Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
The math is really simple. What income do you want to use as a test case? Say $50,000 in Alberta. Your effective rate is 32%. After taxes, the UCCB provides you with $489.60. The tax credit that is eliminated was worth $337.50. You're ahead by $152.10 compared to the old system. But also consider:
1. The doubling of the fitness expense limit to $1000 is worth $75.
2. If you spend enough in child care expenses ($5000 for a kid aged 7 to 16), that is worth $320.
So you're up at least $152.10, and maybe as much as $547 just on those changes.
As your marginal rate increases, the advantage of the UCCB over the old credit shrinks. No one has an effective rate of the full 39%, but if you did, you would be up $101.70 over the old system, not taking into account those other changes I noted above.
|
So you come out a couple of hundred bucks ahead which is fine. What people are objecting to is the perception that you're getting $720 which is a great feel good thing at election when in reality the net is a small fraction of that. It's politics per usual