Is it actually aiding the wealthiest families or is it just returning their own money? Perhaps there should be a limit on how much one family should have to subsidize the gov't. I'm definitely in favour of the old concept of user pays, but should they pay for more than they use just because they are wealthy? Of course the poorest families aren't going to benefit as much as the rich as many of them don't pay much income tax in the first place.
Sure the government doesn't get the revenue but since no particular department is "operating a program", stuff like this gets overlooked when it comes time to cut. I'm sure I've posted a video here on this matter. There is something like 100 billion dollars in tax credits handed out every year and nobody is checking to see if the goals of these credits are being met (if they even have goals attached to them). If, instead of a tax credit, they offered assistance to those seniors that needed it, we could at least target money where it was needed. I spoke out against the firefighter tax credit for much the same reason. I wasn't too popular amongst some firefighters but some people can't see past their own wants and needs.
Even couples aren't convinced about income splitting.
Everybody is a Socialist.
Income splitting aids wealthiest families most, says study
"This is guaranteed to provide the wealthiest families with the biggest benefit and the poorest families with the least benefit, "said Macdonald in a phone interview. "One in 10 of the top 10 per cent of families are going to get a $5,000 cheque."
Macdonald, who says his study used the most recent Statistics Canada tax-modelling software, concluded that income splitting benefits sole-earner families the most.
Lower-income families, however, cannot afford to have one partner drop out of the workplace in order to take advantage of income-splitting. "The people who can most take advantage of these programs are the people who least need support in the first place," he said.
Income splitting aids wealthiest families most, says study
You spoke out against it....................I spoke out against the firefighter tax credit for much the same reason. I wasn't too popular amongst some firefighters but some people can't see past their own wants and needs.
The merits of a progressive tax system are a whole discussion to themselves.
The simple fact is that an income splitting plan does benefit people with higher incomes more.
They definitely cannot overlook tax cuts when crafting the budget. They have to account for the lost revenue and they have to cut that lost revenue from the budget somewhere.
you spoke out against it....................
Do you ore do you not put a check mark in the volunteer firefighter box.......and try not to bullshyte......
So you think the rich should have to pay more taxes than the poor? Ever hear of equality?
The merits of a progressive tax system are a whole discussion to themselves.
The simple fact is that an income splitting plan does benefit people with higher incomes more.
They definitely cannot overlook tax cuts when crafting the budget. They have to account for the lost revenue and they have to cut that lost revenue from the budget somewhere.
Perhaps the argument hinges on the definition of benefitting. Some may argue that getting your own money back is not a benefit & they may be right as getting your own money back might be regarded as "neutral". -
- - - -
They cannot overlook tax credits but they do
People always bitch about tax deductions when someone else is benefiting, but when it benefits them.......Perhaps the argument hinges on the definition of benefitting. Some may argue that getting your own money back is not a benefit & they may be right as getting your own money back might be regarded as "neutral". -
- - - -
I think it is hard to argue that more money in your pocket is not a benefit.
You spoke out against it....................
Do you ore do you not put a check mark in the volunteer firefighter box.......and try not to bullshyte......
No, they aren't. At 100 billion, I doubt you can find a politician anywhere that understands or could account for more than a handfulMaybe in the sense of reporting on the effects, but the costs are very well understood and accounted for.
Do you expect anyone in this forum to believe this load of B. S. ?Yes, I wrote letters to the two area MPs opposing the tax credit. I made a motion at a fire association meeting requesting the fire association do the same. I believe it would be better if the Feds targeted funds towards smaller municipal fire departments that don't have adequate training and equipment funds.
As for my tax credit. I do check the box and give the refunded amount along with all my honorariums to the fire association.
Take a look at this scenario- you are walking down the road when all of a sudden I jump out of the bush and rob you and the next day I have feelings of guilt and return the money. Is that a benefit?
Do you expect anyone in this forum to believe this load of B. S. ?
No, they aren't. At 100 billion, I doubt you can find a politician anywhere that understands or could account for more than a handful
Tax credits are not budget line itemsWell, the finance guys certainly need to understand it because they need to approve the final budget prepared by the staff.
Face it, it is simple accounting. They can't have a tax credit on the books without accounting for the cost of it in the budget. It is not free money.
Yes, I wrote letters to the two area MPs opposing the tax credit. I made a motion at a fire association meeting requesting the fire association do the same. I believe it would be better if the Feds targeted funds towards smaller municipal fire departments that don't have adequate training and equipment funds.
As for my tax credit. I do check the box and give the refunded amount along with all my honorariums to the fire association.
No, they aren't. At 100 billion, I doubt you can find a politician anywhere that understands or could account for more than a handful