Conservative Budget

Hank C

Electoral Member
Jan 4, 2006
953
0
16
Calgary, AB
link
Corporate Canada: budget a win-win situation

Ottawa — Corporate Canada landed a major win Tuesday, as the new Conservative government's first budget featured greater-than-expected tax cuts and a range of other measures designed to boost the country's economic performance.

The budget, highlighted by a broad tax cuts for both corporations and consumers, measured spending increases, and money for productivity-enhancing spending such as education, followed a four-year period when federal spending jumped by an average of 8 per cent a year.

"The common denominator is prosperity," said Finance Minister Jim Flaherty. "To ensure our long-term prosperity, we need to increase our productivity."

Business groups said Mr. Flaherty's first budget was the most important for economic growth since 2000, when then-finance minister Paul Martin used a burgeoning surplus to unveil $100-billion in tax cuts.

Nancy Hughes Anthony, president of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, said the Tory budget is "in a league" with its 2000 counterpart.

Perrin Beatty, chief executive officer of Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters, said Tuesday's budget was a pleasant surprise.

"This is encouraging — a better budget for business than we have seen in the last five years," said Mr. Beatty. "It includes measures that will have a real benefit for business."

Those measures included: — Eliminating the federal capital tax, which economists describe as among the most harmful of taxes, as of Jan. 1 of this year. That's two years ahead of schedule.

— Increasing the amount of small business income eligible for the 12 per cent tax rate to $400,000 from $300,000, as of Jan. 1, 2007.

— Chopping that tax rate to 11.5 per cent in 2008 and to 11 per cent in 2009, from 12 per cent. That's a reaffirmation of a Liberal promise.

— Cutting the general corporate income tax rate to 19 per cent, from 21 per cent, by Jan. 1, 2010.

— Eliminating the corporate surtax for all corporations as of Jan. 1, 2008. It had previously been eliminated only for small and medium-sized companies.

— A new tax credit for up to $2,000 for employers who hire and train apprentices.

— A new $1,000 grant for apprentices.

— A new $500 tax deduction for tradespeople for the cost of tools in excess of $1,000 that they must buy as a condition of their job.

The budget also included measures for consumers and employees. Many economists and companies argue such moves are important for the corporate sector because they make it easier to attract highly skilled employees and because they help boost the economy. Those measures include: — A new lowest personal income tax rate of 15.5 per cent. The Liberal government had lowered that rate to 15 per cent from 16 per cent in their fiscal update last fall.

— A new $1,000 tax credit for each employee.

— An increase in the amount that each Canadian can earn tax free for every year between 2005 and 2007. That includes the previously announced $500 increase.

— A reduction in the GST to 6 per cent, from 7 per cent, that will take effect July 1.

The government has also vowed to limit program spending increases to 5.4 per cent in 2006-07 and 4.1 per cent in the year after that. Both of those figures are less than the expected rate of growth for nominal gross domestic product — the key statistic that determines government revenue — and dramatic lower than the Liberals' spending increases in each of the last four years.

Mr. Flaherty also said that the 2005-06 federal surplus is now expected to be $8-billion, which will be used to pay down the government's massive debt. As it stands now, the government plans to pay down about $3-billion a year in ensuring years.

Craig Wright, chief economist at RBC Financial Group, said the budget took "steps in the right direction" towards improving Canada's competitiveness but that it could have gone even further. "Maybe small steps aren't enough right now."

Mr. Wright said the government could have done a lot more to boost the economy if it had used the $4.5-billion a year allocated on the 1 percentage point reduction of the GST on more effective and productive tax cuts. Although popular with voters, economists, the OECD, and even Finance Canada officials have said that the economy won't get as much bang for the buck from a GST cut, as it would from a cut to almost any other tax, particularly to corporate or personal income taxes.
 

Hank C

Electoral Member
Jan 4, 2006
953
0
16
Calgary, AB
Re: RE: Conservative Budget

Toro said:
Looks good.

The only thing I'd point out is that healthcare is growing at about 8% per year. If the Tories are serious about sticking to 4-5% spending growth, that means other programs will see expenditure growth of less than nominal GDP growth.

good point
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
The Conservative Budget
My Opinion on Budget 2006

:arrow: Concession Confession

I think that in the past few days and weeks, I may have been too hard on the Government of Canada. While I have some serious reservations in terms of some of their decisions to this point, I don't think that any of those reservations at this point would be appropriate causes to promote the defeat of the Government. I concede that this Government is quite young, and unless one or more of their decisions are in stark contrast to my principles, they have my support (please note the term support — support and a vote are two separate ideas).

:arrow: Reduction of the Debt

It has been indicated in the budget that the Government has the intention of reducing the debt by approximately three billion dollars, a measure which I quite support (although I would, of course, have liked to see more measures taken in relation to the debt). The Government has indicated an interest in reducing the the debt-to-GDP ratio to twenty-five per cent, another endeavour which I am one hundred percent in support of.

:arrow: Choice for Child Care

This is one issue where I think that we are going to see some serious contention in the House of Commons, and an interesting experience in the Senate. This is one of two parts of the budget which I would say that I entirely oppose — as the membership would likely be aware, I support the retention of the agreements between the Provinces of Canada and the previous Government of Canada, and I would have preferred to see this made a clear objective in this budget. I think that the Choice for Child Care program, as per the studies and statements out of institutions such as the Caledon Institute on Social Policy, is going to be quite ineffective for many households in Canada.

:arrow: The Environment

I was quite dismayed at the presentation, in terms of its representations in relation to the environment. The Government is prepared to terminate our status as a member of the Kyoto Accord, whereas I think that there is a lot of things that we can do to move toward, if not meet, our targets if there were a more environment-dedicated administration in the Parliament of Canada (this goes for the current Government and their predecessor). There is no vision in this budget in terms of the environment, and in fact I think that it shows apathy, on the part of the Government, toward ensuring that future generations have a good ecosystem in which to live.

:arrow: New Taxation Practices

To be quite frank, I think that the reduction in the Goods and Services Tax is an absolute waste of revenue. I don't think that anyone other than those who have an exorbitant amount of disposable income to begin with are going to see any appreciable effect from this reduction. I was quite happy to see the Government compromise on the issue of the status of the lowest-bracket income tax rate — striking centre-ground between the previous Government's fifteen per cent rate, and this Government's wish for sixteen per cent, at a respectable fifteen-point-five per cent. I agree, for the most part, with the remainder of the tax program; however, I think that some of the tax credits being proposed would be better spent on programs.

:arrow: Conclusion

There are other provisions that I have not included here (the budget documents are quite extensive, of course, and therefore I have not yet finished reading them in their entirety); however, from what I have read so far, while I think that some amendments are of course due, I would be inclined to lend my support to this budget. I think that there is room for improvement, and there are some provisions which I would oppose, but considering the entire document, I think that it's a satisfactory budget.

:!: Note : Hank C, could you please revise your link at the top of this thread?
 

bluealberta

Council Member
Apr 19, 2005
2,004
0
36
Proud to be in Alberta
All the comments I have seen, with the predictable exceptions of the Liberals and NDP, have been quite favorable, including leading economists from various organizations.

Five, I think you will find the daycare issue will be a winner once it is all fleshed out. This has been debated on other threads, but suffice it to say that when only 15% of kids in daycare are in the institutionalized daycare the lib plan was going to affect, then the other 85% like the choice.

Regarding Kyoto, I am ecstatic we are looking at getting out of this money transfer scheme, and looking for a made in Canada solution. I much prefer spending billions on home grown programs as opposed to sending billions to another country to buy invisible "credits" that will do nothing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. By the way, exactly what DO you do with a credit when you purchase it? How does it reduce emissions, since it is an intangible concept, and not real?

Lower overall taxes are great. I also heard something today which I had not considered. A one percent cut in the GST is, in reality, a 14.3% cut in the total GST rate. Think about it. If the GST rate was lowered to 3.5%, it is not a 3.5% reduction, it is a 50% reduction in the total GST collected, so this one percent will reduce the GST collected from Canadians by 14.3%. Sometimes the most simple math gets by us.

All in all, the budget give something to everyone, and is a balanced budget. Bravo, Steve. Keep it up, and a majority is yours at the next election.

BTW, the Bloc will not vote against the budget, so the posturing by the NDP and Libs is simply that, bluff and posture.
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
That is quite true, bluealberta.

It was made quite obvious today that, on principle, Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition and the New Democratic Party of Canada are going to be opposing the implementation of this budget, whereas the Bloc Québécois has indicated their support for the budget in its present form.

This would give dissenting voices, at most (assuming, for argument's sake, that the independent member would vote against the budget), 132 votes. This would mean that, barring some sort of unusual circumstances, this budget is going to be adopted and passed in the House of Commons without too much ruckus.

The Senate will study the legislation to implement budget quite thoroughly, as they have done in the past (they are quite thorough, which is a good thing, in my opinion), but they cannot block the legislation (in the event that they oppose the budget) for more than thirty days.
 

BitWhys

what green dots?
Apr 5, 2006
3,157
15
38
its too damn long. hit the quote button on this post to learn the syntax for embedding urls.

Corporate Canada: budget a win-win situation

the trick is in the url=http:

so we get

1) a set of tax breaks that in all likelihood will get swallowed up in the wake of the pending market correction instead of at least applying the surplus to the debt and reaping the benefits long term

and

2) two torn up agreements justified by the assumption the new government can come up with something better when current experience with Emmerson leads me to believe they're just more prone to announcing solutions than working towards good ones

and

3) a measly $2B in savings mandated to the Treasury leaving the Conservatives officially $20.5B short of their "moderating spending" promise, probably because now that they've seen the books they realize they can't get blood from a stone and have to actually make policy decisions for their micro-managing tendencies to actually yield any results

and

4) a whole bunch of tinker-putt that basically adds up to squat.

It could have been worse.