon tax, you don't even need to go into discussing its validity:
if a government (right or wrong) imposes significant fuel (or goods, sale, service, etc.) taxes to drive a certain behaviour (they consider desirable), they would need to offset the additional tax burden they introduce elsewhere (lower taxes, tax credits, exemptions etc.). otherwise, they just put a 3rd world country tax system (not intending to offend anyone here) on top of an already existing elaborate (i.e. unnecessarily complex) taxation system.

so, the simple answer - without even looking at any scientific or socioeconomic aspects (!) - is that the sole purpose of the so called carbon tax is to increase government revenue

[JBen]

Mosquito.
Go back to around 1950-1960. In the 60 years since. Which party or rather what political ideology has predominately "ruled". That said, not all taxes are bad, not all debt is bad, not all cuts are "good".

With respect to the middle class and the "well off".
How many people who earn (gross around the means and averages) do you think.
can find $3,000 a year for an RSP to reduce their income and save for retirement?
can find $3,000 for an RESP to reduce their income and receive up to %50 from govt?
can find $3,000 for their child to attend summer camps ( and receive a tax credit)?
can find $3,000 for much of anything.

now take a couple that gross 100k or a single person that gets 90k
not saying they to aren't getting pummelled but now all of a sudden despite not living large, and having to make choices. Finding 5-10k a year to put into an RSP ( or TFSA) or the child's RESP and reducing their tax load, saving their $ is more than doable. They may not be able to put
5,000 against their mortgage
5,000 into their retirement fund
5,000 into the kids RESPs

but they can do some of it. And those are just the obvious ones that most "real" people face and often have to choose between. I don't consider a couple that gross 100-120k to be living in luxury, but thy are far better off than the peons.

it is utterly inarguable that the middle class gets screwed. There's more I might say about other things, but for the sake of keeping it small in scope...