PM Harper supports small business owner in defending property!

The Right One · April 7, 2012

from the liberal and taliban NDP hugged thugs who want to steal it from hard working individuals.

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/04/06/pms-office-supports-spicemans-battle

The Prime Minister’s Office called Saturday to provide moral support to a Toronto man who faces charges related to an incident last summer.

“It was a nice phone call” said Naveen Polapady, owner of Maroli Indian Kerala Cuisine on Bloor St. W. “I have received a lot of support from the community and other business owners through telephone and email.”

Bill C-26, which has since been dubbed the “Lucky Moose” bill, seeks to clarify the rules around defence of home and property. It was introduced by the Conservative government, but was delayed by the 2011 election.

“I don’t think business owners should have to worry about stuff like that,” said Michael Wickens, who shops regularly at the Lucky Moose. “At the end of the day, they’re just defending themselves.”

This is why canada needs a strong leader and great man such as Prime Minister Harper!!!

Edited April 7, 2012 by The Right One

cybercoma · April 7, 2012

So wait... when is it acceptable for immigrants to get arrested again? You Conservatives are confusing.

punked · April 7, 2012

Just want to point out the NDP wants the small business tax rate in this country to be 0%. That is in their platform. I know it is a bit unrelated but I thought I would point out who really supports small business in this country.

Mr.Canada · April 7, 2012

If people didn't steal there would be no need for such actions on the part of business owners. The focus should be on the people stealing and not the business owner trying to feed his family through legal means.

TimG · April 7, 2012

Just want to point out the NDP wants the small business tax rate in this country to be 0%. That is in their platform.

I suspect most small business owners pay out all of their excess profits as wages or dividends to themselves so changing the tax rate has no effect on their businesses. If this new rate is applied to all income (as opposed to being limited to business related activities) then the NDP will be creating tax shelter that will allow wealthy people to avoid taxation.

IOW, It is a classic NDP policy: sounds good in a sound bite but makes no economic sense.

Edited April 7, 2012 by TimG

cybercoma · April 7, 2012

I suspect most small business owners pay out all of their excess profits as wages or dividends to themselves. Changing the tax rate has no effect on their operations. That said, if this new rate is applied to all income (as opposed to being limited to business related activities) then the NDP will be creating tax shelter that will allow wealthy people to avoid taxation.

That's not at all true. Take a self-employed sign-language interpreter as an example. If she makes more than $30,000/year she needs a GST/HST number, making her a small business. She has no employees, no dividend payouts, and few expenses. At $45,000 per year, she will owe the government roughly $10,000. She's also her own employer, meaning she pays double the CPP someone that earns a paycheque pays. Where someone that sells goods at a market can evade taxes by not claiming their income, she gets much of her income from government for providing services. She can't hide her income like other small businesses that provide goods or services to private people. The NDP dropping her income tax to 0% would make a signifcant difference.

msj · April 7, 2012

I suspect most small business owners pay out all of their excess profits as wages or dividends to themselves so changing the tax rate has no effect on their businesses.

IOW, It is a classic NDP policy: sounds good in a sound bite but makes no economic sense.

Depends on how well the tax rate is integrated. The government has done a much better job of tax integration between corporations and individuals in the past decade.

Since dividends are not deducted from income as compared to wages, a 0% corporate tax rate would lead to an increase in the dividend tax rate (personally) to make up the difference.

IOW - the corporation pays less while the individual pays more.

So, in the end, roughly equivalent treatment and much ado about nothing.

msj · April 7, 2012

That's not at all true. Take a self-employed sign-language interpreter as an example. If she makes more than $30,000/year she needs a GST/HST number, making her a small business. She has no employees, no dividend payouts, and few expenses. At $45,000 per year, she will owe the government roughly $10,000. She's also her own employer, meaning she pays double the CPP someone that earns a paycheque pays. Where someone that sells goods at a market can evade taxes by not claiming their income, she gets much of her income from government for providing services. She can't hide her income like other small businesses that provide goods or services to private people. The NDP dropping her income tax to 0% would make a signifcant difference.

Huh?

If she is a proprietorship and earns that $45,000 she will owe her income tax based on that net income (minus CPP as a deduction and CPP as a tax credit - one being the employer's portion the other being the employee's portion).

If she owns an incorporated company and makes $45,000 and pays it to herself as wages then she will be paying the same amount of income tax and same amount of CPP (it's just that the employer's portion will be deducted by her company while the employee's amount will be a tax credit on her personal return).

Actually, she wouldn't be able to pay herself the $45,000 in wages since the extra costs of accounting fees for filing a corporate tax return with financial statements would eat up some of her profit.

The most used tax advantage of being a small CCPC (Canadian Controlled Private Corporation) comes from leaving earnings in the company (retained earnings) to pay tax at the lower tax rate (in BC, for example, 13.5%).

Why? Because when your personal marginal tax rate is 38%+ wouldn't you rather leave income in the company at 13.5%?

Then years from now you can pull that income out from the company and pay tax at a lower rate (hopefully) all the while you are deferring paying higher taxes (time value of money).

To the extent that my small business corporate tax rate would go to 2.5% (only the BC rate) from 13.5% then yes, this would be a tremendous benefit for me.

But that's because I make more than I need to live on (i.e. I earn more in my company than I need to pull out as either wages/dividends).

As such, the NDP's proposal for a 0% small CCPC tax rate would benefit the top 1 or 2% of earners because we are the ones who earn enough to leave income in our companies to then actually pay corporate income taxes.

Edited April 7, 2012 by msj

Argus · April 7, 2012

Maybe if we had smarter police, you know, cops smart enough not to charge a guy for attacking a robber with a broom and throwing spices at him, we wouldn't need new laws, eh? I swear, every time I read about a cop these days I wonder if we're selecting these guys according to some sort of equity formula that wants to be fair to people with sub-literate level IQs.

And paying them $100,000 a year to boot. :unsure:

Wild Bill · April 7, 2012

Maybe if we had smarter police, you know, cops smart enough not to charge a guy for attacking a robber with a broom and throwing spices at him, we wouldn't need new laws, eh? I swear, every time I read about a cop these days I wonder if we're selecting these guys according to some sort of equity formula that wants to be fair to people with sub-literate level IQs.

And paying them $100,000 a year to boot.

I blame the public sector unions, Argus. They always seem to focus on the most trivial of issues, demanding rule after rule after clause after clause. These are the people that would deny mail service to your home because your mailbox happens to be a few inches higher or lower than their union contract.

They specifically rule out common sense! Nobody is even allowed to make a judgement call. Instead, there is a rule for everything. Anytime the rules don't seem to fit they address the problem by making more rules, until the rule book is so flippin' complicated that no one can understand it!

Problems of course never actually get fixed. They just get diverted into a maze of conflicting rules. Still, if anyone ever asks, they will point to their rulebook as evidence that they actually have done something!

These people have given us rules about zero tolerance for bullying in schools. Look how well that has worked out!

Rush Limbaugh for once was right! The left plays with symbolism and not substance.

cybercoma · April 7, 2012

Maybe if we had smarter police, you know, cops smart enough not to charge a guy for attacking a robber with a broom and throwing spices at him, we wouldn't need new laws, eh? I swear, every time I read about a cop these days I wonder if we're selecting these guys according to some sort of equity formula that wants to be fair to people with sub-literate level IQs.

And paying them $100,000 a year to boot.

Think about the average person you know that becomes a cop. Everyone I know that became a cop had absolutely no interest in protecting the public. They were more interested in fighting bad guys. One idiot even went so far as to say, "I want to be part of the largest and only legal gang in the country."

Argus · April 7, 2012

Think about the average person you know that becomes a cop. Everyone I know that became a cop had absolutely no interest in protecting the public. They were more interested in fighting bad guys. One idiot even went so far as to say, "I want to be part of the largest and only legal gang in the country."

But there's always been that sort of macho mentality among cops. I just can't imagine a cop in the 1950s or 1960s charging a store owner for defending himself from a robber by throwing spices in his face.

punked · April 7, 2012

As such, the NDP's proposal for a 0% small CCPC tax rate would benefit the top 1 or 2% of earners because we are the ones who earn enough to leave income in our companies to then actually pay corporate income taxes.

How about you actually look at where this has been done and look at the impact it has had. The NDP in Manitoba has done this and has seen an increase in investment and growth of small businesses which help drive their economy. They are doing this in NS with an NDP government I think they have cut the rate every year from something like 7% down to 3% again seeing growth from it. With planes to go right to 0. How about because this is being done instead of fear mongering you look at where it has been done and use some real world Canadian examples of what has happened there.

I will be waiting.

Edited April 7, 2012 by punked

cybercoma · April 7, 2012

New Brunswick would benefit tremendously from an NDP provincial government.

punked · April 7, 2012

New Brunswick would benefit tremendously from an NDP provincial government.

They do have an unemployment figure which is 2-3% higher then Nova Scotia's. In fact Halifax where most these small business's are located in their province has one of the lowest unemployment figures in Canada.

cybercoma · April 7, 2012

They do have an unemployment figure which is 2-3% higher then Nova Scotia's. In fact Halifax where most these small business's are located in their province has one of the lowest unemployment figures in Canada.

There's a ton of really creative entrepreneurs in NB. They could use the reduction to expand their businesses.

punked · April 7, 2012

There's a ton of really creative entrepreneurs in NB. They could use the reduction to expand their businesses.

It would better then that gas tax cut and over all corporate cut that blew a huge hole in their budget and only got NB the worst roads in Canada. I wont even leave the trans-Canada when I am in NB because the roads are so bad. It is crazy to think that before the Liberals took over NB it wasn't even close to NS on per capita debt but because of those holes in like a matter of 7 years they have passed NS.

Edited April 7, 2012 by punked

Tilter · April 7, 2012

So wait... when is it acceptable for immigrants to get arrested again? You Conservatives are confusing.

Apparently they can still be arrested ----------------- In Toronto the last holdout of the lieberals.

Topaz · April 7, 2012

So is the Pm going to call ALL business owners when this happens, or homeowners or just ones with foreign names? I can see many people getting into serious problems because they don't understand this new law and I'm not sure even the minister does. http://www.globalnews.ca/new+citizen39s+arrest+law+won39t+condone+vigilantes+justice+minister/6442575874/story.html

msj · April 7, 2012

How about you actually look at where this has been done and look at the impact it has had. The NDP in Manitoba has done this and has seen an increase in investment and growth of small businesses which help drive their economy. They are doing this in NS with an NDP government I think they have cut the rate every year from something like 7% down to 3% again seeing growth from it. With planes to go right to 0. How about because this is being done instead of fear mongering you look at where it has been done and use some real world Canadian examples of what has happened there.

I will be waiting.

Sure, let's look at BC and AB and SK too then:

2000 - BC was 5.123%, AB was 7%, SK was 8% and MB was 7%. Federal rate was 13%.

2011 - BC 2.5%, AB 3%, SK 3.24%, MB 0% and Federal 11%.

Now if you think that MB's economy is booming because of the change in tax rate on small CCPC's then I have a bridge to sell you.

Particularly when you consider that Manitoba has a sales tax whereas Ontario/BC has/soon-to-be-had a VAT and Alberta does not have any sales tax.

MB is booming for reasons unrelated to this tax decrease.

IMO, MB is being foolish - they could raise their tax rate to 2.5%, still be competitive with BC and bring in more tax revenue.

I think it is foolish for any government to sell out to the corporate fat cats - myself included.

Let's look at a fictitious example:

Let's say I make $200,000 in my company and I only need to live off the proceeds of $100,000 of dividends.

Using BC rates since that's where I live:

Corporate tax is $27,000.

Personal tax on the dividend $14,700.

Total tax is $41,700 or an effective combined rate of 20.85%.

This is compared to me being a proprietorship where that $200,000 in income would cost $67,666 in income taxes and another $4,434 in CPP. An effective tax rate of 36.05%.

As you can see I am getting a tremendous advantage by being incorporated - 21% vs 36%.

Sure, I am deferring income tax - years from now I will pull income from my company and pay more income taxes at that time.

But I will likely still be doing that at tax rates that are reasonably low and, if one appreciates the time value of money, that tax will be paid in the future using future dollars rather than present dollars.

BC was going to reduce our federal SB CCPC tax rate to 0% and has decided not to for fiscal reasons.

If BC and the Feds were to decrease the tax rate on my CCPC then my combined tax bill would go from $41,700 now to $14,700 (i.e. just the tax on the dividends I took out).

Thanks for the $27,000 in tax savings and thanks for allowing me to defer this money within my company for years and years.

It is absurd to do this and is nothing more than a tax cut for the wealthy.

Do you think people who run a CCPC and can only make $60,000 per year (and, therefore, take the full $60,000 out of the company to live on) is going to benefit with lower corporate taxes?

Nope.

It's the people like me who earn more than they need to live on who benefit.

That's not fear mongering - it's a simple mathematical fact.

Oh, and I will gladly pay that 2.5% of corporate taxes in BC - $5,000 - rather than live in Manitoba. :lol:

TimG · April 7, 2012

this and has seen an increase in investment and growth of small businesses which help drive their economy.

Which is EXACTLY the argument the conservatives use to justify cutting all business taxes. What rational basis do you have for supporting a small business tax rate of 0% while supporting a increased tax rate on large businesses?

punked · April 7, 2012

Which is EXACTLY the argument the conservatives use to justify cutting all business taxes. What rational basis do you have for supporting a small business tax rate of 0% while supporting a increased tax rate on large businesses?

Because most of Canada's large business comes from the resource sector or spin offs from the resource sector. You really think they are going to drill from oil that in the ground in Alberta from the Virgin Islands, or take diamonds that exist in the North from Indiana? If you want that business the Canadian government doesn't need to cut taxes to bring them here they need to say you want to mine in Canada bring your operations and offices here and mine but because you are take the stuff out of our ground you will pay heavily for that right.

TimG · April 7, 2012

Because most of Canada's large business comes from the resource sector or spin offs from the resource sector.

So you are saying that Canada has no need to to encourage the development of non-resource based businesses?

If you want that business the Canadian government doesn't need to cut taxes to bring them here they need to say you want to mine in Canada

Lots of places have rocks and trees. People with money invest their money in places where they are likely to get the best return. Governments that make a habit of confiscating private wealth tend to find that projects don't get built or take a long time to develop.