Ottawa to Share the Wealth

[Shiva]

Ottawa To Share the Wealth

Last Updated Thu, 06 Oct 2005 07:01:57 EDT
CBC News

The federal government plans new legislation called the "Surplus Allocation Act" to share budget surpluses directly with Canadians.

The legislation will be introduced Friday.

The idea is to lighten the tax burden of as many as 15 million Canadians by sharing the wealth when the federal government rolls up budget surpluses.

Ottawa maintains a $3 billion contingency fund for national emergencies, and that fund will remain the priority call on a surplus.

But the new legislation will provide that the remainder of any surplus will be divided evenly three ways, among tax cuts, debt relief and new spending.

Today's National Post newspaper quotes an Ottawa source as saying, "taxpayers will now get a share of any unexpected surpluses.
"People like to pay less tax and this is good news."

The Globe and Mail reports that the tax break portion of the surplus will first be applied as a credit on income tax returns. Then the following year the individual exemption, the amount Canadians can earn tax-free, will be raised by the same amount.

The tax credit for any given fiscal year's surplus will be applied to the following year's tax returns.

"If you are already getting a (tax refund) your cheque will be bigger", the Globe quotes its source as saying. "If you owe the government money, you'll owe less".

The tax relief will depend on the size of the surplus, and in the absence of a surplus would disappear. In recent years Ottawa has tended to underestimate the size of the surplus, which, under current law, is used to pay down the public debt.

The surplus sharing program, along with a proposed new home heating oil rebate program, are seen as precursors to an upcoming federal general election. The election will be held not later than 30 days after the Gomery report on the federal sponsorship scandal is released. The report is expected in February. But it could come earlier if the Liberals were to lose a Commons vote that entails lack of confidence in the government.

 

[shamus11]

Flat Tax my Friend

By

James Bredin

Why are our politicians so opposed to flat tax?
No people in the world so overtaxed to the max,
That plus Mulroney’s GST could make a man cry,
Complicated calculations -- madness gone awry.

No justification or human rights near here,
Get the numbers right or have plenty to fear,
Just pay your extortionate taxes and none of your crap,
Wouldn’t want those tax guys to cause a flap.

Just fill out the forms and spell your name right,
Adding and subtracting enough to give you a fright,
Deductions for that and additions to this,
Don’t forget one number or the tax guys will hiss.

And each year it gets more compound and complex,
That’s the way they like it as you get more perplexed,
And you’ve been trained to be compliant and quiet,
Canadians forbidden to speak out or riot.

But certain countries already have flat tax,
Twenty percent would be nice and we could relax,
Though politicians and auditors hate this idea,
Might act in a panic like they had diarrhea.

The media or their papers don’t write about this,
Bought by politicians who think this is remiss,
It might interfere with their extortionate plans,
Adscam ideas and envelopes in hand.

Thursday, October 27, 2005

http://conservativepoetry.blogstream.com/

 

[MMMike]

The Globe and Mail reports that the tax break portion of the surplus will first be applied as a credit on income tax returns. Then the following year the individual exemption, the amount Canadians can earn tax-free, will be raised by the same amount.

The tax credit for any given fiscal year's surplus will be applied to the following year's tax returns.

"If you are already getting a (tax refund) your cheque will be bigger", the Globe quotes its source as saying. "If you owe the government money, you'll owe less".

The tax relief will depend on the size of the surplus, and in the absence of a surplus would disappear. In recent years Ottawa has tended to underestimate the size of the surplus, which, under current law, is used to pay down the public debt.

What a f-n inefficient way to do it. Lets take the money out of your pocket, then we'll return whatever's left after it goes through the bureaucracy. :roll:

 

[MMMike]

Flat tax yes! The "rich" are still paying more, and by increasing the basic personal exemption the poor can get even more relief. Simplify, and reap the benefits.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Ottawa to Share the W

Flat taxes are regressive as hell. The less money you earn, the larger your tax bill as a proportion of your income. That leaves those struggling to get ahead with fewer resources. It also effectively shifts the tax burden even more from corporations and the very wealthy onto working people.

 

[MMMike]

Re: RE: Ottawa to Share the W

Flat taxes are regressive as hell. The less money you earn, the larger your tax bill as a proportion of your income. That leaves those struggling to get ahead with fewer resources. It also effectively shifts the tax burden even more from corporations and the very wealthy onto working people.

That is false: look at this. Lets assume a $15,000 basic personal exemption and a 20% flat tax after that. A person making $20,000 will then pay $1,000 in taxes (5,000 x 0.20), or 5% of his income. Someone making $75,000 will pay $12,000 in taxes (60,000 x 0.20), or 16% of his income.

Explain to me again how "the less money you earn, the larger your tax bill as a proportion of your income"??

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Ottawa to Share the W

Because the person making $75,000 can more easily afford $12,000 than the person making $20,000 can afford $2,000. The person making $75,000 is really getting screwed too though. They cannot afford that $12,000 nearly as easily as the person making $300,000 or $700,000.

The end effect is to shift the overall tax burden onto the middle and wroking classes though, while lightening the burden on the very wealthy and corporations. The only way to change that is to exempt everybody making less than $100,000, and I notice that figure never comes up in this discussion.

 

[missile]

It's not the perfect deal, but it is a tax break..I'll accept paying a bit less and getting a few dollars back So,I'm easily pleased,so what?

 

[Andygal]

RE: Ottawa to Share the W

I taught I thaw some vote buying! I did! I did! I did tee some vote buying!

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Ottawa to Share the W

It is some vote buying.

It's going to take more than this to buy my vote. I remember the last tax break a little too well...I got about enough to buy a case of beer or two. I'd be a lot happier if the third going to "new spending" was more directly targeted. I'd be happier still if the tax return was going to people making less and incrementally cut back so the wealthy got nothing.

 

[MMMike]

Re: RE: Ottawa to Share the W

Because the person making $75,000 can more easily afford $12,000 than the person making $20,000 can afford $2,000. The person making $75,000 is really getting screwed too though. They cannot afford that $12,000 nearly as easily as the person making $300,000 or $700,000.

The end effect is to shift the overall tax burden onto the middle and wroking classes though, while lightening the burden on the very wealthy and corporations. The only way to change that is to exempt everybody making less than $100,000, and I notice that figure never comes up in this discussion.

:roll: True socialist thinking Rev. The more money you make, the more you pay... in absolute terms and as a percentage of income. How is that unfair? Just because you think the 'rich' should be brought down to the level of everybody else? We all pay too many taxes in this country. We all deserve some tax relief.

 

[MMMike]

Re: RE: Ottawa to Share the W

I taught I thaw some vote buying! I did! I did! I did tee some vote buying!

Unfortunately this Liberal government doesn't care about the long-term success of this country or its citizens. That doesn't even factor into their thinking! The only thing that matters, is: how many votes will this get us? The daycare plan, gun registry, the NDP budget, all of these things were to buy your vote (with your own money!)

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Ottawa to Share the W

Because the person making $20,000 already has no disposable income. They are just getting by and the less disposable income they have, the less chance they have of upward mobility.

 

[MMMike]

Re: RE: Ottawa to Share the W

Because the person making $20,000 already has no disposable income. They are just getting by and the less disposable income they have, the less chance they have of upward mobility.

It is not for the rich or anybody else to provide these people with a better life. It is up to themselves.

 

[Andygal]

RE: Ottawa to Share the W

some people by virtue of their circunstances lack the wherwithal to help themselves. Getting a good education to get a good job costs money. But in order to get a hold of that money you either have to be born into it or work. But without a good education you can't get a good enough job to afford education. It's a vicious cycle. And the only way to break it is to provide good social programs and tax relief for the disadvantaged.

 

[MMMike]

Re: RE: Ottawa to Share the W

some people by virtue of their circunstances lack the wherwithal to help themselves. Getting a good education to get a good job costs money. But in order to get a hold of that money you either have to be born into it or work. But without a good education you can't get a good enough job to afford education. It's a vicious cycle. And the only way to break it is to provide good social programs and tax relief for the disadvantaged.

Getting a good education is free - its called the local library. Getting a degree does not require deep pockets - have you not heard of student loads, bursaries, summer jobs? A motivated poor person has ample opportunity to better themselves. A lot of these people have bigger obstacles to success, and money won't solve those issues.

 

[Andygal]

RE: Ottawa to Share the W

Do you know what it costs me to get an education, it's going to be about 10,000 dollars a year. A person whose family as an income of 20,000 dollars a year is not going to be able to afford that. Student loans and busaries help but there is still going to money that has to come out of your own pockets.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Ottawa to Share the W

MMMikey, the US has been following your theory for a quarter of a century now. It is far harder to move between classes in the US than it is in Canada even more difficult when compared to European countries that have progressive taxation and social programs.

In other words, your way has been shown not to work.