Federal Election Called for Oct 19, 2015

[nik-]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Did we ever get numbers/estimates suggesting net taxation would be the same?

I don't think so. I know their plan is to run deficits for the first few years, but if you want to shift tax percentages you shouldn't be making yourself a hole to appease either side. It's something that's going to need to be corrected. Why not just correct it at rollout, because going back and re-changing tax rates again is not going to be popular.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by nik-

I don't think so. I know their plan is to run deficits for the first few years, but if you want to shift tax percentages you shouldn't be making yourself a hole to appease either side. It's something that's going to need to be corrected. Why not just correct it at rollout, because going back and re-changing tax rates again is not going to be popular.

Wouldn't cancelling the TFSA increases, UCCB, etc., help?

[The Ditch]

are the tax changes for combined family income or single income ie two people making $88,000 ($176,000) would have tax cuts.

[nik-]

double post

[nik-]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Wouldn't cancelling the TFSA increases, UCCB, etc., help?

That's implemented, but not really on the books yet I would assume. Cancelling that will close a revenue gap yes, but it's a separate gap. They're still punching a hole in the existing tax structure and not accounting for it

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by darklord700

Justine has just defined the middle class as the above.

No, he defined it as $44.7k to $199.9k. If your individual income is anywhere in that range, the Liberal income tax plan will save you money. If you make $200k or more, then your income taxes will go up.

[Looch City]

It's per person, single income.

Quote from platform:

WHAT IT MEANS
Canadians with taxable income between $44,700 and $89,401 per year will see their income tax rate fall. This tax relief is worth up to $670 per year, per person – or $1,340 per year for a two-income household. This middle class tax cut will make our system fairer by asking wealthier Canadians to pay a little more.

https://www.liberal.ca/files/2015/05...ddle-Class.pdf

[I_H8_Crawford]

I do NOT like the Cons with their culture of fear and seeming desire to control all information in this country.

However, I don't like how the Liberals and NDP are trying to turn this into a class war - i.e. TFSAs are for the rich, not the middle class.

I call BS on that and it pisses me off - my wife and I are middle class, we don't make $250K/year (combined...not even close), yet we save our money, and make sure to max out our TFSA and RRSPs each year.

Why should we be punished for saving to retire earlier than usual to make others who make similar money but spend it on cars, expensive real estate, toys etc feel better about themselves?

If the Liberals came out and said "we will keep the TFSA as is" they would have my vote. Hell they could even come out and say, "we will keep the limit as is, but only $5500 in unused room can be carried over each year" and I would vote for them. But instead us savers are being lumped in with the "rich Canadians who can afford to pay for everyone else" and I can't accept that.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Just report it please so we don't have to delete multiple posts.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by I_H8_Crawford

I do NOT like the Cons with their culture of fear and seeming desire to control all information in this country.

However, I don't like how the Liberals and NDP are trying to turn this into a class war - i.e. TFSAs are for the rich, not the middle class.

I call BS on that and it pisses me off - my wife and I are middle class, we don't make $250K/year, yet we save our money, and make sure to max out our TFSA and RRSPs each year.

Why should we be punished for saving to retire earlier than usual to make others who make similar money but spend it on cars, expensive real estate, toys etc feel better about themselves?

If the Liberals came out and said "we will keep the TFSA as is" they would have my vote. Hell they could even come out and say, "we will keep the limit as is, but only $5500 in unused room can be carried over each year" and I would vote for them. But instead us savers are being lumped in with the "rich Canadians who can afford to pay for everyone else" and I can't accept that.

I think the problem is likely that the definition of middle-class is too broad. For you and your wife, the increase might be useful. For a single-income person, making $45k, the increase isn't very much help.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by nik-

That's implemented, but not really on the books yet I would assume. Cancelling that will close a revenue gap yes, but it's a separate gap. They're still punching a hole in the existing tax structure and not accounting for it

It looks like it's on the books as far as their costing plan goes:

http://www.liberal.ca/costing-plan/

[I_H8_Crawford]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I think the problem is likely that the definition of middle-class is too broad. For you and your wife, the increase might be useful. For a single-income person, making $45k, the increase isn't very much help.

The taxes could be a benefit, but frankly, I would rather have a combined $20K/year shoved into our TFSAs to earn more money (compounding FTW) over saving $1300 on taxes each year.

For example, say a 7% return on that first year of JUST the $20K... that's $1400 which is worth more than the tax break already... plus again, that $1400 gets added into the TFSA, so it just grows and grows, and the Gov't can't touch it.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by I_H8_Crawford

The taxes could be a benefit, but frankly, I would rather have a combined $20K/year shoved into our TFSAs to earn more money (compounding FTW) over saving $1300 on taxes each year.

For example, say a 7% return on that first year of JUST the $20K... that's $1400 which is worth more than the tax break already... plus again, that $1400 gets added into the TFSA, so it just grows and grows, and the Gov't can't touch it.

Yeah, I'm not debating that it's probably a nice thing to have for dual-income earners, but it's not really prudent fiscal policy, and it doesn't do much to help people on the lower end of the middle-class scale. Quite frankly, and I've said it before, it annoys me to no end that the middle-class has been the focal point of this election, and the marginalized members of society and the working poor are basically SOL. Not that I was expecting anything different, mind you, the parties are always going to pander to where the most votes are and it's not going to change as long as we maintain a FPTP system.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by rubecube

It looks like it's on the books as far as their costing plan goes:

http://www.liberal.ca/costing-plan/

I see.

They list their tax cut on the middle class and tax increase on the 1%'ers as evening out. I'd really like to see the numbers on that, because I don't buy that at all.

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by I_H8_Crawford

I do NOT like the Cons with their culture of fear and seeming desire to control all information in this country.

However, I don't like how the Liberals and NDP are trying to turn this into a class war - i.e. TFSAs are for the rich, not the middle class.

I call BS on that and it pisses me off - my wife and I are middle class, we don't make $250K/year, yet we save our money, and make sure to max out our TFSA and RRSPs each year.

Why should we be punished for saving to retire earlier than usual to make others who make similar money but spend it on cars, expensive real estate, toys etc feel better about themselves?

If the Liberals came out and said "we will keep the TFSA as is" they would have my vote. Hell they could even come out and say, "we will keep the limit as is, but only $5500 in unused room can be carried over each year" and I would vote for them. But instead us savers are being lumped in with the "rich Canadians who can afford to pay for everyone else" and I can't accept that.

Agreed, this is a part of the Liberal platform that I have a major issue with. The characterization of the TFSA being a tool for the rich is false. It's a vehicle that everyone in the middle class should be taking advantage of and it's a good policy because it encourages private savings and spurs investment. I've been making use of a TFSA since my university days when I was earning minimum wage.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Zarley

I think the Conservatives made a huge mistake by eschewing the consortium debate. Trudeau sounds good in sound bites, but when he gets away from his talking points he comes across as a neophyte. By replacing the high exposure consortium debates with these obscure, online-only affairs, the Conservatives have limited Trudeau's exposure to sound bites from the debates and closely controlled Liberal messaging.

I mean, I know this is a political thread but I really feel like that "Aw geeze, not this #### again" meme is incredibly appropriate at this point.

The "online" debates were not any different to other debates of the past. Being online did not make them "less like previous debates." That they reached less people is likely a blessing for the CPC at this point. Just because Trudeau did well in them does not make them different from the past. When are people going to give up this flawed line of thinking created by terrible CPC ads. He was fine off the cuff, he will be fine going forward.

[EldrickOnIce]

H

Originally Posted by MarchHare

No, he defined it as $44.7k to $199.9k. If your individual income is anywhere in that range, the Liberal income tax plan will save you money. If you make $200k or more, then your income taxes will go up.

This would drop taxes because the amount earned between 44k and 90k is taxed less?
So we are giving couples who earn up to 400k combined a tax break? Because they are middle class?

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

H

This would drop taxes because the amount earned between 44k and 90k is taxed less?
So we are giving couples who earn up to 400k combined a tax break? Because they are middle class?

At the start, yes. He has said it will then creep up on people in the higher echelon of that bracket aswell, I believe.

[puckedoff]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I think the problem is likely that the definition of middle-class is too broad. For you and your wife, the increase might be useful. For a single-income person, making $45k, the increase isn't very much help.

IMO that doesn't make it a bad thing.

Not all tax/savings strategies are going to work the same for everyone, but I wouldn't say a program to help my neighbour is necessarily bad just because it doesn't help me.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Zarley

Agreed, this is a part of the Liberal platform that I have a major issue with. The characterization of the TFSA being a tool for the rich is false. It's a vehicle that everyone in the middle class should be taking advantage of and it's a good policy because it encourages private savings and spurs investment. I've been making use of a TFSA since my university days when I was earning minimum wage.

I think this is a mischaracterization of the Liberal position re: TFSAs. They're not cancelling the program or saying that only rich people use it. They're proposing rolling back the maximum annual contribution limit from $10k to the previous $5.5k amount. It's a fair assessment that typically only the wealthy can afford to take advantage of the $10k cap. That amount is certainly beyond the means of all low-income Canadians and most middle-income earners as well.