View Single Post
Old 10-05-2019, 01:14 PM   #20
rubecube
Franchise Player
 
rubecube's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Victoria
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
That's a bad example, as those two couples would pay pretty similar taxes. In Alberta the first couple would pay $23,150 in taxes ($26,900 minus the $3,750 saved from transferring the lower earning spouse's personal exemption) and the second one would pay $22,200, for a difference of $950.

And I really don't see how it makes sense to disincentive the non-working person or lower earning spouse by effectively taxing that person at the higher earner's marginal rate for any income they earn.

It's a measure that almost solely benefits high earners in traditional family units where one member can afford to not work. It provides essentially nothing about 2/3rds of the population.
This is what I was trying to say. For a family with a single-income earner making $100k, yeah you can argue that maybe it's more fair. Once we start getting above that, it just seems like a tax break for the wealthy.
rubecube is offline   Reply With Quote