[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by calculoso

So... it's all about how to maximize tax revenue, and this policy goes against that in two ways - keeps one person out of the taxable income bracket, and reduces the tax for the other person. Plus it would minimize things like daycare, taking out even more tax revenue (both on the spend and income side).

So really, it has not much to do with what is better for the people, or better for the kids, or better for the family, or better for society as a whole, it's about the taxes.

Anecdotally, sure there men that have their wives under their thumb and oppress them. Anecdotally, there are women that have their men under their thumb and oppress them too.

Everyone knows that women spend by far more than men do. In our modern society, women have a lot more power than most give them credit for... it just depends on how you want to measure it.

I know I am not going to change anyone's mind, but just wanted to say that the gender equality issues are not anecdotal. The issue has been studied and reported on by various neutral 3rd party think tanks.

This is the report that former Harper finance minister Jim Flaherty cited when he opposed the income splitting tax:

https://www.cdhowe.org/why-income-sp...nstitute/15033

The splitting proposal would significantly raise marginal effective tax rates for most lower-earning spouses, thus imposing barriers for working or returning to work; this would make married women more vulnerable by reducing their work experience.

There is also this one:

http://irpp.org/research-studies/choices-vol14-no1/

Gender equity turns out to be a more vital criterion for assessing income splitting than for most tax policy problems. The choice of tax unit has major potential effects on the well-being and autonomy of married and cohabiting women. Joint taxation or the splitting of labour income would reinforce women's traditional roles of staying at home, being more specialized in parenting and being less active in the workforce.

Retaining the individual tax unit with respect to labour earnings, the main source of income for nonelderly couples, with provisions for the splitting of pension and investment income, would satisfy the criteria for a good tax system. This approach would perform best in terms of horizontal equity and gender equity with an acceptable cost in vertical equity. It would avoid the marriage bonuses, marriage penalties and work disincentives for a couple's second earner that arise under full splitting and joint taxation. It would also provide the greatest simplicity for tax administration and compliance and the highest economic efficiency. In short, Canadian tax policy should pursue limited forms of income splitting but otherwise keep the individual tax unit.