Per vote subsidy gone next election!

[Dave_ON]

Well we get nothing back as we have to pay every year. Many people pay nothing and get refunds which takes far more out of the government coffers. Should we halt refunds?

Here's some free financial advice, start an RRSP or if you have one up your contributions. If you make that much money you should certainly be able to afford to squirrel some away. Everyone should have an RRSP regardless of how much they make. You could also have them take more money off of your pay check, any overpayment is money in the bank though the RRSP is a far better option as you actually make money loaning it to the bank as opposed to loaning it to the government.

Getting a refund isn't free money, it means you paid too much tax and are getting it back, free of interest of course. If you owe, it means you didn't pay enough during the year.

Well, the tax reciept is probably here to stay. The socialists would say it's an attack on the poor who wish to donate so good luck getting rid of it. Aside from that if you scrapped this for the tax reasons you'd have to scrap all donation reciepts from charities as well etc. I doubt the government of any stripe would be foolish enough to do this.

You can't compare a political party to a charity. Ending the tax credit for one does not mean you have to end it for the other and no one would ever suggest otherwise. Besides the two tax credits work differently. One is a reduction in taxes payable the other is a reduction in income, much like an RRSP.

[Mr.Canada]

Your grasp of $ can't possibly be that poor.

You really are joking, aren't you?

I can't believe I'm about to explain this to a supposed adult, but here goes:

You and the other guy each owe $100 for the year, but he pays it off at a rate of $10/month (so ends up paying $20 more than he needs to) but you only pay $8/month, and at the end of the year have to pony up $4 more to pay off the hundred dollar debt.

In the end, you have both have paid $100. Your year-end $4 was not 'extra' to cover money 'given' to him. The $20 he gets back came from him, not you. Paying your debts late doesn't entitle you to give away other folks' money.

This is crazy. I used to get a refund but now we make too much money. I pay much more then I ever used to get back as a refund. We both have extra money taken off of our cheques each pay period and still have to pay each year. The amount I pay and the amount some person gets back as a refund are not equal. I don't know why you're trying to say it is.

The people who actually have to pay taxes are off setting the money that used to pay for the refunds. I don't know how you cannot see this. I am contributing far more money then someone who gets a refund every year because I get no refund. So not only do I get to pay taxes from my cheque every pay period but I also have to pay again at tax time whereas some people get refunds.

So since it is my money that is being used for all the programs and not some welfare bums it's not too much to ask for a bit of break for my donations. Welfare bum pays nothing and gets everything back and then some. I work hard get taxed each pay period and still must pay at tax time. Not to mention everyone is entitled to the tax rebate not just those who pay taxes.

In other words you want me and all those who actually pay taxes to just shut up and keep the money rolling in year after year to pay for your social programs while some others get refunds year after year and give almost nothing to the government coffers.

Here's some free financial advice, start an RRSP or if you have one up your contributions. If you make that much money you should certainly be able to afford to squirrel some away. Everyone should have an RRSP regardless of how much they make. You could also have them take more money off of your pay check, any overpayment is money in the bank though the RRSP is a far better option as you actually make money loaning it to the bank as opposed to loaning it to the government.

Getting a refund isn't free money, it means you paid too much tax and are getting it back, free of interest of course. If you owe, it means you didn't pay enough during the year.

We both have RRSP's as well as stocks both domestic and foreign as well as precious metals. We're well diversified. We moved much of our money around just before the financial crisis hit however so the %'s are different from what they once were.

For the working person yes what you said is true. What about for the people on welfare? It certainly is free money to them as they give nothing to society but take everything. Like parasites.

The Conservatives are NOT ENDING POLITICAL PARTY WELFARE!!!

They are keeping the aspect that supports them the best and generates the most revenue for them. Tax Receiptable donations.

If the Conservatives had any balls they would end all tax rebates.

But they don't dare. Because that would cripple them.

Its the welfare of the Conservative party that is more important.

It will be a good sell.

But no I am not fooled by their shell game.

This is a way to score political points.

I doubt they have the courage to remove the 75% rebate.

Easier get rid of the $1.95 then it is to walk away from $700.

Everyone who makes a political donation to any party gets a tax rebate not just the Tories. Nice try to and paint the Tories as the only ones who get it. So that means all those people who donate to the NDP get even bigger refunds.

Also do you really think that LAyton, Ducceppe and Ignatieff would support a move to get rid of the tax rebates?

I can almost guarantee they would not. Layton would see it as an attack on the poor. Nice try on the spin though I ain't buying it.

Edited April 5, 2010 by Mr.Canada

[bloodyminded]

This is crazy. I used to get a refund but now we make too much money. I pay much more then I ever used to get back as a refund. We both have extra money taken off of our cheques each pay period and still have to pay each year. The amount I pay and the amount some person gets back as a refund are not equal. I don't know why you're trying to say it is.

The people who actually have to pay taxes are off setting the money that used to pay for the refunds. I don't know how you cannot see this. I am contributing far more money then someone who gets a refund every year because I get no refund. So not only do I get to pay taxes from my cheque every pay period but I also have to pay again at tax time whereas some people get refunds.

No, they are not getting your money; they are refunded the money they put in. I understand what you're saying (as you start to get to it afterwards) but on this point you're mistaken.

In other words you want me and all those who actually pay taxes to just shut up and keep the money rolling in year after year to pay for your social programs while some others get refunds year after year and give almost nothing to the government coffers.

Correct. It's a relatively good system.

[Mr.Canada]

No, they are not getting your money; they are refunded the money they put in. I understand what you're saying (as you start to get to it afterwards) but on this point you're mistaken.

Correct. It's a relatively good system.

Great so since you understand that I contribute far more money then a welfare person does I don't see any problem in getting a receipt for my donations. What does a Welfare recipient give in terms of tax load? Answer nothing other then consumption taxes. Yet they get a refund of $400 - 800 each year. Trust me I know, I was one I know how it works.

[bloodyminded]

Great so since you understand that I contribute far more money then a welfare person does I don't see any problem in getting a receipt for my donations. What does a Welfare recipient give in terms of tax load? Answer nothing other then consumption taxes. Yet they get a refund of $400 - 800 each year. Trust me I know, I was one I know how it works.

You would deny to others what you yourself benefited from?

[ToadBrother]

Great so since you understand that I contribute far more money then a welfare person does I don't see any problem in getting a receipt for my donations. What does a Welfare recipient give in terms of tax load? Answer nothing other then consumption taxes. Yet they get a refund of $400 - 800 each year. Trust me I know, I was one I know how it works.

Have you paid back all that unjustified money?

[Mr.Canada]

Have you paid back all that unjustified money?

...and then some.

Stop trying to deflect and answer my question.

What does a Welfare recipient give in terms of tax money other then consumption taxes?

All this doesn't change the fact that people who have to pay taxes each year are contributing far more money to the government coffers then someone who gets a refund does. Plain and simple.

Edited April 5, 2010 by Mr.Canada

[ToadBrother]

...and then some.

Really? Have you written cheques to the government specifically to pay back the welfare you received?

Stop trying to deflect and answer my question.

What does a Welfare recipient give in terms of tax load other then consumption taxes?

There's no doubt that their expenditures cannot possibly cover how much they cost. And yet, the alternatives cost so much more. The whole reason that we began constructing a social safety net, particularly beginning in Victorian times, is because the costs to society of a destitute underclass for outweigh the cost of a monthly welfare cheque.

[Mr.Canada]

There's no doubt that their expenditures cannot possibly cover how much they cost. And yet, the alternatives cost so much more. The whole reason that we began constructing a social safety net, particularly beginning in Victorian times, is because the costs to society of a destitute underclass for outweigh the cost of a monthly welfare cheque.

Great so you admit that welfare recipients first receive money every month out of the government coffers then get a tax refund each year on money they didn't earn.

I earn my own money and am taxed on it each pay period, on top of which I pay taxes each tax season. Bottom line I contribute far more money then a person on social assistance does. Not only that every person of any political stripe who makes a donation gets a receipt, not just those who pay taxes.

So not only do these people get a receipt each year from political donations they also get a larger refund due to it. Poor, middle class and rich alike. Again Layton and Ignatieff would flip out if Harper tried to remove the tax rebate program and you all know it which is why you guys continually ignore this when I post it.

[ToadBrother]

Great so you admit that welfare recipients first receive money every month out of the government coffers then get a tax refund each year on money they didn't earn.

I can't say for sure. Every tax situation is slightly different. I can conceive of situations, I suppose. But so what?

I earn my own money and am taxed on it each pay period, on top of which I pay taxes each tax season. Bottom line I contribute far more money then a person on social assistance does. Not only that every person of any political stripe who makes a donation gets a receipt, not just those who pay taxes.

That may be true. I don't know you enough to say for proof positive. And yes, all political donations to recognized political parties gets you a receipt.

So not only do these people get a receipt each year from political donations they also get a larger refund due to it. Poor, middle class and rich alike. Again Layton and Ignatieff would flip out if Harper tried to remove the tax rebate program and you all know it which is why you guys continually ignore this when I post it.

I have my doubts that many welfare recipients donate in any meaningful degree to political parties. If you have some evidence to the contrary, please provide it.

[Mr.Canada]

I can't say for sure. Every tax situation is slightly different. I can conceive of situations, I suppose. But so what?

That may be true. I don't know you enough to say for proof positive. And yes, all political donations to recognized political parties gets you a receipt.

I have my doubts that many welfare recipients donate in any meaningful degree to political parties. If you have some evidence to the contrary, please provide it.

So you're willing to attack me on just about everything but as soon as I point some truth at your pets, the welfare recipients, all your criticism dries up and instead take the high road. How very fair of you.

[ToadBrother]

So you're willing to attack me on just about everything but as soon as I point some truth at your pets, the welfare recipients, all your criticism dries up and instead take the high road. How very fair of you.

As I have distinct doubts that any substantial number of welfare recipients make political donations, I think the first step here is for you to actually produce some evidence. CAn you provide such evidence or not?

[Dave_ON]

...and then some.

Stop trying to deflect and answer my question.

What does a Welfare recipient give in terms of tax money other then consumption taxes?

All this doesn't change the fact that people who have to pay taxes each year are contributing far more money to the government coffers then someone who gets a refund does. Plain and simple.

Ok I think we're talking two different issues here.

No dispute on welfare recipients point. This is precisely why the very concept of income tax is archaic, consumption, not income should be taxed, but that's for another topic.

I heartily disagree that someone who is getting a refund is contributing less then someone who owes or does not get a refund. Taxes are based on income bracket and are progressive. So if you are like most people and are in the mean tax bracket, roughly 40k to 81k your tax rate is 15% on the first 40K and 22% on anything over 40k but below 81k.

Now if two people make 50k a year they both owe the same amount of tax.

If person A pays 25% on the amount over 40K they have overpaid and are thus entitled to a refund.

If person B pays 20% on the amount over 40k then they owe the government and additional 2%.

In a sense the person who owes tax at the end of the year has contributed less, because they short changed the government 2% of their income. By contrast the person who contributed 3% more actually contributed more overall as the government had additional funds for the duration of the overpayment, they technically weren't entitled to.

The trick of course is lowering your overall taxable income, which you do via RRSPs. The person who makes 50K a year ideally would contribute 10K to their RRSP, effectively dropping their taxable income to 40k and their bracket to 15%.

For a more in depth look at taxation check out the CRA.

http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/fq/txrts-eng.html?=slnk

[Mr.Canada]

Dave, I know this and I was waiting for someone to say it and it turned out to be you. Yes I'm well aware of the percentages. I am referring to total dollar amounts. We make more and thus are taxed more which increases the total amount sent to Ottawa either by pay or by taxes at tax time. Because we're in a higher bracket we give much more then some who makes $25k a year would for example. As someone who makes $25k a year would get a refund of around $1000 or more. We get nothing back and in fact pay. Sure our combined income is higher but so is our total dollar amount we give to Ottawa each year.

So a tax receipt to reduce this amount isn't bad since the overall dollar amount we give Ottawa is much higher then someone who makes less then we do. At the same time we get the same tax rebate for political donations as welfare person or lower income person would. In essence we're being rewarded for including ourselves and participating in the political process of this country. That's how I see it anyhow.

All this argument over a tax rebate worth $500 is a waste of time imho but I like confrontation so...

[madmax]

All this argument over a tax rebate worth $500 is a waste of time imho but I like confrontation so...

You don't deserve a tax rebate.

Tax rebates aren't offered in municipal elections, there is no reason for people to be milking the taxpayer for political contributions.

Your contribution costs more to the taxpayer then the $1.95 your vote would return.

To the tune of $350....

Another Tory Schemer.