Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 4
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6121
Reputation: 225
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 6:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PM willing to improve small biz tax plan but won't abandon in face of backlash


Canadian Press

Wednesday, September 6th, 2017


KELOWNA, B.C. — Justin Trudeau is kicking off a Liberal caucus retreat by insisting his government will not back down on a plan to end tax loopholes it maintains give some wealthy small business owners an unfair advantage.

The prime minister says the government is open to finding better ways to fix the problem — but it is determined to fix it.

Liberal MPs have been inundated with complaints about the proposed tax changes and have come to the retreat hoping to persuade Finance Minister Bill Morneau to adjust his plan.

Trudeau’s opening remarks to the retreat signal that the government is willing to make adjustments but won’t abandon the proposals in the face of a growing backlash from doctors, lawyers, shopkeepers and others who have incorporated their small businesses in order to pay less income tax.

Trudeau is also urging Liberal backbenchers not to spend time patting themselves on the back over the government’s accomplishments in the first half of its four-year mandate.

He’s warning them there is plenty of heavy lifting ahead in the second half of the mandate.


http://ipolitics.ca/2017/09/06.....-backlash/
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4038
Reputation: 235.5
votes: 8

PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My bet is that this is only the first tightening of the noose. What is harder to understand is what is the gain. The increase in revenue is reported to be relatively small in a budget of $330 billion. (I saw the figure of $250 million new revenue kicked around.)

This follows on the taxation of previously untaxed employee benefits, such as dental plans. That was a significant tax increase for some people.

They have heaped benefits on single mothers, and mothers in general. For example, the EI has been tweaked to give pregnant women earlier benefits and for longer. People can now get 18 months of parental leave and get a EI cheque. Same sex couples can get more 'fertility' help. (I suppress the urge to joke about an obviously missing part of the equation.) And they're dedicating a $billion a year or so to more daycare spaces. It goes on and on -- EI will pay you for 15 weeks if you are taking care of a relative.

The deficit is $28 billion, so it's important to squeeze another quarter billion where you can. Look for more and more of these bites.

And, you know ... the rich have to pay. Otherwise, it wouldn't be fair.

What is surprising is that they seem to be starting this off as a matter of principle. It runs against political pragmatism. You almost think they are bent on revenge for something we don't know about ...
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 582
Reputation: 90Reputation: 90
votes: 3
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Same sex couples can get more 'fertility' help.

No more help than any straight couple , but then again you know that .

Not to mention they (the couple/single) must pay an exhorbitant amount of money for parts of the treatment and the drugs.

It aint cheap, I know that much.
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7367
Reputation: 295.1
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RCO wrote:

KELOWNA, B.C. — Justin Trudeau is kicking off a Liberal caucus retreat by insisting his government will not back down on a plan to end tax loopholes it maintains give some wealthy small business owners an unfair advantage.

The prime minister says the government is open to finding better ways to fix the problem — but it is determined to fix it.

Liberal MPs have been inundated with complaints about the proposed tax changes and have come to the retreat hoping to persuade Finance Minister Bill Morneau to adjust his plan.


The proposal as laid out is almost unenforceable;
I can't imagine the sheer amount of CRA auditors that would need to be added to play "capital police".

My best guess is you put something so ridiculous forward and watch small business scream then as an alternative you roll back the Harper Era Small Business Tax Cuts and expect to be cheered.

RCO wrote:
Trudeau’s opening remarks to the retreat signal that the government is willing to make adjustments but won’t abandon the proposals in the face of a growing backlash from doctors, lawyers, shopkeepers and others who have incorporated their small businesses in order to pay less income tax.


I would argue that they don't pay less in tax.

The advantage of incorporating is that you can pull money from your corporation as dividends at a slightly lower rather than if you did management fees (income tax) however that is largely reliant on the amount of corporate tax you paid on the profit within the company to begin with, it may be cheaper to pull it as a management free from pretax operating income.

This isn't as a matter that small business pays less tax on passive income its a matter of when they pay tax on that income the second time;

They pay corporate tax on the profit in that year, then when the profit flows through to the individual you pay taxes again as a dividend or as income tax. What changes now is that you can't "leave" the capital in your company as passive income without incurring taxes.

Which effectively taxes operating capital and punishes you for leaving the capital in a Canadian Corporation.

For a individual who does business within Canada primarily (Doctors, Lawyers, etc) they are screwed. For anyone else, I suspect we will see exactly what we say in Ontario in 1990 - 1995.

Business' and capital move 100 miles and wait it out.
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6121
Reputation: 225
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Small biz owners are once bitten, twice shy


Postmedia Network

First posted: Monday, September 11, 2017 05:08 PM EDT | Updated: Monday, September 11, 2017 05:15 PM EDT


Finance minister Bill Morneau has a strange way of going about damage control.

“Trust me, you’ll be fine!” is the message he’s selling small business owners who have mobilized against the Liberals’ proposed changes to the tax rules.

The government is attacking the legal ways mom and pop businesses, family doctors and other professionals use to lower tax rates – income splitting with family members, sheltering investment income within corporations and claiming regular business income as capital gains, which carry lower tax rates.

Understandably, small businesses across the country are incensed. The Liberals are using loaded language like “loopholes” to suggest small business people are tax cheats.

Meanwhile, Stats Can reports, small businesses account for almost 90% of new job creation in this country, and employ about 70% of private sector employees.

Hiking their taxes may have broad economic repercussions.

Morneau appeared on the CTV Sunday morning program Question Period and brushed aside concerns, stating that folks making less than $73,000 a year won’t be impacted at all by the changes.

He’s also stressed that only business owners making more than $150,000 or who have money left in their accounts after maxing out their RRSPs and TFSAs will feel the wrath of his “tax fairness” plan.

None of this is as assuring as Morneau seems to think it is. Small business owners in this country should be forgiven if they’re skeptical. They’re likely feeling once bitten, twice shy.

After all, the Liberals campaigned on dropping the small business tax rate down to 9%. Yet in the 2016 budget, they broke that promise, keeping it at 10.5% for the foreseeable future.

All they’ve got is Morneau’s word that these tax changes won’t affect lower earning small businesses, yet the Liberals have proven their word – at least on financial matters – isn’t worth much these days.

Canadians believe individuals and corporations should pay their fair share. That is not in dispute. But that doesn’t mean they want more wealth distribution.

We should be celebrating people’s success, not punishing them. Is there some sort of moral imperative to target people making over $150,000?

Right now, very little of this makes sense to Canadian business owners. Morneau and Trudeau need to do a whole lot more to explain these changes

http://www.torontosun.com/2017.....-twice-shy
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4038
Reputation: 235.5
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2017 10:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Toronto Centre wrote:
Quote:
Same sex couples can get more 'fertility' help.

No more help than any straight couple , but then again you know that .

Not to mention they (the couple/single) must pay an exhorbitant amount of money for parts of the treatment and the drugs.

It aint cheap, I know that much.


You don't know how many laughs you give me.

I imagine that same sex couples require even more help than the old-fashioned two-sex couples do, but I wonder if Science is required when turkey basters are everywhere, as is sperm.

And, as for the other kind of same sex marriage -- the kind with oodles of sperm, but a shortage of wombs ... well, what to say, but ... Tough luck, fella, them's the breaks. Tell me, what kind of medical help can solve that problem? Maybe a little psychiatry, but that doesn't get us a baby, does it?

So I think the rest of us should just have a good laugh, and point our fingers, jeeringly, at this bit of bureaucratic stupidity and write it off as flagrant policy bias.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4038
Reputation: 235.5
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2017 10:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Re: Small biz owners are once bitten, twice shy

I know that one of the animating points of the early McGuinty government was rolling back every Mike Harris innovation they could get their hands on. They even tried to get rid of the school evaluations and the plain language report cards.

Even Caledonia was motivated to show that they weren't like Mike Harris, who had Ipperwash on his hands.

They have already trimmed the TFSA accounts. I think they'd like to get rid of them because they allow a small amount of capital to be accumulated tax-free. As far as they are concerned, this is a "tax loophole".
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4038
Reputation: 235.5
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2017 10:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Cosmo said:
My best guess is you put something so ridiculous forward and watch small business scream then as an alternative you roll back the Harper Era Small Business Tax Cuts and expect to be cheered.


They are being surprisingly tough on this, and you get the sense of an almost personal animus to small business.

If you put this together with what Wynne is doing in Ontario, and you have to wonder -- when will this lunacy end? $15 minimum wage, spiralling tax future, weirdly ineffective educational system, uncertain electrical power costs ... and meanwhile, if your business can actually support permanent jobs, New York State is giving you a flash of thigh ... you can bet!

Any why not Texas or Indiana?
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7367
Reputation: 295.1
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2017 12:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:


They are being surprisingly tough on this, and you get the sense of an almost personal animus to small business.

If you put this together with what Wynne is doing in Ontario, and you have to wonder -- when will this lunacy end? $15 minimum wage, spiralling tax future, weirdly ineffective educational system, uncertain electrical power costs ... and meanwhile, if your business can actually support permanent jobs, New York State is giving you a flash of thigh ... you can bet!

Any why not Texas or Indiana?


What is interesting is how targeted this is;
The overwhelming majority effected by this change are business owners with five to six figure salaries and business with six to seven figure revenue.

You have largely left the "Donor Class" untouched.

The appeal of moving shop to the US to those who have that option is certainly present, especially with the recent strength of the Canadian Dollar.

Watching the approach the US President and Canadian Prime Minister are taking toward small business couldn't contrast anymore than it does,

If even a fraction of the US tax cuts are passed;
Even if the corporate tax rates don't tumble all the way down from 35 to 15, even if it comes down to 25% that advantage Canadian business had in terms of corporate tax rates begins to erode.

This situation with changing when small business is taxed on capital is a short term win, much like selling Hydro One to balance the books once.

Do we need to give Doctors any more incentive to seek positions in the US?
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 582
Reputation: 90Reputation: 90
votes: 3
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:


You don't know how many laughs you give me.

No surprise there and you are welcome.

What is funny is when the ignorant laugh and dont understand the issue. (heres looking at you !)

But do tell me .....and dont forget the largest most expensive fertility in the city is run by the woman I awoke beside this morning.

I showed her your words. You dont want to know the response.
Quote:

I imagine that same sex couples require even more help than the old-fashioned two-sex couples do, but I wonder if Science is required when turkey basters are everywhere, as is sperm.

The first part is just dumb. They dont , normally, need more help. They need the same help as the straight couples do.
Quote:

And, as for the other kind of same sex marriage -- the kind with oodles of sperm, but a shortage of wombs ... well, what to say, but ... Tough luck, fella, them's the breaks. Tell me, what kind of medical help can solve that problem?

The mental help is for you Sir, your ignorance is refreshing insofar as you love to waddle in it.
Quote:

So I think the rest of us should just have a good laugh, and point our fingers, jeeringly, at this bit of bureaucratic stupidity and write it off as flagrant policy bias.


Atta boy, dont let your abject stupidity get in the way of some moronic rant.
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 582
Reputation: 90Reputation: 90
votes: 3
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[]
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4038
Reputation: 235.5
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2017 4:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't understand why you would spare me the wrath of the woman you wake up with ... she may have a more coherent comment than you do.

Why shouldn't we be laughing our asses off at same sex couples that can't understand why they aren't having children?

It reminds me of the peculiar fact that the present generation needs to have public health nurses to come into schools to show them how a condom is put on. In my day, people had to figure that out for themselves. It shows you how much progress we've made.

So, help me here -- what are the issues that I need to understand.

When a two-sex couple show up at a fertility clinic, as I understand it, they pull out the microscopes to see if the little wigglies are still wiggling. And so on ...

What do they do with childless same sex couples? Do they pull out the microscope and look at their little wigglies? Empathizing and recommending a psychiatrist is not the same treatment that the two-sex couples get. Or am I wrong?

I have another question ... have you ever been a 'donor'?
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6121
Reputation: 225
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

cosmostein wrote:
Bugs wrote:


They are being surprisingly tough on this, and you get the sense of an almost personal animus to small business.

If you put this together with what Wynne is doing in Ontario, and you have to wonder -- when will this lunacy end? $15 minimum wage, spiralling tax future, weirdly ineffective educational system, uncertain electrical power costs ... and meanwhile, if your business can actually support permanent jobs, New York State is giving you a flash of thigh ... you can bet!

Any why not Texas or Indiana?


What is interesting is how targeted this is;
The overwhelming majority effected by this change are business owners with five to six figure salaries and business with six to seven figure revenue.

You have largely left the "Donor Class" untouched.

The appeal of moving shop to the US to those who have that option is certainly present, especially with the recent strength of the Canadian Dollar.

Watching the approach the US President and Canadian Prime Minister are taking toward small business couldn't contrast anymore than it does,

If even a fraction of the US tax cuts are passed;
Even if the corporate tax rates don't tumble all the way down from 35 to 15, even if it comes down to 25% that advantage Canadian business had in terms of corporate tax rates begins to erode.

This situation with changing when small business is taxed on capital is a short term win, much like selling Hydro One to balance the books once.

Do we need to give Doctors any more incentive to seek positions in the US?



the whole thing to me is starting to look like a shake down ? but whats so bizarre is during the election , the liberals actually promised to cut taxes for small businesses . everyone has forgot that they broke that promise , now there taking it a step further and decided to take more money from them


it has the look and smell of something we'd see go down in some communist country somewhere . where the corrupt government decides to go after the business people who are perceived as having too much by the poor lower class , in a way to boost there popularity among the poor , but considering trudeau has already come out and said he admires china's dictatorship and was devastated when Castro died , maybe we shouldn't be surprised
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 582
Reputation: 90Reputation: 90
votes: 3
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
I don't understand why you would spare me the wrath of the woman you wake up with ... she may have a more coherent comment than you do.

She doesnt hold back when encountering ignorance.
Quote:


Why shouldn't we be laughing our asses off at same sex couples that can't understand why they aren't having children?

Considering there isnt even ONE same sex couple in Canada who doesnt know or understand.....what point are you grasping for ?
Quote:

It reminds me of the peculiar fact that the present generation needs to have public health nurses to come into schools to show them how a condom is put on. In my day, people had to figure that out for themselves. It shows you how much progress we've made.

Its precisely because you old guys couldnt figure it out that we need PHN to do the teaching.
Quote:

So, help me here -- what are the issues that I need to understand.

Apart from civility & education ?
Quote:

When a two-sex couple show up at a fertility clinic, as I understand it, they pull out the microscopes to see if the little wigglies are still wiggling. And so on ...

Ovum dont 'wiggle'. I imagined you wouldnt know.
Quote:

What do they do with childless same sex couples?
The exact same thing they do when an opposite sex couple show up with problems conceiving.
Quote:
Or am I wrong?
Only woefully. Your trolllish behaviour si the first clue.
Quote:

I have another question ... have you ever been a 'donor'?
Why does this matter?
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6121
Reputation: 225
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 3:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

( some liberal mp's are starting to break ranks and coming out saying they won't support the changes )



Liberal MP Wayne Long Says He Won’t Support Proposed Federal Tax Reforms


Sep 13, 2017

•by Mark Leger


Wayne Long, MP for Saint John-Rothesay, with N.B. Premier Brian Gallant (Image: Wayne Long Facebook page)


SAINT JOHN – Wayne Long, the Liberal Member of Parliament for Saint John-Rothesay, posted on Facebook last night that he can no longer support the tax reforms for incorporated businesses that are being proposed by the federal government.

His comments came only hours after he was present at an information session organized by The Saint John Region Chamber of Commerce. Before a packed room of more than 150 people, several area business people stood up and urged him to oppose the proposed changes.

“As a former business entrepreneur I understand fully the risks incurred with starting, building, and growing a small business. I’ve lived it,” Long wrote on Facebook last night. “I’ve balanced budgets, worried about meeting payroll, collected receivables so we could get paid etc.”


“I’ve lived the hopes and dreams of having a business. Small business is the backbone of our economy. I believe in my heart that these proposed changes will discourage entrepreneurship and hurt the very people we want to help. I cannot support these proposals without amendments.

“This is difficult for me, but I know I simply can’t support as is.”

Long’s Facebook post has received nearly 1,000 likes and 300 shares. Read the full post below.

http://huddle.today/liberal-mp.....x-reforms/
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 4

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Concerns mount over Morneau's proposed tax changes

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB