Sales tax in Alberta?

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I wonder about the tax barrier, I'm fine with a consumption tax in place of a income tax if that was the plan.

But as taxation at a city, municpal and in theory federal tax level come into effect combined with a health care premium you approach a barrier that the poor and middle class can't afford and you create a situation where government taxation exceeds cost of living increases in the work place.

If a family suddenly has to find a thousand bucks a year for health care premium and gets hit for another thousand or so a year because of a on top of sales tax your impacting them far more then you are the higher income brackets.

Before Alberta abolished health care premiums, low-income individuals and families were exempt. Also, I assume any hypothetical PST would not apply to the necessities of life like groceries and such.

Sales taxes are generally viewed to be a regressive form of taxation, though (that is, they create a greater burden on those with lower incomes than they do on the wealthy).

[opendoor]

Why the reticence to having a normal progressive income tax? I never understood the flat tax's upside. I know why high wage earners would like it, but what does it do for the majority of the population?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Before Alberta abolished health care premiums, low-income individuals and families were exempt. Also, I assume any hypothetical PST would not apply to the necessities of life like groceries and such.

Sales taxes are generally viewed to be a regressive form of taxation, though (that is, they create a greater burden on those with lower incomes than they do on the wealthy).

Add to this that the suggestions yesterday included a rebate just like lower income families receive from the GST.

Originally Posted by opendoor

Why the reticence to having a normal progressive income tax? I never understood the flat tax's upside. I know why high wage earners would like it, but what does it do for the majority of the population?

In talking in passing with Gosbee yesterday he noted that this will deter high income earners from elsewhere from settling here, and obviously we do want attract those people. I've heard this argument before, perhaps most notably at an event where Steve Forbes was speaking. I'm kind of on the fence to be quite honest; I don't want to pay higher taxes!

I also love the efficacy of a consumption tax, and frankly it just makes so much more sense than income tax. People would actually take home more of their pay cheque, and that is definitely a good thing.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Before Alberta abolished health care premiums, low-income individuals and families were exempt. Also, I assume any hypothetical PST would not apply to the necessities of life like groceries and such.

Sales taxes are generally viewed to be a regressive form of taxation, though (that is, they create a greater burden on those with lower incomes than they do on the wealthy).

Until we see the layout we can't be sure of anything.

My concern is that governments seem to be falling into the bear pit of its ok to spend more and increase taxes cause a few cents here or there never hurt anyone.

Even though I make good money, and I get regular yearly increases it just seems that my after tax pay either receeds or stays the same. Even for a middle class family for example that wouldn't get a health care exemption a thousand bucks a year is a lot of money.

A flat tax has its benefits in theory because you don't need the bureaucracy that you do with the more complex tax systems and a flat tax percentage is eminently fair, but to me only if you remove all exemptions and loop holes.

[MarchHare]

Even though I make good money, and I get regular yearly increases it just seems that my after tax pay either receeds or stays the same.

Alberta's provincial income tax rate has been the same for decades, federal income tax was reduced by the Chretien/Martin Liberals, and Harper's Conservatives cut the GST by 2%. I don't think it's possible for your after tax income to have been stagnant if you've been getting regular annual salary increases. Maybe your employer is charging more for your benefits?

A flat tax has its benefits in theory because you don't need the bureaucracy that you do with the more complex tax systems

Progressive tax systems aren't inherently complicated. The tax code only becomes bloated and complex when various governments over the years add all kinds of incentives and deductions because they want to encourage certain kinds of behaviour.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Until we see the layout we can't be sure of anything.

My concern is that governments seem to be falling into the bear pit of its ok to spend more and increase taxes cause a few cents here or there never hurt anyone.

Even though I make good money, and I get regular yearly increases it just seems that my after tax pay either receeds or stays the same. Even for a middle class family for example that wouldn't get a health care exemption a thousand bucks a year is a lot of money.

A flat tax has its benefits in theory because you don't need the bureaucracy that you do with the more complex tax systems and a flat tax percentage is eminently fair, but to me only if you remove all exemptions and loop holes.

Health care premiums were often covered by an employer as part of the benefits package. The elimination of premiums served businesses much more than it did the average citizen.

Also I question what the cost difference would be between administering a progressive tax vs a flat tax. I doubt that there would be hordes of people who would need to be brought in to analyze the tax brackets.

[Northendzone]

I would say that for the majority of low earning Alberta's, it was unlikely that thier er was paying for ahc. The premiums were an unfair tax, because you paid the same regardless of your earnings. So for someone making $25,000 a $1, 000 of after tax money is a big deal while the average caper who made $150,000 likely had thier er paying the bill......

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

A flat tax has its benefits in theory because you don't need the bureaucracy that you do with the more complex tax systems and a flat tax percentage is eminently fair, but to me only if you remove all exemptions and loop holes.

How much bureaucracy is needed for some simple arithmetic though? A progressive tax rate isn't inherently more complex than a flat one; the complexity comes from deductions and credits which can exist (or not exist) under either type of plan.

And while flat taxes seem to strike people as being fair on the surface, they never seem to generate the same revenue as progressive taxes do and when you have a revenue problem you need to get the money from somewhere.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Where does the notion that Alberta is more expensive come from?
I can't think of a single thing that is cheeper here in Vancouver, compared to when I lived in Calgary.
Everything from housing, food, gas, insurance, health care premiums, alcohol, everything & everything is more expensive here.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

Where does the notion that Alberta is more expensive come from?
I can't think of a single thing that is cheeper here in Vancouver, compared to when I lived in Calgary.
Everything from housing, food, gas, insurance, health care premiums, alcohol, everything & everything is more expensive here.

weed

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

Where does the notion that Alberta is more expensive come from?
I can't think of a single thing that is cheeper here in Vancouver, compared to when I lived in Calgary.
Everything from housing, food, gas, insurance, health care premiums, alcohol, everything & everything is more expensive here.

Fresh produce in my experience is cheaper in the lower mainland as well as anything from the sea such as delicious, delicious sushi.

[AR_Six]

Originally Posted by Chingas

Has anybody consulted AR_Six?

Yes they have, don't worry.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by Slava

Again, (and I feel like I'm talking to a wall here) the proposals yesterday weren't about a tax increase. I have no idea how more bluntly that can be said.

Basically you're making a strawman argument here though.

I think pretending that the PC's would institute any changes that would be Revenue Neutral (such as Mintz suggests) is a pipe dream.

As alluded to many times, the PC's believe Alberta needs to drastically INCREASE revenues. Mintz, like the Wild Rose Party and the CTF, is much more on the side of reduction of spending to balance the budgets. He even believes Alberta's reckless spending is hurting the rest of Canada. http://opinion.financialpost.com/201...as-next-spree/


A consumption or sales tax to replace income tax and lower business taxes, while clearly the best option, is incredibly unlikely to ever pass.

[GP_Matt]

If we accept that replacing income tax with a consumption tax is a good thing then we will throw that opportunity away if a sales tax is brought in to balance the budget.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by opendoor

How much bureaucracy is needed for some simple arithmetic though? A progressive tax rate isn't inherently more complex than a flat one; the complexity comes from deductions and credits which can exist (or not exist) under either type of plan.

You can make the reverse argument about a flat tax in that average tax rates in alberta are not that much less progressive than other juridictions.

Compared to others, every jurisdiciton is a bit higher somehwere, and a bit lower somehere. In alberta's case we are generally lower, but not always. Other places may be generally average, or generally higher, but not always.

If people (and not singling you out) want to argue to tax the rich higher blaming the flat tax seems disingenious. A 12% flat tax with a higher exemption could be every bit as effective if its a revenue not an ideology question.

People (especially the big brains around government) should just say what they mean and have a real conversation.

Tax the rich. Fine. How rich? How much?

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

People (especially the big brains around government) should just say what they mean and have a real conversation.

Tax the rich. Fine. How rich? How much?

Anyone who is richer than me should be taxed more. Those rich guys are really screwing us.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

Anyone who is richer than me should be taxed more. Those rich guys are really screwing us.

Whoa there. Haven't we already established that CP'ers are pretty much the 1%er's? Let's not "cripple" the members here . . .

[getbak]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

Anyone who is richer than me should be taxed more. Those rich guys are really screwing us.

Everyone should pay higher taxes...Except me...My taxes are too high.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by chemgear

Whoa there. Haven't we already established that CP'ers are pretty much the 1%er's? Let's not "cripple" the members here . . .

Maybe we should form a lobby group.

[mykalberta]

If they are going to change the tax structure then change it.

5% sales tax (exclude new home builds that meet a certain density requirement - condos etc)
10% income tax on first 100K
12% on the next 75K
14% <175K
Allow the City charters so Cities can have their own consumption taxes to pay for the unique challenges they face Challenges that should be paid for by its citizens and not via resource revenue.

But if there arent severe cuts to ago along with it then no thank you to the new tax.