CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 10419
PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 8:10 pm
 


So Justin’s turned chicken-shit and now he’s giving away more revenue in the form of tax cuts than he’ll save by closing the tax loopholes for the wealthy.

Or maybe this was the plan all along and the loophole drama was just a bit of misdirection?

Or maybe the LPC is shifting back towards the right because they think Jagmeet’s NDP is not an electoral threat?

Dumb Dumb move, Justin.

Quote:
Small-business tax cut is an unseemly buy-off: Editorial

If Justin Trudeau’s newly announced small-business tax cut is the beginning of the end of this past summer’s pathetic tax-reform saga, it will be a finale worthy of O. Henry.

Star Editorial Board

If the Trudeau government’s newly announced small-business tax cut is the beginning of the end of this past summer’s pathetic tax-reform saga, it will be a finale worthy of O. Henry.

The three small-business tax changes the government unveiled in July were framed as a down payment on its promise to close costly tax loopholes for high-earning individuals, a supposedly easy way for a government in dire need of revenues to raise some.

Well, it certainly hasn’t been easy. And now it looks like the effort won’t raise much, if anything. To appease those aggrieved by the proposed reforms the government seems set on forgoing more revenue than it sought to save in the first place. With its ham-fisted rollout of a largely sensible tax-reform package, it has squandered a great deal of capital, both political and actual.

Cutting the small-business tax rate to 9 per cent, from its current level of 10.5 per cent, was a Liberal campaign promise that went undelivered in Finance Minister Bill Morneau’s first two budgets. Morneau likely delayed in part because, as the government accumulated larger-than-expected debt, Ottawa simply couldn’t afford it. But perhaps, too, Morneau hesitated because the move is so controversial in policy circles.

Some argue that preferential small-business taxes encourage companies to stay small rather than grow and incur the much higher corporate rates. A number of countries, such as Britain, have done away with small-business tax benefits entirely.

There’s also mounting evidence that Canada’s small-business tax regime does not primarily benefit the sort of mom-and-pop operations it was designed to help. According to researchers at the University of Calgary, 60 per cent of Canada’s small-business tax break benefit is enjoyed by those who earn more than $150,000 per year.

Meanwhile, a recent report for the Canadian Tax Foundation found that those who make more than $2.6 million a year (that is, the top 1 per cent of the top 1 per cent) are over 10 times more likely to hold shares in a small business corporation than the average Canadian.

This tax cut appears to be a gift the government can’t afford that will benefit primarily those who don’t really need it.

Whatever the reason for the delay in making the cut, the government has clearly calculated that delivering on this promise is the best way to quiet the uproar over its badly managed tax proposals and attempt to undo the political damage of the past weeks. (It is also expected to announce a number of further tweaks to the proposals in the coming days.)

Of course, the uproar that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is now attempt to quiet was largely avoidable. The proposed reforms are aimed at preserving an unassailable principle: that the small-business tax system should help small businesses thrive and grow, not make it easier for wealthy individuals to pay less than others in similar circumstances. But in its tone-deaf communications and sloppy policy design, the government turned what should have been manageable blowback into a major political headache – one that’s bound to grow as questions are raised about Morneau’s handling of his own business interests and financial disclosures. And so we get this cut.

The result is as absurd as the process that got us here. According to projections from the Parliamentary Budget Officer, the tax cut will cost Ottawa far more over the coming years than the closed loopholes were supposed to bring in.

This fiasco casts serious doubt on whether the Trudeau government has the skill or the will to raise needed revenues. Study after study has shown that our tax code is rife with regressive and ineffective loopholes that cost Ottawa billions of dollars per year without helping the government meet any larger policy objective. Upon taking office, Morneau claimed tax fairness as his top priority and promised to bring in $3 billion annually by reviewing the system and closing the worst of these loopholes. Some experts suggest it would be relatively easy to save twice as much as that.

Of course, this just and prudent project won’t work if every time the government tries to close a loophole it attempts to buy support with a costly tax cut. Is it competence or courage this government lacks? In any case, if the prime minister continues down this path, he will either have to scale back his progressive vision or continue to rack up debt indefinitely. Either way, that’s not the government we were promised.


https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editori ... orial.html


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Calgary Flames
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23344
PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 8:16 pm
 


Getting embarrassed by his own finance minister not bothering to declare his own ownership of foreign property doesn't help the overall impression either.


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 448
PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 8:36 pm
 


The Canadian Medical Association ran a highly effective campaign against these reforms and managed to hide its members behind genuine mom and pop operations.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 10419
PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 8:38 pm
 


Yeah now there’s something that would normally be a minor issue in and of itself but the timing and optics are terrible because for one thing it highlights how rich Morneau is at the same time he’s being accused of attacking the middle class (unfairly IMO).

And although it would have been very bad if the company in question was a Canadian company or a company that did any significant amount of business or something ...but it’s just his private vacation home in France not a real ““business”....ironically probably formed to take advantage of the same kind of “business” loopholes he’s trying to close hear in Canada.

I don’t think it was an intentional ethics violation but obviously a political blunder and I’m not opposed to investigating and even fining his ass just for the optics alone.


Offline
Forum Junkie
Forum Junkie
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 698
PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 8:40 pm
 


I called it....only a few weeks ago. I thought it would take until the next election in Ontario to rise to the surface again.

It just goes to show, the Liberals bend to pressure from the business community just as much as the other parties do.


Offline
Forum Junkie
Forum Junkie
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 698
PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 8:46 pm
 


BeaverFever wrote:

I don’t think it was an intentional ethics violation but obviously a political blunder and I’m not opposed to investigating and even fining his ass just for the optics alone.


Our Finance Minister put a home under the name of a business to avoid paying taxes on that home in Canada. The question of foreign property ownership is one that comes up on income tax statements.

Secondly, his family ownership if Morneau Shepell comes into question as they stood to gain from these tax changes.

Further, this is a man married into the McCain family on top of his own wealth and that of his family.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Calgary Flames
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23344
PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 8:49 pm
 


How much are the taxes the government lays on a house overseas anyway if these rich dickwads who are drowning in cash don't want to declare ownership? :?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 10419
PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 8:54 pm
 


Yeah, I think that’s always been true. The LPC, as an institution that’s governed Canada for most of its history has always had entrenched “big business” and wealthy/powerful “family compact” types. Paul Martin and Bill Morneau are just two easy examples and that’s not even considering the backroom powerbrokers who avoid the public eye.

But there’s also been civil wars in the party with the progressive wing, but U think the latter usually loses.


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 448
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 5:46 am
 


BeaverFever wrote:
Yeah now there’s something that would normally be a minor issue in and of itself but the timing and optics are terrible because for one thing it highlights how rich Morneau is at the same time he’s being accused of attacking the middle class (unfairly IMO).

And although it would have been very bad if the company in question was a Canadian company or a company that did any significant amount of business or something ...but it’s just his private vacation home in France not a real ““business”....ironically probably formed to take advantage of the same kind of “business” loopholes he’s trying to close hear in Canada.

I don’t think it was an intentional ethics violation but obviously a political blunder and I’m not opposed to investigating and even fining his ass just for the optics alone.


Doctors are not rich like Morneau is rich - they have to work - but many of them are still in the top 1% of earners. I would not call them middle class. In my province there has been a big move to become incorporated over the last ten years and now nearly any physician who can do that has done it because it is so beneficial. We heard a lot more about struggling shopkeepers than the details of physicians' businesses in this fight and that's the way the CMA wanted it.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 7115
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 10:13 am
 


Prefer a gov't that would have kept the loopholes AND given the reduction and then summarily dismissed any public opposition as anti-business leftists?


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 448
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 12:39 pm
 


It's incredible that a person applying for the job of Finance Minister would make these mistakes. Every year, I'm lectured about foreign property by my accountant and this year for the first time I had something very modest to declare (which I don't even own BTW). If there's any nonsense over it, Mr. Morneau will certainly be mentioned.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.