Ontario’s new “tax on the rich” could reduce revenue

[CDNBear]

It's not a dodge. And to prove it I will list a number of wealthy citizens who will not be moving from Ontario to avoid any surtax.

1. Professional athletes and entertainers. These people have to be where the jobs are.

You do realize that many of which live abroad, and work here right?

2. Corporate executives based in the many corporate HQs located in Ontario.
3. Any business owner who has a business located in Ontario.

Maybe, but as others have pointed out, there are ways around it.

In fact I can't think of a single person who is likely to pack up and leave due to the tax increase. However, I will be pleased to view your list of those you think will leave.

Oh don't try and throw this back on me, it was your claim, I made none.

Nice try though.

I've seen pronouncements like this from the C.D. Howe before. This organizations views any tax increase on those who fund it as a threat. The strange thing is it never produces any data to support its specious claims.

You think so?

Ontario

There's the study again, can you show me the flaws in it? Pretty please.

 

[El Barto]

My views on taxing the rich ......

If you live in a system that benefits you in becoming wealthy then it is only fair you should pay your share.

 

[TenPenny]

It's not a dodge. And to prove it I will list a number of wealthy citizens who will not be moving from Ontario to avoid any surtax.

1. Professional athletes and entertainers. These people have to be where the jobs are.
2. Corporate executives based in the many corporate HQs located in Ontario.
3. Any business owner who has a business located in Ontario.

In fact I can't think of a single person who is likely to pack up and leave due to the tax increase. However, I will be pleased to view your list of those you think will leave.

I've seen pronouncements like this from the C.D. Howe before. This organizations views any tax increase on those who fund it as a threat. The strange thing is it never produces any data to support its specious claims.

Where you work and where you live are not necessarily the same.

 

[Walter]

My views on taxing the rich ......

If you live in a system that benefits you in becoming wealthy then it is only fair you should pay your share.

What does that mean? Who gets to say what's fair?

 

[captain morgan]

Ontario

There's the study again, can you show me the flaws in it? Pretty please.

The only 'flaw' is that it differs in the ideological perspective.

What does that mean? Who gets to say what's fair?

You'll never get a firm answer top that question: Doing so would eliminate the possibilities of carving future taxes off of a demographic.

 

[CDNBear]

The only 'flaw' is that it differs in the ideological perspective.

You'll never get a firm answer to that question: Doing so would eliminate the possibilities of carving future taxes off of a demographic.

Both astute observations.

 

[captain morgan]

Both astute observations.

2 in one day!.... Looks like I filled my quota for the next couple of years or so

 

[CDNBear]

2 in one day!.... Looks like I filled my quota for the next couple of years or so

LOL, maybe, but I wouldn't hesitate to say you will be given many opportunities to make many more.

 

[captain morgan]

Ahhh... You're too kind Bear!

 

[taxslave]

My views on taxing the rich ......

If you live in a system that benefits you in becoming wealthy then it is only fair you should pay your share.

Most are in agreement with that. Where the view diverge is in defining what is a fair share.

 

[El Barto]

Most are in agreement with that. Where the view diverge is in defining what is a fair share.

A quick reply to that is the unfair tax breaks that others are privilaged to... and the accounting ways they are allowed to pay next to nothing.
Just that would be a huge improvement .

 

[JLM]

Most are in agreement with that. Where the view diverge is in defining what is a fair share.

And you'll never arrive at that in a million years. Some people go through life without accessing many (if any gov't services) while others are at the Gov't Agent's office regularly checking for "freebies", possibly while picking up the welfare cheque. :lol::lol: Of course some are determined to get every cent they are "entitled to" while forgetting that entitlement goes hand in hand with genuine need. :lol::lol:

A quick reply to that is the unfair tax breaks that others are privilaged to... and the accounting ways they are allowed to pay next to nothing.
Just that would be a huge improvement .

Good point Bart................the only argument I can think of is that in any venture there is risk, so maybe a "tax break" is an incentive to take the risk for the eventual benefit of the economy in general. :smile:

 

[B00Mer]

You have to get your facts straight. He changed his residency to Bermuda, not the Bahamas. One of his grandsons lives up the street from me.

Also you might want to be aware that, while he changed his residency to Bermuda to avoid inheritance taxes, the companies generate HUGE tax dollars for the economies of NB, NS, PEI, Maine, and Canada. Huge dollars in taxes. And the company profits aren't siphoned off to offshore accounts, they are re-invested into more businesses. Unlike some wealthy people who take the money out of the business.

Yeah, Bermuda not Bahamas...sorta always get those two mixed up.. nevertheless, in 1971 K.C moved out of the country to avoid "income tax." as well did many of his descendents.

Reinvestment's into their own infrastructure is tax deductible, such as a truck or vehicle you can amortize over 3 to 5 years..

Trust me Irving Oil is it business to make money for themselves.. and reminds the Atlantic government of this fact with the threat of pulling out ...


K. C. Irving - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[El Barto]

And you'll never arrive at that in a million years. Some people go through life without accessing many (if any gov't services) while others are at the Gov't Agent's office regularly checking for "freebies", possibly while picking up the welfare cheque. :lol::lol: Of course some are determined to get every cent they are "entitled to" while forgetting that entitlement goes hand in hand with genuine need. :lol::lol:



Good point Bart................the only argument I can think of is that in any venture there is risk, so maybe a "tax break" is an incentive to take the risk for the eventual benefit of the economy in general. :smile:

We would have to have an open audit to really get down to the nuts and bolts of this topic.

 

[TenPenny]

Yeah, Bermuda not Bahamas...sorta always get those two mixed up.. nevertheless, in 1971 K.C moved out of the country to avoid "income tax." as well did many of his descendents.

Well, no, that's not why he moved.

He moved to avoid inheritance taxes.

And his children did not move, although upon his death, they did have to establish residency in Bermuda in order to inherit.

You won't find me claiming they aren't in business to make money. I see, however, where the money is invested. It's not into houses in London and mansions in Florida, like Conrad Black, it's in businesses here in Canada. You might want to do some research.

 

[taxslave]

A quick reply to that is the unfair tax breaks that others are privilaged to... and the accounting ways they are allowed to pay next to nothing.
Just that would be a huge improvement .

So earning $10000 a year and not paying any income tax is an unfair break that someone earning $80000 is not entitled to right?

 

[El Barto]

So earning $10000 a year and not paying any income tax is an unfair break that someone earning $80000 is not entitled to right?

Sure ... but still look ate the ease of one life style compared to the other .

 

[TenPenny]

So earning $10000 a year and not paying any income tax is an unfair break that someone earning $80000 is not entitled to right?

You could say that, but for the person earning $80,000/year, the first $10,000 isn't taxed, so in reality, it's fair.

 

[El Barto]

i love the points being brought up

 

[taxslave]

Sure ... but still look ate the ease of one life style compared to the other .

BUt if you overtax the producers where is the incentive to work? If my slacker neighbour refuses to work more than 40 hrs a week and takes home $40000 after taxes and I put in 60 or so hrs only to be taxed down to the same takehome why would I bother to try to get ahead?