Official (Alberta) Oil Discussion Thread

[Slava]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

It may be wise, although highly unpopular, for the government to consider some sort of estate tax as the boomers start to die off.

A lot of the assets they have today are taxable when they move to the next generation though. So while there is no estate tax, things like RRSPs, houses and other significant assets are all taxed anyway. There are some ways to minimize this impact, but overall the governments aren't exactly dreading this transfer.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I think the issue of an aging demographic is also being looked at too much from one side only.

Yes, the population of every first world nation is getting much older. And yes, that means many people will stop being taxpayers.

However, they are also the wealthiest generation in history, and they are going to switch from being savers to being spenders of that money. They are also going to ensure that healthcare remains to be a growing industry.

Also, their exodus from the workforce should provide opportunity for jobs for others. In Canada, the aging demographic can be largely offset with immigration.

The taxpayer issue can be addressed by reshaping the tax landscape, with more emphasis on sales tax.

Finally, that wealth will eventually be transferred to others - younger others - effectively releasing it from savings.

I continue to believe that the big concern about the aging baby boomers will be a giant non-event. (by non-event, I mean a non-catastrophe... it will undoubtedly cause a great deal of change)

The baby boomers are also the most heavily indebted generation in history. I think most people will be very surprised how little they will be getting from inheritance after lifetime healthcare costs, capital gains on real and investment properties, RRSP/RRIF taxation, debt repayment, estate administration, professional fees and in many cases, estate litigation.

[Enoch Root]

Yeah, estate tax is a terrible idea, IMO - it changes the way people save. And you should never discourage savings.

As Slava said, there are already ways it gets taxed, and once it is transferred, there is usually a significant increase in spending, which is far better than taxation.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

The baby boomers are also the most heavily indebted generation in history. I think most people will be very surprised how little they will be getting from inheritance after lifetime healthcare costs, capital gains on real and investment properties, RRSP/RRIF taxation, debt repayment, estate administration, professional fees and in many cases, estate litigation.

That is already factored into wealth calculations - sure, there is a lot of debt out there, and a lot of people whose debt eats up or dwarfs their savings. However, there is still an incredible amount of wealth stored up by boomers.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

That is already factored into wealth calculations - sure, there is a lot of debt out there, and a lot of people whose debt eats up or dwarfs their savings. However, there is still an incredible amount of wealth stored up by boomers.

Just look at property alone. The average Canadian today inherits about $110K. I don't think it's coincidental that that's around the value of the average home divided by the size of the average family 50 years ago.

[FireGilbert]

Parents aren't necessarily giving their children money to buy homes, but many are allowing their adult children to live at home rent free allowing them to save up enough for a down payment.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Yeah, estate tax is a terrible idea, IMO - it changes the way people save. And you should never discourage savings.

As Slava said, there are already ways it gets taxed, and once it is transferred, there is usually a significant increase in spending, which is far better than taxation.

However this generation that has 750 billion to pass on accumulated roughly the same amount of federal debt by underpayingbtaxes for years.

[4X4]

I just heard on QR77 that Trump is about to approve the KXL. Hope he's not lying about it!!

[Kavvy]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I just heard on QR77 that Trump is about to approve the KXL. Hope he's not lying about it!!

Nice, here:

http://calgaryherald.com/business/en...cess-pipelines

President Donald Trump intends to sign two executive actions today that would advance construction of the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Keystone was rejected under former President Barack Obama. Trump’s move on Energy Transfer Partners LP’s 1,172-mile Dakota Access project aims to end a standoff that has stalled the $3.8 billion project since September when the Obama administration halted work on land near Lake Oahe in North Dakota.

The moves, taken on Trump’s fourth full day in office, mark a major departure from the Obama administration’s handling of the controversial oil pipelines. The steps vividly illustrate Trump’s plan to give the oil industry more freedom to expand infrastructure and ease transportation bottlenecks

[Senator Clay Davis]

Didn't Trump say he wasn't going to approve Keystone unless the US got a bigger share of the profits? Dropped that one pretty fast.

[Kavvy]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Didn't Trump say he wasn't going to approve Keystone unless the US got a bigger share of the profits? Dropped that one pretty fast.

well... it has me concerned what conditions may apply with the approval.

[Senator Clay Davis]

I wouldn't be. He's a Trans Canada shareholder, I doubt he would do anything too harsh on them, and obviously would more likely do something favorable. It's just another lie for his supporters to defend, but defend they will.

[OMG!WTF!]

Sounds like the terms of Keystone xl will have to be renegotiated and the pipes are all going to be built in the USA. How does that effect this project?

[Tron_fdc]

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/tr...160323414.html

Where are you finding terms?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Tron_fdc

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/tr...160323414.html

Where are you finding terms?

From the story you linked: "Both orders are subject to renegotiations of the agreements."

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

Sounds like the terms of Keystone xl will have to be renegotiated and the pipes are all going to be built in the USA. How does that effect this project?

IIRC the Canadian portions have were completed years ago.

[Tron_fdc]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

From the story you linked: "Both orders are subject to renegotiations of the agreements."

I mean specifics (or at least rumoured specifics). Are those available?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Well, no, of course not. The "re-negotiation of the agreements" hasn't started yet. He literally just signed the orders.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Well, no, of course not. The "re-negotiation of the agreements" hasn't started yet. He literally just signed the orders.

Well he's asking because someone claimed a very specific clause adjustment just a few posts up.

[Tron_fdc]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Well, no, of course not. The "re-negotiation of the agreements" hasn't started yet. He literally just signed the orders.

I understand that. What I'm looking for are what might be in the package. Curious what he may have in mind.