Here’s the strategy of the Liberals for the next election campaign. At least it’s not abortion and gun control for fallback bogeyman yet I guess.
Well, today is the Liberal/NDP Non-Coalition Coalition Budget Day!
- Thread starter Ron in Regina
- Start date
All I wanted to know is if she is paying out of pocket for the Ozempic or if its covered and if people like you or me are footing the bill for her bad life choices?
What if it becomes an urban green space generating carbon dioxide and helping to replenish the ozone layer? Seems odd the plan would be to work around the aging infrastructure unless it is running at full capacity. I'd gamble on the entire lot but don't see myself as one who could live there.
TRUDEAU'S BUDGET SUCKS UP MONEY: No relief for Canadians with more Liberal spending — Toronto Sun
WATCH BELOW as the Sun’s political columnist Lorne Gunter says the Trudeau budget will deliver nothing for Canadians. What do YOU think? Tweet and Facebook us!
Bill Morneau slams Freeland's budget as a threat to investment, economic growth — CBC News
Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland's predecessor Bill Morneau says there was talk of increasing the capital gains tax while he was on the job — but he resisted such a change because he feared it would discourage investment by companies and job creators.
He said Canada can expect that investment drought now, in response to a federal budget that targets high-end capital gains for a tax hike. Good times.
TRUDEAU'S BUDGET SUCKS UP MONEY: No relief for Canadians with more Liberal spending — Toronto Sun
WATCH BELOW as the Sun’s political columnist Lorne Gunter says the Trudeau budget will deliver nothing for Canadians. What do YOU think? Tweet and Facebook us!apple.news
Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland's predecessor Bill Morneau says there was talk of increasing the capital gains tax when he was on the job — but he resisted such a change because he feared it would discourage investment by companies and job creators.
Bill Morneau slams Freeland's budget as a threat to investment, economic growth — CBC News
Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland's predecessor Bill Morneau says there was talk of increasing the capital gains tax while he was on the job — but he resisted such a change because he feared it would discourage investment by companies and job creators.
He said Canada can expect that investment drought now, in response to a federal budget that targets high-end capital gains for a tax hike. Good times.
Was just hypothesizing about rail yards in general. Seems like most things being transported are industrial goods, oil, grain, cement, cars and containers which has little to do with an urban freight yard.
CP has a deal going back to the time of construction that no tax is paid for revenue generated by the main line so that would be another reason for them not to change anything to jeopardize that.
CPR argues against paying income tax, cites 140-year-old contract
That’s one heck of a workload.
In her budget speech, Chrystia Freeland, defending the government’s capital gains tax hike to a two-thirds inclusion rate for amounts over $250,000 in a given year, suggested that without the tax hike kids would go hungry — a reference to the government’s National School Food Program. “Do you want to live in a country where kids go to school hungry?” she asked. If not, she remarked, stop complaining and pay up. This of course is nonsense: even if the federal government wanted to insert itself into the provincial responsibility of schooling with a food program, then defunding the CBC, as one easy example, would pay for it seven times over. There is no need for higher taxes.
In addition to the suggestion that poor children will starve without the capital gains tax hike, there have been two main defences of it. The first, as the Liberals claim, is that the tax hike will hit only the super-rich. But even former NDP leader Thomas Mulcair points out, “this is going to clobber artisans, tradespeople, and small business owners” such as those whose retirement assets are non-principal residence properties bought decades ago (since they, unlike government employees, do not have defined benefit pensions).
The other defence of the capital gains tax is that it increases horizontal equity, which means different types of income (labour income, dividends, and capital gains) will be treated more equally under the new policy, whereas previously capital gains were taxed more lightly. Unlike the claims that children would starve otherwise and that only the super-rich will pay the tax, this is a valid argument. But it doesn’t make the tax hike a good thing.
A person whose left leg is already in a cast is unlikely to benefit from an anvil dropped on his right leg to create a symmetrical handicap on the other side; similarly, Canadians suffering a taxation beating when it comes to their labour income will not be helped by Trudeau’s tax hike to “catch up” the severity of the capital gains taxation beating. And, importantly, the people who bear the economic burden of the tax are not only the people on whose tax returns the incidence of the tax appears. Raising the capital gains tax will reduce economic productivity, to the detriment of all Canadians whether they have large capital gains or not.
In 2004, a working paper published by Canada’s Department of Finance estimated the costs to society of seven types of taxes and found that personal capital income taxes were the second most damaging to GDP — in fact, considerably more damaging than corporate income taxes, personal income taxes, and payroll taxes. Other studies have come to similar conclusions, and these results are not surprising. Economic productivity relies on capital investment, and increasing taxes on investment discourages it.
The capital gains tax hike exacerbates the economic harm of Canada’s already punitive tax regime, and contrary to the Liberals’ claims, imposes burdens on all Canadians and not just “the rich.” The Canadian economy is already severely handicapped by the Liberals’ spending explosion, over-taxation, and oppressive regulation: from 2015-Q3 to 2023-Q4, cumulative real GDP growth per capita was less than one per cent in Canada compared to over 15 per cent in the United States. And now comes another anvil in the latest budget to flatten Canadian taxpayers and workers even more.
apple.news
In addition to the suggestion that poor children will starve without the capital gains tax hike, there have been two main defences of it. The first, as the Liberals claim, is that the tax hike will hit only the super-rich. But even former NDP leader Thomas Mulcair points out, “this is going to clobber artisans, tradespeople, and small business owners” such as those whose retirement assets are non-principal residence properties bought decades ago (since they, unlike government employees, do not have defined benefit pensions).
The other defence of the capital gains tax is that it increases horizontal equity, which means different types of income (labour income, dividends, and capital gains) will be treated more equally under the new policy, whereas previously capital gains were taxed more lightly. Unlike the claims that children would starve otherwise and that only the super-rich will pay the tax, this is a valid argument. But it doesn’t make the tax hike a good thing.
A person whose left leg is already in a cast is unlikely to benefit from an anvil dropped on his right leg to create a symmetrical handicap on the other side; similarly, Canadians suffering a taxation beating when it comes to their labour income will not be helped by Trudeau’s tax hike to “catch up” the severity of the capital gains taxation beating. And, importantly, the people who bear the economic burden of the tax are not only the people on whose tax returns the incidence of the tax appears. Raising the capital gains tax will reduce economic productivity, to the detriment of all Canadians whether they have large capital gains or not.
In 2004, a working paper published by Canada’s Department of Finance estimated the costs to society of seven types of taxes and found that personal capital income taxes were the second most damaging to GDP — in fact, considerably more damaging than corporate income taxes, personal income taxes, and payroll taxes. Other studies have come to similar conclusions, and these results are not surprising. Economic productivity relies on capital investment, and increasing taxes on investment discourages it.
The capital gains tax hike exacerbates the economic harm of Canada’s already punitive tax regime, and contrary to the Liberals’ claims, imposes burdens on all Canadians and not just “the rich.” The Canadian economy is already severely handicapped by the Liberals’ spending explosion, over-taxation, and oppressive regulation: from 2015-Q3 to 2023-Q4, cumulative real GDP growth per capita was less than one per cent in Canada compared to over 15 per cent in the United States. And now comes another anvil in the latest budget to flatten Canadian taxpayers and workers even more.
Matthew Lau: Liberal hike to job-killing capital gains tax is inexcusable — National Post
It serves to make Canada's tax system more equally punitive
LILLEY: Key architects of past Liberal budgets slam Trudeau's latest — Toronto Sun
An incoherent, tax-and-spend mess that former top advisors say won't help fix what's wrong with Canada's economy
Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said the higher taxes on capital gains announced in this year’s federal budget are the cost of maintaining a stable democracy, and insisted she wouldn’t have proposed the changes if she believed they would impede investment.
apple.news
“We looked at a lot of economic research,” Freeland said in an interview with The Logic Wednesday, one day after she tabled the Liberal government’s latest budget. “There’s a lot of serious economic research done in Canada and internationally that suggests that tax on capital gains does not hurt economic growth, does not affect entrepreneurship. And if you do it right, you can actually have a positive impact on economic growth.” (?)
OK then.
apple.news
Freeland defends capital-gains tax hike after blowback from tech leaders — The Logic
April 17 at 2:10 PM
OK then.
Benjamin Bergen: Why would anyone invest in Canada now? — National Post
Capital gains tax hike a sure way to repel the tech sector
Queen Cynthia the wise should know , what with her experience in journalism and all .Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said the higher taxes on capital gains announced in this year’s federal budget are the cost of maintaining a stable democracy, and insisted she wouldn’t have proposed the changes if she believed they would impede investment.
“We looked at a lot of economic research,” Freeland said in an interview with The Logic Wednesday, one day after she tabled the Liberal government’s latest budget. “There’s a lot of serious economic research done in Canada and internationally that suggests that tax on capital gains does not hurt economic growth, does not affect entrepreneurship. And if you do it right, you can actually have a positive impact on economic growth.” (?)Freeland defends capital-gains tax hike after blowback from tech leaders — The Logic
April 17 at 2:10 PM
OK then.
Benjamin Bergen: Why would anyone invest in Canada now? — National Post
Capital gains tax hike a sure way to repel the tech sector
“If you’re renting right now, you’re going to want to hear this,” Trudeau said in the short video. “Our upcoming budget is going to make renting fairer.”
He explains that renters will soon be able to see what previous tenants paid so a fair deal can be negotiated.
Trudeau also said renters can expect their monthly payments to count towards building credit scores.
“It doesn’t make any sense for someone who pays $2,000 a month in mortgage payments to get credit for it, but not someone who’s paying $2,000 in rent,” he said.
Trudeau also hinted at “new rights and protections for renters,” particularly when it comes to “renovictions, bad landlords and rent hikes.”
The gist of the plan is to give renters a “leg up” for when it comes time to purchasing a home and focusing on “making the housing market fairer for every generation.”
While Trudeau had some support, with some thinking sounded almost too good to be true, others countered that what the PM previewed won’t change anything.
One person argued: “Seeing a rent history on a rental does nothing for the renter and no landlord is going to negotiate anything lower than asking price in a housing crisis. You are so out of touch it’s not even funny.”
A second person called Trudeau “oblivious to why landlords and property owners need to give significant hikes to try to keep up with the extreme inflation problem this country has.”
Another agreed: “Having rent reflected on credit scores does absolutely NOTHING to help the goal of one day owning when we struggle to save for a down payment with the high costs of rent and living in general and won’t pass the banks stress test anyhow.”
Many Canadians called out the carbon tax that is set to increase by 23% on April 1, and suggested he get rid of that.
“If you want to do something Canadians can support, put a stop to the April 1 pay raise politicians are going to give themselves!”
Meanwhile, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh also entered the ring with his own proposal for renters with a “Renters Protection Fund” that aims to protect people from corporate greed.
“Justin Trudeau and Pierre Poilievre have allowed rich developers to use renovictions to take homes away from Canadians – so they can jack up the rent,” he wrote on social media.
Wait! What? Justin is the Government, and Jagmeet is in the Non-coalition coalition that’s definitely not a coalition-type coalition that’s keeping the Justinites in power to continue to do this stuff, & Jagmeet blames the Real Opposition here?
People in the comments dared Singh to call an election if he wants to change things, however most people doubted he could back up his big talk.
“Coming from the guy who is only in it for the pension,” one person sneered.
“The only reason you are in the coalition and voting with the liberals is to save the pensions of many of the NDP members. You’re not fooling anyone.”
apple.news
He explains that renters will soon be able to see what previous tenants paid so a fair deal can be negotiated.
Trudeau also said renters can expect their monthly payments to count towards building credit scores.
“It doesn’t make any sense for someone who pays $2,000 a month in mortgage payments to get credit for it, but not someone who’s paying $2,000 in rent,” he said.
Trudeau also hinted at “new rights and protections for renters,” particularly when it comes to “renovictions, bad landlords and rent hikes.”
The gist of the plan is to give renters a “leg up” for when it comes time to purchasing a home and focusing on “making the housing market fairer for every generation.”
While Trudeau had some support, with some thinking sounded almost too good to be true, others countered that what the PM previewed won’t change anything.
One person argued: “Seeing a rent history on a rental does nothing for the renter and no landlord is going to negotiate anything lower than asking price in a housing crisis. You are so out of touch it’s not even funny.”
A second person called Trudeau “oblivious to why landlords and property owners need to give significant hikes to try to keep up with the extreme inflation problem this country has.”
Another agreed: “Having rent reflected on credit scores does absolutely NOTHING to help the goal of one day owning when we struggle to save for a down payment with the high costs of rent and living in general and won’t pass the banks stress test anyhow.”
Many Canadians called out the carbon tax that is set to increase by 23% on April 1, and suggested he get rid of that.
“If you want to do something Canadians can support, put a stop to the April 1 pay raise politicians are going to give themselves!”
Meanwhile, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh also entered the ring with his own proposal for renters with a “Renters Protection Fund” that aims to protect people from corporate greed.
“Justin Trudeau and Pierre Poilievre have allowed rich developers to use renovictions to take homes away from Canadians – so they can jack up the rent,” he wrote on social media.
Wait! What? Justin is the Government, and Jagmeet is in the Non-coalition coalition that’s definitely not a coalition-type coalition that’s keeping the Justinites in power to continue to do this stuff, & Jagmeet blames the Real Opposition here?
People in the comments dared Singh to call an election if he wants to change things, however most people doubted he could back up his big talk.
“Coming from the guy who is only in it for the pension,” one person sneered.
“The only reason you are in the coalition and voting with the liberals is to save the pensions of many of the NDP members. You’re not fooling anyone.”
'OUT OF TOUCH:' Canadians react to Trudeau’s video vowing to ‘make renting fairer’ — Toronto Sun
The astronomical cost of rentals in Canada these days has forced Canadians to resort to desperate measures amid the rising cost of living. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took to social media to preview what lies ahead for the nation’s renters. “If you’re renting right now, you’re going to want to...
Well, here’s the Liberal post-budget announcement numbers bump from the mentally challenged and mathematically inept that haven’t taken the time to think things through, or take off their shoes & socks to continue their ciphering of the guzinta’s…
The 2024 budget projects that the Trudeau government will add $156 billion in new debt to the books, the equivalent of 29% of this year’s current budget. Over that same time period the amount of money spent to cover the interest payments on the debt will amount to $291 billion, or 54% of this year’s budget.
apple.news
Interestingly it also bumped the Conservatives & the Bloc. Not so much for the further fringes like the NDP or the PPC.
Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland says she thinks unhappy premiers will come around on measures in the federal budget that “touch” (???) on provincial legislation, even as they push back?? Wanna bet? This explains the jump for the Bloc above.
apple.news
I know that many people in the rest of Canada will roll their eyes at the prospect of a new threat to Canadian unity coming from Quebec. I understand the impatience, the vexation. However, Canadian political leaders need to be clear-eyed and wise in the face of this new challenge.
It would help if the government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at least tried to respect provincial jurisdiction. When Trudeau talks of a new renters’ bill of rights, for example, he is interfering with the Civil Code of Quebec, which has been recognized as Quebec’s civil law since the Quebec Act of 1774.
apple.news
It appears the bulk of the other provinces are none too happy either about the Federal Liberals being Provincial Premiers in place of the actual elected Provincial Governments.
Weird that, and when Scott Moe carved out Saskatchewans own heating fuel exemption just like the Feds did for the Maritimes…the Liberals got a taste of their own medicine but it made no difference leading into this budget.
apple.news
The 2024 budget projects that the Trudeau government will add $156 billion in new debt to the books, the equivalent of 29% of this year’s current budget. Over that same time period the amount of money spent to cover the interest payments on the debt will amount to $291 billion, or 54% of this year’s budget.
LILLEY: Trudeau's budget nothing more than Trump-style populist campaign — Toronto Sun
Trudeau is engaging in a populist campaign of class and generational warfare to win back voters.
Interestingly it also bumped the Conservatives & the Bloc. Not so much for the further fringes like the NDP or the PPC.
Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland says she thinks unhappy premiers will come around on measures in the federal budget that “touch” (???) on provincial legislation, even as they push back?? Wanna bet? This explains the jump for the Bloc above.
Freeland defends budget measures, as premiers push back on federal involvement — CBC News
The federal finance minister said Sunday she's optimistic provincial leaders will come around on measures that touch on their jurisdiction, such as housing.
It would help if the government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at least tried to respect provincial jurisdiction. When Trudeau talks of a new renters’ bill of rights, for example, he is interfering with the Civil Code of Quebec, which has been recognized as Quebec’s civil law since the Quebec Act of 1774.
André Pratte: Quebec separatism is resurging, and Trudeau isn't taking the threat seriously — National Post
Trudeau must remember that, as prime minister, his utmost duty is to keep Canada united
Weird that, and when Scott Moe carved out Saskatchewans own heating fuel exemption just like the Feds did for the Maritimes…the Liberals got a taste of their own medicine but it made no difference leading into this budget.
GUNTER: The never-ending incompetence of the Trudeau Liberals — Toronto Sun
The fancy stats used by economists and business analysts are discouraging enough. Since the Liberals came to office in 2015, business investment per worker is down, productivity is down, per capita Gross Domestic Product has fallen for six consecutive quarters, living standards have fallen...
590,000 barrels per day going to new markets starting in a few days (May 1) will come in handy. That will free up a zillion rail tankers to feed Houston. Oil production will break 4M bbl/d this year.Well, here’s the Liberal post-budget announcement numbers bump from the mentally challenged and mathematically inept that haven’t taken the time to think things through, or take off their shoes & socks to continue their ciphering of the guzinta’s…
The 2024 budget projects that the Trudeau government will add $156 billion in new debt to the books, the equivalent of 29% of this year’s current budget. Over that same time period the amount of money spent to cover the interest payments on the debt will amount to $291 billion, or 54% of this year’s budget.
View attachment 21883LILLEY: Trudeau's budget nothing more than Trump-style populist campaign — Toronto Sun
Trudeau is engaging in a populist campaign of class and generational warfare to win back voters.
Interestingly it also bumped the Conservatives & the Bloc. Not so much for the further fringes like the NDP or the PPC.
View attachment 21884
Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland says she thinks unhappy premiers will come around on measures in the federal budget that “touch” (???) on provincial legislation, even as they push back?? Wanna bet? This explains the jump for the Bloc above.
I know that many people in the rest of Canada will roll their eyes at the prospect of a new threat to Canadian unity coming from Quebec. I understand the impatience, the vexation. However, Canadian political leaders need to be clear-eyed and wise in the face of this new challenge.Freeland defends budget measures, as premiers push back on federal involvement — CBC News
The federal finance minister said Sunday she's optimistic provincial leaders will come around on measures that touch on their jurisdiction, such as housing.
It would help if the government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at least tried to respect provincial jurisdiction. When Trudeau talks of a new renters’ bill of rights, for example, he is interfering with the Civil Code of Quebec, which has been recognized as Quebec’s civil law since the Quebec Act of 1774.
It appears the bulk of the other provinces are none too happy either about the Federal Liberals being Provincial Premiers in place of the actual elected Provincial Governments.André Pratte: Quebec separatism is resurging, and Trudeau isn't taking the threat seriously — National Post
Trudeau must remember that, as prime minister, his utmost duty is to keep Canada united
Weird that, and when Scott Moe carved out Saskatchewans own heating fuel exemption just like the Feds did for the Maritimes…the Liberals got a taste of their own medicine but it made no difference leading into this budget.
GUNTER: The never-ending incompetence of the Trudeau Liberals — Toronto Sun
The fancy stats used by economists and business analysts are discouraging enough. Since the Liberals came to office in 2015, business investment per worker is down, productivity is down, per capita Gross Domestic Product has fallen for six consecutive quarters, living standards have fallen...
There is money coming in but at this rate of spending we won't feel it until we get caught up.
Trans Mountain Successfully Completes Pipe Pullback for Mountain 3…
www.transmountain.com
For the afternoon giggle factor:
apple.news
Only the CBC isn’t treating this like a comedy skit? Weird…The agreement is set to last until June of next year, but Singh has been coy on whether he supports the Liberals' most recent budget.
"We've not made that decision yet," Singh told a press conference Monday. “Maybe all of our MP’s that were elected in 2019 want their pensions and maybe they don’t.”
Freeland states, "I hope that MPs from every single party will support the essential investments in the budget."
(The Conservatives, Bloc Québécois and Green Party have all said they won't be supporting the budget….& Budget votes are confidence votes…so how is Jughead gonna vote again? Oh yeah…)
Singh says NDP still hasn't decided whether to support Liberals' new budget — CBC News
NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said Monday his party still hasn't decided whether it will vote in favour of the federal budget introduced last week.
"We've not made that decision yet," Singh told a press conference Monday. “Maybe all of our MP’s that were elected in 2019 want their pensions and maybe they don’t.”
Freeland states, "I hope that MPs from every single party will support the essential investments in the budget."
(The Conservatives, Bloc Québécois and Green Party have all said they won't be supporting the budget….& Budget votes are confidence votes…so how is Jughead gonna vote again? Oh yeah…)
Facing pushback from physicians and businesspeople over the coming increase to the capital gains inclusion rate, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his deputy Chrystia Freeland are standing by their plan to target Canada's highest earners.
You could almost say they were doubling down on this sales pitch.
In respective press conferences on Tuesday, both Trudeau and his finance minister defended their proposal to rake in $19.3 billion over the next five years by increasing the capital gains inclusion rate — the portion of capital gains on which tax is paid – for individuals with more than $250,000 in capital gains in a year.
This new revenue stream comes as the federal government plans to spend billions of dollars. "At a time when young people have started to give up on the dream of eventually ever being able to own a home, it was really important to rebalance the situation," Trudeau said, speaking to reporters in Saskatchewan.
"I understand for some people this may cost more if they sell a cottage or a secondary residence. But, young people can't buy their primary residences yet." (?)
While not the direct wealth tax or excess profit taxes some had anticipated – given Freeland's dodging of questions about whether those were revenue routes the government was considering – since the budget was tabled, many Canadian business owners and entrepreneurs have raised concerns that the move could stunt innovation.
"At a time when our country is facing critically low productivity and business investment our political leaders are failing our country's entrepreneurs," wrote Shopify president Harley Finkelstein in a post on "X" last week.
On Tuesday, the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) also came out against the move, asking the Liberals to reconsider as the change will impact doctors' retirement savings as most incorporate and operate their practice as a small business.
"It is completely unfair, late in the game taxation for those physicians who did follow the rules of the day and save for their retirement inside of our professional corporations," CMA president Dr. Kathleen Ross said Tuesday.
PBO cautions 'collateral damage'
It's this kind of potential for "collateral damage" that Canada's Parliamentary Budget Officer Yves Giroux voiced caution about in an interview on CTV News Channel's Power Play on Friday, with host Mike Le Couteur.
Citing the sale of secondary residences such as cottages, or rental properties in the current housing market as examples of how Canadians could feel the impact of this tax change, Giroux said it's not unusual for capital gains to be realized "well in excess of $250,000."
"The moment you have a capital gain that's higher than a quarter million, then you're captured by that higher capital gains inclusion rate," he said.
The PBO also cautioned that it's difficult to determine based on the government's current numbers, whether they will actually be able to generate the amount of revenue expected, but his office plans to assess that over the next couple of weeks.
BUT…In defending the capital gains reforms, both Trudeau and Freeland said the way the tax system currently works means a nurse, student, or carpenter could be paying income tax at a higher marginal rate than a multimillionaire who can use accountants to pay a lower tax rate. (?)
So if one person pays 20% on $50,000 minus deductions…but a company pays 17% on $10,000,000 minus deductions, it’s unfair to the person paying 25% on a much much smaller amount in a marginal sort of way?
"That's not fair," Freeland said, speaking in Toronto on Tuesday. "It is fair to ask those who are doing really well to contribute a little bit more."
apple.news
You could almost say they were doubling down on this sales pitch.
In respective press conferences on Tuesday, both Trudeau and his finance minister defended their proposal to rake in $19.3 billion over the next five years by increasing the capital gains inclusion rate — the portion of capital gains on which tax is paid – for individuals with more than $250,000 in capital gains in a year.
This new revenue stream comes as the federal government plans to spend billions of dollars. "At a time when young people have started to give up on the dream of eventually ever being able to own a home, it was really important to rebalance the situation," Trudeau said, speaking to reporters in Saskatchewan.
"I understand for some people this may cost more if they sell a cottage or a secondary residence. But, young people can't buy their primary residences yet." (?)
While not the direct wealth tax or excess profit taxes some had anticipated – given Freeland's dodging of questions about whether those were revenue routes the government was considering – since the budget was tabled, many Canadian business owners and entrepreneurs have raised concerns that the move could stunt innovation.
"At a time when our country is facing critically low productivity and business investment our political leaders are failing our country's entrepreneurs," wrote Shopify president Harley Finkelstein in a post on "X" last week.
On Tuesday, the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) also came out against the move, asking the Liberals to reconsider as the change will impact doctors' retirement savings as most incorporate and operate their practice as a small business.
"It is completely unfair, late in the game taxation for those physicians who did follow the rules of the day and save for their retirement inside of our professional corporations," CMA president Dr. Kathleen Ross said Tuesday.
PBO cautions 'collateral damage'
It's this kind of potential for "collateral damage" that Canada's Parliamentary Budget Officer Yves Giroux voiced caution about in an interview on CTV News Channel's Power Play on Friday, with host Mike Le Couteur.
Citing the sale of secondary residences such as cottages, or rental properties in the current housing market as examples of how Canadians could feel the impact of this tax change, Giroux said it's not unusual for capital gains to be realized "well in excess of $250,000."
"The moment you have a capital gain that's higher than a quarter million, then you're captured by that higher capital gains inclusion rate," he said.
The PBO also cautioned that it's difficult to determine based on the government's current numbers, whether they will actually be able to generate the amount of revenue expected, but his office plans to assess that over the next couple of weeks.
BUT…In defending the capital gains reforms, both Trudeau and Freeland said the way the tax system currently works means a nurse, student, or carpenter could be paying income tax at a higher marginal rate than a multimillionaire who can use accountants to pay a lower tax rate. (?)
So if one person pays 20% on $50,000 minus deductions…but a company pays 17% on $10,000,000 minus deductions, it’s unfair to the person paying 25% on a much much smaller amount in a marginal sort of way?
"That's not fair," Freeland said, speaking in Toronto on Tuesday. "It is fair to ask those who are doing really well to contribute a little bit more."
Amid concerns over 'collateral damage' Trudeau, Freeland defend capital gains tax change — CTV News
Facing pushback from physicians and businesspeople over the coming increase to the capital gains inclusion rate, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his deputy Chrystia Freeland are standing by their plan to target Canada's highest earners.