Harper vows to cut GST to 5%

[Black Dog]

Actually, I'd like to see GST be removed from family essentials like diapers, baby forumula, etc. and also remove it from natural gas and electricity for residences. This would be easy to do.

Then the NDP is the party for you, friend!

So we could say that it implies that the Liberals and NDP are against tax relief for the poorest members of our society.

In 2004 the ND's proposed a combination of eliminating the GST on essentials and instituting an inheritance tax, so you can count them out of you rlittle formulation.

An income tax cut for middle income earners and an increase in corporate rates (Canada's corporate rate is lower than the U.S's!) would ease the tax burden on the most productive segment of our society.

[scribblet]

Actually, I'd like to see GST be removed from family essentials like diapers, baby forumula, etc. and also remove it from natural gas and electricity for residences. This would be easy to do.

Then the NDP is the party for you, friend!

So we could say that it implies that the Liberals and NDP are against tax relief for the poorest members of our society.

In 2004 the ND's proposed a combination of eliminating the GST on essentials and instituting an inheritance tax, so you can count them out of you rlittle formulation.

An income tax cut for middle income earners and an increase in corporate rates (Canada's corporate rate is lower than the U.S's!) would ease the tax burden on the most productive segment of our society.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

LOL - in some respects it might be, but I don't like the socialist concept that all people should be equally poor. All people should be given equal opportunity, but there's no guarrantee there will be an equality of outcome.

I also believe that lowering the corporate tax rate would help stimulate the economy and provide more jobs.

[BHS]

Actually, I'd like to see GST be removed from family essentials like diapers, baby forumula, etc. and also remove it from natural gas and electricity for residences. This would be easy to do.

Then the NDP is the party for you, friend!

So we could say that it implies that the Liberals and NDP are against tax relief for the poorest members of our society.

In 2004 the ND's proposed a combination of eliminating the GST on essentials and instituting an inheritance tax, so you can count them out of you rlittle formulation.

An income tax cut for middle income earners and an increase in corporate rates (Canada's corporate rate is lower than the U.S's!) would ease the tax burden on the most productive segment of our society.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

While I salivate at the concept of paying lower taxes personally, I don't think it would be of longterm benefit to hike corporate taxes (if you can imagine that, coming from me). Lower corporate taxes are an important incentive to draw business out of the US and to encourage foreign investment aimed at the US to Canada instead. If our corporate taxes were equal to or higher than the US' the incentive would disappear. It doesn't necessarily mean that foreign investment would dry up, of course, but it would be one less reason to choose Canada as a place to build new plants or start new enterprises. Or for that matter, as a place to stay. Tax breaks for the middle class lose their appeal if the result is higher unemployment in the long run.

Being a fan of individual choice versus collective decree, I have an almost visceral aversion to inheritance tax. I don't dedicate my life to the maintainance of government, so why should my life's residue be used for that purpose?

[Black Dog]

I also believe that lowering the corporate tax rate would help stimulate the economy and provide more jobs.

We already have a rock bottom corporate tax rate (as I said, it's lower than the U.S.A). In the past 5 years, the corporate rate has dropped 7 per cent, with little effect on investment. See, corporations have a tendancy to pay out shareholders and stash profits (which have been increasing even as investment stagnates) in offashore tax shelters (I'm looking at you , Paulie!). Individuals are a far more significant economic driver than corporations.

[Guest eureka]

I will spare you, Black Dog, because you are usually a lot brighter than that.The pressures were continent, if not world-wide- from the Right in those times. Liberalism, and Socialism, has not yet made a significant come back.

[southerncomfort]

While I salivate at the concept of paying lower taxes personally, I don't think it would be of longterm benefit to hike corporate taxes (if you can imagine that, coming from me). Lower corporate taxes are an important incentive to draw business out of the US and to encourage foreign investment aimed at the US to Canada instead. If our corporate taxes were equal to or higher than the US' the incentive would disappear. It doesn't necessarily mean that foreign investment would dry up, of course, but it would be one less reason to choose Canada as a place to build new plants or start new enterprises. Or for that matter, as a place to stay. Tax breaks for the middle class lose their appeal if the result is higher unemployment in the long run.

Being a fan of individual choice versus collective decree, I have an almost visceral aversion to inheritance tax. I don't dedicate my life to the maintainance of government, so why should my life's residue be used for that purpose?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Me too - whats in your wallet !!!

[August1991]

I also believe that lowering the corporate tax rate would help stimulate the economy and provide more jobs.

We already have a rock bottom corporate tax rate (as I said, it's lower than the U.S.A). In the past 5 years, the corporate rate has dropped 7 per cent, with little effect on investment.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Rock bottom? No, but you are right that our federal corporate tax rate dropped by 7%, from 28% to 21%. The comparison problem is that we must add in provincial corporate tax rates. And on what "profit" is this percentage "calculated"? (God knows.)

Moreover, most Canadians have provincial health insurance, paid through our general taxes or special premiums. Elsewhere, corporations pay part of these premiums for their privileged employees - a form of corporate tax. And what about regressive payroll taxes such as UIC or CPP?

I think we should drop corporation taxes (even payroll taxes) and simply tax (rich) people, or what they own.

As to low corporate taxes, Ireland has successfully done this. Look at Ireland's corporate tax rates.

[Virgil]

Only taxe rich people!? Is that a joke? I believe people should be taxed based on their work. I don't think rich people should be taxed to the point of non- profit but I concur they should be taxed more than lower classes. I think lower class people should be taxed, clearly not as much as rich people but they still need to be taxed as they still benefit from social programs. However, higher classes should not pay for the social benefits of lazy people in the lower classes. I feel Canada's current taxation is adequate.

[CamTheCat]

Regarding the GST, read this media release from the Green Party...

Media Releases

2005-12-03

Harper, Martin miss the point on GST

The Green Party would reduce the GST on products that cut pollution and improve the health of Canadians, while comparably raising it on products that do the opposite.

(Montreal, Saturday, 3 December 2005) - By staking out the pro and con sides over GST cuts, the Conservatives and Liberals have forgotten that the GST is one tool available to the federal government to improve the overall health and direction of society, said Green Party of Canada leader Jim Harris today in Montreal.

"The GST should guide the social, environmental and economic priorities of Canadians by linking its rate to the impact of specific products," said Harris. "In the dying days of Parliament, MPs were able to find the time to fast-track a bill to scrap the 8 per cent luxury tax on Canadian-made jewelry, but couldn't find time to reform the GST system to better reflect the needs of ordinary Canadians."

The Green Party would reduce the GST on products that cut pollution and improve the health of Canadians, while comparably raising it on products that do the opposite. As part of its overall strategy to reduce poverty, the GST would also be gradually eliminated on education supplies, books and children's clothing. GST rebates would be more accurately indexed to reflect the buying patterns of low-income Canadians.

The existing GST is the federal government's double-edged fiscal sword, pumping up government revenues on the one hand, while contributing to increased public costs on the other. According to the Green Party, the underlying flaw of the GST is that the same rate applies to gasoline or Doritos as it does to a fitness club membership or Margaret Atwood's latest bestseller The Penelopiad."

In March 2005, the New England Journal of Medicine published a report that children born today have a life expectancy that could for the first time in recent history be shorter than that of their parents. The author of the report blames rising mortality on disease related to obesity and lack of exercise.

"When one-third of Canadian female single-parent families report worrying about not having enough to eat or eating the quality of food desired, it's a bit rich of the Conservative party to call a news conference in front of plasma TVs to promise a GST cut on SUVs," said Harris.

The Green Party also drew attention to the Liberal Party Red Book, released for the 1993 election that proposed fiscal measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase efficiency and move towards a healthier Canada. "Regrettably, the Liberals have chosen budgetary surpluses over honouring their 1993 pledge."

Thought this was on topic for this thread.

Cameron

[Argus]

Regarding the GST, read this media release from the Green Party...

Media Releases

2005-12-03

Harper, Martin miss the point on GST

The Green Party would reduce the GST on products that cut pollution and improve the health of Canadians, while comparably raising it on products that do the opposite.

How about some examples of what you would raise the GST on? I'm guessing, gasoline (home heating oil?), cars and boats (planes?), but what about big TVs, gas fireplaces, washers and dryers, garage door openers, snowblowers?

Would these be the kinds of things that pay a higher GST, and if so what would that rate be?

[shoop]

Such an utterly ridiculous policy.

Man that is what people want to see, the GST made *more* difficult to understand.

How about some examples of what you would raise the GST on? I'm guessing, gasoline (home heating oil?), cars and boats (planes?), but what about big TVs, gas fireplaces, washers and dryers, garage door openers, snowblowers?

Would these be the kinds of things that pay a higher GST, and if so what would that rate be?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear shoop,

Such an utterly ridiculous policy.

Man that is what people want to see, the GST made *more* difficult to understand.

Not entirely ridiculous, just a poor application. It is the 'carrot and stick' method, one that is tried and true, but the GST manipulation is not the way to go about it.

With Harper announcing cuts to the GST, I believe he is only doing it because the Liberals already announced income tax cuts, a much wiser solution but one Harper can't be seen on as saying 'Me too!". If the intention is to give lower-middle class earners a break for essentials, it should be done through income tax breaks. The GST is applied to 'luxury spending' (although I still can't figure out why toilet paper is taxed and not a dozen donuts at Safeway), and giving 'the poor' 1% off a Sony Playstation is not a great help on the monthly heating bill, nor would it encourage the economy as much as would more money in the hands of the spender.

[shoop]

By taxing less on consumption you put more money in the hands of the spender, don't you?

If the intention is to give lower-middle class earners a break for essentials, it should be done through income tax breaks.  The GST is applied to 'luxury spending' (although I still can't figure out why toilet paper is taxed and not a dozen donuts at Safeway), and giving 'the poor' 1% off a Sony Playstation is not a great help on the monthly heating bill, nor would it encourage the economy as much as would more money in the hands of the spender.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Virgil]

I think I am d'accord somewhat with Cameron, perhaps GST should apply to things more luxiourious, such as "donuts at Safeway" and not so much to essentials such as school supplies.

[Riverwind]

By taxing less on consumption you put more money in the hands of the spender, don't you?

This statement will not be true in practice because the tax cuts will be introduced at a time when there are already a lot of inflationary pressures. In many cases, retailers will be able to increase prices because of increased demand which means the poor will not see any price break at the cash register. In addition, the stimulative effect of tax cuts will increase the size of future interest rate hikes which means that anyone carrying a significant debt load (most Canadians according to the stats) will have to spend whatever savings are left to pay more interest.

IMO tax cuts this time should be focused on things that address Canada's productivity gap by encouraging businesses to invest in technology and training.

[August1991]

IMO tax cuts this time should be focused on things that address Canada's productivity gap by encouraging businesses to invest in technology and training.

What a wonderful world it would be if governments could pick winners, or as you put it, "know how to encourage businesses to invest in technology and training".

I would prefer a government that tries to do less but I'll settle for a government that merely does what it says it will do.

Cutting GST is something everybody can understand. Heavens, Canadians might actually have some trust in the federal government if it ever happened.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear shoop,

By taxing less on consumption you put more money in the hands of the spender, don't you?

Not exactly, when regarding the GST. Again, it is applied to 'luxury spending', so for low-income earners, saving 1% on a new Escalade isn't going to enable them to buy one. Cutting their income tax would help them purchase more of the essentials, while the GST cuts merely takes a very small amount off of 'non-essentials'.

[Canuck E Stan]

The Conservatives are considering income-splitting as part of a package to ease the burden on "massively overtaxed" Canadians, party leader Stephen Harper says.

The measure would be a boon to single-income families who could reduce taxes by dividing total earnings between spouses. Supporters of the idea say stay-at-home parents would no longer be essentially penalized for caring for young children, and seniors would have the fairer treatment they've sought for years.

Harper mulls income-splitting among tax cuts as campaign enters Week 2

Actual solutions to problems we face,how refreshing.Keep going Stevie,your on the right track.

...where are the Liberal solutions?

[GostHacked]

I think the GST is fine where it is. We have been used to it for this long. And really a 2% cut is nice, but in the overal scheme of things in MY life, I won't even notice it. It's alot of money for the government to use (waste).

Keep it in place.

[sharkman]

Harper mulls income-splitting among tax cuts as campaign enters Week 2

Actual solutions to problems we face,how refreshing.Keep going Stevie,your on the right track.

...where are the Liberal solutions?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Income splitting sounds like a unique way to approach things for families. The CTV stated that the GST 1% reduction would save a person about $360 a year, which they pointed out difffered with the Conservative number of $400. Quibble over 40 bucks in a year, sounds like the CTV alright. I haven't heard them differ with the Liberals though. At any rate, I'd notice an extra $30+ bucks a month, it's an extra tank of gas for me. Plus whatever the benefits of income splitting. Bring it on, Harper.

[Canuck E Stan]

MY life, I won't even notice it.

In your life you probably don't notice a lot of things others do.

For others this cut will mean something and will be noticed even if it's a couple of hundred bucks.

Cut the GST.

[lovecanada]

I can't understand how "getting rid of the GST" was a good thing when the Liberals were proposing it in 1993, but now it's not a good thing?? You can't have it both ways. And, people who buy luxury items are paying the GST on them and a luxury tax!!

[shoop]

Because the Liberals are all about demonizing the opposition no matter what.

Interestingly, even the CBC has picked up on it.

That Peter Mansbridge show on Newsworld on Sunday, even mentioned it.

I can't understand how "getting rid of the GST" was a good thing when the Liberals were proposing it in 1993, but now it's not a good thing?? You can't have it both ways. And, people who buy luxury items are paying the GST on them and a luxury tax!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[scarascar]

What I find hilarous about this is as soon as Harper mentioned his great GST nonsense he starting tanking in the polls, and it hasn't let up yet.

The guy is shooting blanks.

[Montgomery Burns]

I'm glad Harper is lowering the GST. As the polls have shown, it is popular with the public too.

He is also going to unveil some more tax cuts. I hope he lowers corporate taxes, and the personal income tax for everybody (1 percentage point per tax base would be nice), instead of discriminating against the productive--like Paul "we lead the world" Martin did with his tax cut for only the first tax rate.

I'm all for keeping more of MY money, because no one manages MY money as good as I do...and that includes the Conservative Party.

The Liberals are crooks and the thought of the NDP getting ahold of my money is terrifying.