[Newsbot]

Title: Taxes versus the Necessities of Life: The Canadian Consumer Tax Index, 2017 Edition | Fraser Institute
Category: Political
Posted By: uwish
Date: 2017-08-29 09:00:50
Canadian

[N_Fiddledog]

Here's the study:

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies ... 16-edition

Here's a blurp from an Op Ed on it:

"It's unacceptable, scandalous even, that the average Canadian family spends more of its income on taxes than on the basic necessities of life.

Data released Thursday morning by the Fraser Institute reminded us how deeply government has its hands in our pockets.

"The average Canadian family now spends more of its income on taxes (42.5%) than it does on basic necessities such as food, shelter, and clothing combined (37.4%)," a bulletin released by the Vancouver-based think-tank explains.

It's simply not right that Canadians spend more servicing government coffers than they do to provide for their families.

It wasn't always this way.

As the report details, "By comparison, 33.5% of the average family's income went to pay taxes in 1961 while 56.5% went to basic necessities."

And it doesn't have to continue being like this. The people can say they've had enough. The politicians can summon some guts and courage to tackle this problem..."

http://www.torontosun.com/2017/08/24/re ... o-much-tax

Here's an article from the National Post:

Average Canadian family spending more on taxes than basic necessities, Fraser Institute says

$1:

"TORONTO - The average Canadian family continues to spend more on taxes than they do on food, shelter and clothing combined, according to the Fraser Institute's annual study of taxation in Canada.

The think-tank's Canadian Consumer Tax Index study released Thursday says a Canadian family earning $79,010 in 2014 would have spent 42.1 per cent of income on total tax bills compared to 21 per cent of income on shelter, 11 per cent on food, and five per cent on clothing.

Although the 2014 numbers can still change as more data becomes available, the percentage of income used to pay taxes has continuously risen since 2008 when 40.9 per cent of income was spent..."

http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/ave ... -institute

[BartSimpson]

Who needs food, shelter, or clothing when you have a national health care program and your country provides lavish support for Islamic colonists who hate your guts?

[BeaverFever]

This debunked study from a right-wing propaganda outlet comes up every year or so and has been dealt with on CLA before. So here's this year's rebuttal, same as every years.

It's the most blatant kind of partisan fuzzy math, described in detail (again) below

$1:

Annual anti-tax report is still bogus after all these years: Editorial | Toronto Star

There is no sweeter time of year for those perennially convinced of government’s greed and bloat than the release of the Fraser Institute’s annual Canadian Consumer Tax Index, which never lets the truth get in the way of a bit of anti-tax panic.

The numbers are again eye-popping. According to the authors, the tax bill of the average Canadian family has increased by a whopping 2,006 per cent since 1961. We now pay more in taxes than we do on housing, food and clothing combined, the report gasps, as it does every year.

As ever, however, the scandal the report purports to uncover would seem far less scandalous if only the numbers used were not so distorted and out of any context.

To take a few egregious examples: the report doesn’t account for inflation. It includes corporate taxes in the average family’s tax bill, though these are largely shouldered by richer Canadians. It presents the mean family as the typical one, though the median family, which earns less and thus pays less in taxes, would be more appropriate.

The report asserts that Canadians, on average, spend more than 40 per cent of their income on taxes. A recent study from the Broadbent Institute put the number at about half that. There are many ways to calculate these things; the Fraser Institute’s questionable methodology no doubt suits its dogmatic aversion to taxes and active government.


Nor does the report mention that Canada is increasingly a low-tax country compared to our peers. When it comes to taxes as a share of GDP, for instance, Canada is well below average among OECD nations. But saying that, we suppose, might dampen the outrage.

The study’s greatest failing, however – the omission that ultimately renders its statistics meaningless – is that it makes no mention whatsoever of what we get in return for our tax money. Nowhere does the report mention “public services” or “programs,” nowhere “roads” or “schools.” It’s true that taxes as a percentage of our income have risen over the last 56 years, by around 7 per cent, but consider what they have bought: medicare, for instance, and the Canada Pension Plan, to name just two programs established after their baseline year of 1961.

Not only are these and other aspects of our social safety net arguably central to our national identity – the civilization, you might say, for which taxes have been the price. But they have also yielded exceptional value for money.

A 2009 report from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives found that middle-income Canadians enjoy public services, from education to health insurance to pensions, worth about $41,000 annually per family – or roughly 63 per cent of their income and more than they pay in taxes. Conversely, we have watched as decades of tax cuts have led to eroding public services, but also to rising inequality, persistent homelessness, traffic gridlock and crumbling schools.

By delinking taxes from the services they buy, the Fraser Institute has long fed into a false narrative that for decades was in the ascendancy: that any tax is a bad tax and any cut a free good. In recent years, however, that view has begun to fall out of favour, and not just on the left. The IMF, the OECD, and other past champions of austerity have all made the case that the costs of tax cuts often outweigh their benefits and taxes and the collective action they pay for are essential if we are to meet our biggest challenges.

A few years ago it was almost unthinkable that a Canadian politician could run successfully on the promise of raising any taxes ever. But in the last federal election, both the New Democrats and the Liberals promised tax hikes for at least some Canadians that would have seemed political suicide in recent elections past.

The Fraser Institute’s annual anti-tax litany was always bogus. Now, thankfully, it’s starting to look out of touch.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.thestar ... ditor.html

[BartSimpson]

Funny, the Vancouver Sun came to a completely different conclusion:

http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news ... he-numbers

[fifeboy]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

This debunked study from a right-wing propaganda outlet comes up every year or so and has been dealt with on CLA before. So here's this year's rebuttal, same as every years.

It's the most blatant kind of partisan fuzzy math, described in detail (again) below

$1:

Annual anti-tax report is still bogus after all these years: Editorial | Toronto Star

There is no sweeter time of year for those perennially convinced of government’s greed and bloat than the release of the Fraser Institute’s annual Canadian Consumer Tax Index, which never lets the truth get in the way of a bit of anti-tax panic.

The numbers are again eye-popping. According to the authors, the tax bill of the average Canadian family has increased by a whopping 2,006 per cent since 1961. We now pay more in taxes than we do on housing, food and clothing combined, the report gasps, as it does every year.

As ever, however, the scandal the report purports to uncover would seem far less scandalous if only the numbers used were not so distorted and out of any context.

To take a few egregious examples: the report doesn’t account for inflation. It includes corporate taxes in the average family’s tax bill, though these are largely shouldered by richer Canadians. It presents the mean family as the typical one, though the median family, which earns less and thus pays less in taxes, would be more appropriate.

The report asserts that Canadians, on average, spend more than 40 per cent of their income on taxes. A recent study from the Broadbent Institute put the number at about half that. There are many ways to calculate these things; the Fraser Institute’s questionable methodology no doubt suits its dogmatic aversion to taxes and active government.


Nor does the report mention that Canada is increasingly a low-tax country compared to our peers. When it comes to taxes as a share of GDP, for instance, Canada is well below average among OECD nations. But saying that, we suppose, might dampen the outrage.

The study’s greatest failing, however – the omission that ultimately renders its statistics meaningless – is that it makes no mention whatsoever of what we get in return for our tax money. Nowhere does the report mention “public services” or “programs,” nowhere “roads” or “schools.” It’s true that taxes as a percentage of our income have risen over the last 56 years, by around 7 per cent, but consider what they have bought: medicare, for instance, and the Canada Pension Plan, to name just two programs established after their baseline year of 1961.

Not only are these and other aspects of our social safety net arguably central to our national identity – the civilization, you might say, for which taxes have been the price. But they have also yielded exceptional value for money.

A 2009 report from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives found that middle-income Canadians enjoy public services, from education to health insurance to pensions, worth about $41,000 annually per family – or roughly 63 per cent of their income and more than they pay in taxes. Conversely, we have watched as decades of tax cuts have led to eroding public services, but also to rising inequality, persistent homelessness, traffic gridlock and crumbling schools.

By delinking taxes from the services they buy, the Fraser Institute has long fed into a false narrative that for decades was in the ascendancy: that any tax is a bad tax and any cut a free good. In recent years, however, that view has begun to fall out of favour, and not just on the left. The IMF, the OECD, and other past champions of austerity have all made the case that the costs of tax cuts often outweigh their benefits and taxes and the collective action they pay for are essential if we are to meet our biggest challenges.

A few years ago it was almost unthinkable that a Canadian politician could run successfully on the promise of raising any taxes ever. But in the last federal election, both the New Democrats and the Liberals promised tax hikes for at least some Canadians that would have seemed political suicide in recent elections past.

The Fraser Institute’s annual anti-tax litany was always bogus. Now, thankfully, it’s starting to look out of touch.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.thestar ... ditor.html

AND to all this I say

[uwish]

Between Federal and the 'new' regressive Provincial income tax in Alberta I do pay just over 34% in taxes, that doesn't include property tax, just the two forms of income tax. Also not included is CPP etc on that bill and that is calculated from the marginal tax rates from both federal and provincial as the income changes. It's around 37% when you throw in the rest of the boxes on your T4 and then property taxes (only the provincial portion) So sure, it may not be >40% but it sure is closer than this 'rebuttal' that says the number is closer to half that! (20%)

[BeaverFever]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Funny, the Vancouver Sun came to a completely different conclusion:

http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news ... he-numbers

He just regurgitates their report, he doesn't really examine their math.

[BeaverFever]

uwish uwish:

Between Federal and the 'new' regressive Provincial income tax in Alberta I do pay just over 34% in taxes, that doesn't include property tax, just the two forms of income tax. Also not included is CPP etc on that bill and that is calculated from the marginal tax rates from both federal and provincial as the income changes. It's around 37% when you throw in the rest of the boxes on your T4 and then property taxes (only the provincial portion) So sure, it may not be >40% but it sure is closer than this 'rebuttal' that says the number is closer to half that! (20%)

To have an income tax of 34%

[BeaverFever]

uwish uwish:

Between Federal and the 'new' regressive Provincial income tax in Alberta I do pay just over 34% in taxes, that doesn't include property tax, just the two forms of income tax. Also not included is CPP etc on that bill and that is calculated from the marginal tax rates from both federal and provincial as the income changes. It's around 37% when you throw in the rest of the boxes on your T4 and then property taxes (only the provincial portion) So sure, it may not be >40% but it sure is closer than this 'rebuttal' that says the number is closer to half that! (20%)

Tax calculator
https://simpletax.ca/calculator

To have a total effective income tax rate of 34% in Alberta you would have to be making taxable income of around $210,000 per year so either I don't believe you or I don't feel sorry for you.

Most likely you're confusing your top marginal rate with your overall effective tax rate.....common mistake

[herbie]

Own a home, kids all gone, three cars, umpteen computer gizmos, satellite tv and cell phones, high speed internet, meds and health care covered, fridge is full, bills all paid.
Yeah we're just suffering....

[BRAH]

herbie herbie:

Own a home, kids all gone, three cars, umpteen computer gizmos, satellite tv and cell phones, high speed internet, meds and health care covered, fridge is full, bills all paid.
Yeah we're just suffering....

If you're in the Vancouver area would you be able to find the same home for the current value of your home?
.

[herbie]

Who knows? Left that ratrace three decades ago.
All I know is if I'd kept my house in Langley and sold it today I could've bought

A 30 unit townhome complex
A motel
A lakeshore home with marina and seaplane
20-25 city lots
10-15 mobiles on separate lots that could rent out for 1200 a month each
A restaurant and a lakeshore home
one super Class A motorhome and enough change to tour for a decade.

in these parts....
the house I grew up in in Burnaby sold this spring for $1.4 million. Someone paid that kind of money, that's just fucking nuts. That's triple what we sold it for 10 years ago, and that was insane.

[BRAH]

The lower mainland's problem is you have Chinese Criminals / Immigrants buying million dollar homes to launder money while claiming welfare and not paying property / personal taxes leaving Canadian taxpayers to pick up the bill which creates a damaging ripple effect.

[BeaverFever]

BRAH BRAH:

The lower mainland's problem is you have Chinese Criminals / Immigrants buying million dollar homes to launder money while claiming welfare and not paying property / personal taxes leaving Canadian taxpayers to pick up the bill which creates a damaging ripple effect.

Million dollar homes AND claiming welfare? Sounds unlikely. I think you're getting your immigrant rage stories mixed up