Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by GGG

I know it’s not politically palatable but I think a broad based tax increase like raising the 20.5% bracket would be a good idea if not even the 15% bracket. The middle class needs to pay more in taxes if they want the level of services required. We can target tax relief and benefits to those in need with income based programs but base taxation needs to be higher to meaningfully impact revenues.

Just my 2c...

Instead of raising income taxes on the middle class, I think we should take a hard look at a nation wide property tax. It should be accompanied with a rebate system, so that those who are only paying tax on one home would get roughly the same amount back from the rebate, whereas those who own multiple homes would pay substantially more in property tax than they get back. We could also look at something like a multi-year exemption from the tax for first-time home buyers on modest incomes.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Couldn't be because private equity firms and the ultra wealthy buying up all the housing and pricing Canadians out of the market? Couldn't be commodity speculators continually pushing prices of goods higher and higher? Nah, couldn't be that.

Quick, give more tax cuts to the rich, tell Putin to invade a few more countries, and remind everyone that climate change isn't real. That'll solve everything!

I've read this a few times on CP. Any source to private equity firms buying up all the housing?

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Just my 2c...

Instead of raising income taxes on the middle class, I think we should take a hard look at a nation wide property tax. It should be accompanied with a rebate system, so that those who are only paying tax on one home would get roughly the same amount back from the rebate, whereas those who own multiple homes would pay substantially more in property tax than they get back. We could also look at something like a multi-year exemption from the tax for first-time home buyers on modest incomes.

I actually like this idea, well done. The more property you own, the more tax you comparatively pay. Could also ease a bit of pressure on the housing market too, making it easier for first-time home buyers.

[CliffFletcher]

All of the countries with high quality public services fund those services with a broad tax base. Nordic countries have higher income taxes than Canada at every bracket, and 20-25 per cent VAT. While funding our public services through higher taxes on corporations and the rich sounds appealing, there aren’t any real-world examples of it working.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

All of the countries with high quality public services fund those services with a broad tax base. Nordic countries have higher income taxes than Canada at every bracket, and 20-25 per cent VAT. While funding our public services through higher taxes on corporations and the rich sounds appealing, there aren’t any real-world examples of it working.

I think that Norway actually has lower income tax rates than Canada but they are an exception I believe.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Just my 2c...

Instead of raising income taxes on the middle class, I think we should take a hard look at a nation wide property tax. It should be accompanied with a rebate system, so that those who are only paying tax on one home would get roughly the same amount back from the rebate, whereas those who own multiple homes would pay substantially more in property tax than they get back. We could also look at something like a multi-year exemption from the tax for first-time home buyers on modest incomes.

I think that could be done and a broad based middle class tax increase. Compared to Europe we have higher salary’s for Doctors and teachers and lower taxation. It just doesn’t work.

I also don’t think a 2nd property tax moves the needle on housing price. It’s a supply issue right now. But I do agree with taxing luxuries. I’m a supply restricted market price is dictated by mortgage policy and qualifying incomes.

I think taxing under developed and under utilized land to discourage holding would help raise revenue and increase construction rates.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Just my 2c...

Instead of raising income taxes on the middle class, I think we should take a hard look at a nation wide property tax. It should be accompanied with a rebate system, so that those who are only paying tax on one home would get roughly the same amount back from the rebate, whereas those who own multiple homes would pay substantially more in property tax than they get back. We could also look at something like a multi-year exemption from the tax for first-time home buyers on modest incomes.

Wouldn't that be pretty easy to dodge by keeping real estate in separate corporations?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I think that Norway actually has lower income tax rates than Canada but they are an exception I believe.

Yeah, Canada has slightly higher taxes on the rich while Norway has slightly lower taxes on lower income brackets.

But, overall, they both follow an extremely similar model, so I’m not really sure where the fantasy that what Canada is doing hasn’t been done anywhere else successfully comes from. Pointing at progressive tax rates and saying “there’s the problem” seems fairly ignorant when Canada’s issues are far more nuanced than that, but we’d probably benefit from higher taxes across the board.

[Nufy]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

I've read this a few times on CP. Any source to private equity firms buying up all the housing?

Complete speculation...but would it be in the form of all those reverse mortgage commercials I keep seeing.

Or the random "I will buy your home" flyers that keep coming around.

I think it is happening...They are just hiding it well.

[CliffFletcher]

Most “I will buy your home” solicitation is from house-flippers.

There’s no shadowy conspiracy behind the housing crisis. Just demographic challenges, different levels of government working at cross-purposes, and politicians who don’t want to make tough or unpopular decisions.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I think that Norway actually has lower income tax rates than Canada but they are an exception I believe.

Norway also has 25% sales tax (15% for groceries), a wealth tax (~$1000 per $100,000 of net worth above ~$250,000), and a 20-25% Social Security payroll tax (5% for employee, 15-20% for employer depending on how much the employee makes).


If Canada set a general sales tax rate at 25% (feds get 12.5%, provinces get 12.5%), we could drop income taxes quite a bit.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

All of the countries with high quality public services fund those services with a broad tax base. Nordic countries have higher income taxes than Canada at every bracket, and 20-25 per cent VAT. While funding our public services through higher taxes on corporations and the rich sounds appealing, there aren’t any real-world examples of it working.

Actually the brackets for Norway and Sweden are quite high on the rich. In Norway the tax rate jumps over 200% when making more than $85k Canadian, from 4% to 14%. In Sweden if you make more than around $75k Canadian you get hit with an additional 20% state tax above and beyond the normal local taxes.

So yes, here are two real world examples of putting much higher taxes on the richer population.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Yeah, Canada has slightly higher taxes on the rich while Norway has slightly lower taxes on lower income brackets.

But, overall, they both follow an extremely similar model, so I’m not really sure where the fantasy that what Canada is doing hasn’t been done anywhere else successfully comes from. Pointing at progressive tax rates and saying “there’s the problem” seems fairly ignorant when Canada’s issues are far more nuanced than that, but we’d probably benefit from higher taxes across the board.

I don’t think people are pointing at progressive taxes being the issue. I certainly am not. The issue is we are under taxed relative to the level of service we expect.

The solution to that under taxation a broad based tax increases rather than increasing the progressiveness of the system. Increasing the GST to say 10% would also be a good idea.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by belsarius

Actually the brackets for Norway and Sweden are quite high on the rich. In Norway the tax rate jumps over 200% when making more than $85k Canadian, from 4% to 14%. In Sweden if you make more than around $75k Canadian you get hit with an additional 20% state tax above and beyond the normal local taxes.

So yes, here are two real world examples of putting much higher taxes on the richer population.

I didn’t say the rich shouldn’t be taxed higher. I said everyone should be taxed higher.

Canadians at all income levels pay lower taxes than their counterparts in the countries we like to compare ourselves to. Just focusing on the wealthy won’t get us to the public funding for health care, pensions, and education that we expect.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GGG

The solution to that under taxation a broad based tax increases rather than increasing the progressiveness of the system. Increasing the GST to say 10% would also be a good idea.

Given Canada’s increasingly unfavourable demographics and dependency ratio, a 10 per cent GST is a near-certainty. The only question is how deep into crisis we’ll go before we bite the bullet.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Norway also has 25% sales tax (15% for groceries), a wealth tax (~$1000 per $100,000 of net worth above ~$250,000), and a 20-25% Social Security payroll tax (5% for employee, 15-20% for employer depending on how much the employee makes).


If Canada set a general sales tax rate at 25% (feds get 12.5%, provinces get 12.5%), we could drop income taxes quite a bit.

I think that’s probably a good ballpark number. Eliminate PST, HST, all that. One sales tax (with some reductions on essentials or increases on luxuries) that is split with each province 50/50.

Would have to be 20% at least to ensure no provinces are actually losing money under that system. But 25% seems about right.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

I've read this a few times on CP. Any source to private equity firms buying up all the housing?

It's been a fairly recent socialist talking point found in echo chamber subreddits like canadahousing. It has gained ground as a talking point as it became more prevalent and noticeable in the US, but there has been little indication that this is an actual problem in Canada at this time.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/rea...sing-1.6538087

Lack of Canadian data
The scale of current institutional ownership over Canadian housing is unclear, but analysts believe it's far lower than in the U.S. and generally a minor cause of the rapid rise in home prices this country has seen over the last decade.

A few years ago it was all about vacancy taxes and foreign buyer tax and bans, which of course did absolutely nothing to curb housing prices as they are red herrings.

https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/professi...-canadians-act

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...lity-1.7058154

It's much more socially acceptable to hate on private firms and out of country buyers, than pointing out government policies such as bringing 1.2 million immigrants in a country in a year and the impact it would have on housing. Add to this high interest rates causing housing construction to go down at the same time after a few years of unchecked historically low rates causing a buying frenzy on top of an already frothy market and you have a manufactured affordability and housing crisis.

Private equity firms is simply the new socially hip thing to hate on as they can no longer hate on foreign buyers (the whole ban thing).

I can tell you one thing, the new government policy changes to allow 30 year amortization mortgages back for first time home owners is only going to exacerbate the crisis.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GGG

I don’t think people are pointing at progressive taxes being the issue. I certainly am not. The issue is we are under taxed relative to the level of service we expect.

The solution to that under taxation a broad based tax increases rather than increasing the progressiveness of the system. Increasing the GST to say 10% would also be a good idea.

Sure, but increasing progressiveness of the system (code for increasing tax rates above a certain income threshold) is like almost ever solution here: part of it, but not the entire thing. Even the Nordic countries have progressive taxation and aggressively tax “the rich.” So, saying it hasn’t been successful holds little weight when it is part of successful tax systems.

I agree that there needs to be more than that, but it’s as good of a starting place as any. I would say the same about a 10% GST. Good starting point, but not enough in isolation.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Rumblings that tomorrow’s budget is gonna be quite the doozy… increased taxes here we come. And I have my doubts it stops at “the wealthy” (what does this mean)?

If only the government could like, ya know, tell us where they spend the money… maybe they’d get more buy-in.

If I've said it once, I've said it a million times. Most people dont have a problem paying their taxes...until they turn on the News and see their Government wasting it.

Especially high-income earners, because they think: "Why give it to these idiots if they're just going to waste it? I can do better than that."

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I think there was something like “AntiFuzz” or before as well.

Fuzz pissed off someone crazy.

That he did. And I for one think its hilarious!

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Damn, you want the poorest Canadians to contribute even more in taxes as their struggles to live grow every year? That is harsh.

Unfortunately this is pretty much whats going to happen, not the 'poorest' Canadians per se though.

The thing is, we have built-in guide-posts for 'the poor' who would pay little to nothing in terms of taxes.

Its that next-tier or two, the lower-middle and middle that are really going to take it on the chin.

And unfortunately this Liberal Government hasnt done anything about it.

They haven't diversified, innovated, found ways of reducing housing or utility costs, every single thing they've done has literally made Canada a worse and more expensive place to live.

In 20 years Trudeau's legacy will be Legalizing Pot, Blackface, being a dumbass in India and the least Financially transparent Government in modern history.

Where is the money Freeland? Show us the money!

[GGG]

I disagree that it’s a good first step. It’s a good last step. Doing it first continues to reinforce the idea that we don’t need to pay for our services. We can have American taxation and European services because ?????. It’s underpants gnome policy.

You can’t role out Pharmacare, Daycare, and Dental care and have 10% of people pay for it.

The Liberals are losing the next election, the least they could do is have the courage to sue what Mulruny did and make a broad based unpopular tax hike on the way out that the next party will promise to kill but won’t when they see the revenue in brings in.