PM Harper and the GST

[Riverwind]

Your missing my point! Howcome when you mention cutting a certain tax, you automatically fire back with a tax hike!? Is it not possible to totally ABOLISH the GST, and not raise any taxes? Yes, it is possible- ill say it again- cut spending, so a $40 billion dollar hole remains a hole.

You are missing everyone elses point. Let's assume that it is possible to cut taxes by $40 billion. In that case, cutting the the GST is dumb policy - that entire 40 billion should be used to reduce income tax.

[SamStranger]

Everyone has their own view on taxes and the way we should be taxed. I don't take the side of any government at all when it comes to taxes. If i had it my way, their would be hardly no tax and everything would be privatized. I make almost $90,000 a year- and I pay over $40,000 in income tax- and another few in GST and PST. Thats not right at all. Id rather pay $90 to see a doctor then pay $40,000 in tax.

Dont let the LYING, HYOPCRITE, ASSHOLE Liberals and NDP tell you "the GST is good". They VOTED AGAISNT IT in 1990, they caused a huge stir in the Senate when Mulrooney got the queens consent to add 8 PC senators to pass the bill. They swore to ABOLISH the GST in their 1993 campaign- and never did. The only party with credibillity on the GST is the Conservatives, because most of them came from the Reform/Alliance- and Preston Manning, Stockwell, and Harper have always been enemies of the GST- and now their finllay cutting it.

No more games. It's time to bring forward leglisation that Abolishes the GST by 2010. We should start a lobby group or something!

[Riverwind]

I make almost $90,000 a year- and I pay over $40,000 in income tax- and another few in GST and PST.

You need a better accountant if you are paying $40K/year on income tax on 90K/year. If you a single person with no deductions you would be paying 25K in Ontario - at most. If you spent every remaining cent on items that charged the PST and the GST you would pay another 8K in sales taxes bringing your total tax bill to 33K. However, you probably spend a big chunk of you money on stuff that is not taxable so I doubt your total tax bill exceeds 30K.

IOW - the 40K/year figure is pure fiction. If you are going to whine about how much tax you pay then get your facts right.

[White Doors]

I think the GSt should go to 5% and then they should take a good long look at income taxes to make them more fair and so everyone pay's less.

Income taxes are MUCH worse than consumption taxes.

[scribblet]

I think the GSt should go to 5% and then they should take a good long look at income taxes to make them more fair and so everyone pay's less.

Income taxes are MUCH worse than consumption taxes.

5% would be good, and in Ontario they should drop the PST to 5%... a nice round 10%

[Renegade]

WE need to convert to a fair tax system. The only definition of a fair tax is one that is equally applied. To that end a system of taxation needs to be created that provides a sufficient revenue stream for the government to pay for existing programs and debt repayment while at the same time being made equal in cost to all tax payers. Since there are two categories of tax payers; business and personal, any new system must be applicable to both.

What do you mean by "equally applied" and that the payment must be "made equal in cost to all tax payers". Does that mean that each man, woman , and child pays the same dollar amount? Why or why not?

In my opinion the first consideration should be the application of taxation. Some things need to be considered exempt from taxation, those things can be described as basic needs. The government ought not to impose tax on basic needs because this has a detrimental impact to the least affluent of citizens. That impact would comprimise the ability of the citizen to acquire basic needs and therefore a floor must be designed in which a citizen can acquire the goods and services necessary to sustain their basic needs.

This consideration may already invalidate your criterion that the taxes be "equally applied". If a person generates only sufficient income (or less) to cover exempted items, then they will pay no tax. This essentially violates that taxes are "equally applied".

To date the most successful means of tax collecting has been the GST. The government spends very little to collect these funds unlike their costs to collect income taxes which are extensive. Using this model makes the most sense then. That in turn dictates a system of taxation that is based upon transactions and not income, it is not personal just business. This system is completely blind in its application.

The biggest reason that the government spends little to collect the GST is that it hoists those costs onto retail businesses. In a fairer system, it would actually have to reimburse businesses for acting as its tax collector.

[Hydraboss]

I make almost $90,000 a year- and I pay over $40,000 in income tax- and another few in GST and PST.

You need a better accountant if you are paying $40K/year on income tax on 90K/year. If you a single person with no deductions you would be paying 25K in Ontario - at most. If you spent every remaining cent on items that charged the PST and the GST you would pay another 8K in sales taxes bringing your total tax bill to 33K. However, you probably spend a big chunk of you money on stuff that is not taxable so I doubt your total tax bill exceeds 30K.

IOW - the 40K/year figure is pure fiction. If you are going to whine about how much tax you pay then get your facts right.

Alberta...$90,000 gross income = $26968.56 deductions (federal & provincial tax, max EI, max CPP) = 29.97% tax load. If you take the remaining $63,031.44 and charge 6% GST = $3781.89 (no prov sales tax) that leaves you with a total tax load of $30,750.45 or 34.17%.

Just thought I would throw that in.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

WE need to convert to a fair tax system. The only definition of a fair tax is one that is equally applied. To

that end a system of taxation needs to be created that provides a sufficient revenue stream for the government to pay for existing programs and debt repayment while at the same time being made equal in cost to all tax payers. Since there are two categories of tax payers; business and personal, any new system must be applicable to both.

What do you mean by "equally applied" and that the payment must be "made equal in cost to all tax payers". Does that mean that each man, woman , and child pays the same dollar amount? Why or why not?

Equal between business and personal tax payers. The level of taxation woud be the same for everybody.

In my opinion the first consideration should be the application of taxation. Some things need to be considered exempt from taxation, those things can be described as basic needs. The government ought not to impose tax on basic needs because this has a detrimental impact to the least affluent of citizens. That impact would comprimise the ability of the citizen to acquire basic needs and therefore a floor must be designed in which a citizen can acquire the goods and services necessary to sustain their basic needs.

This consideration may already invalidate your criterion that the taxes be "equally applied". If a person generates only sufficient income (or less) to cover exempted items, then they will pay no tax. This essentially violates that taxes are "equally applied".

To a degree yes, however what sense is there in taxing a person to death? There needs to be a floor as well as a ceiling doesn't there? If there is nothing left which to pay the government after poviding basic needs than I would suggest the government won't get paid no matter what legislation is in place.

To date the most successful means of tax collecting has been the GST. The government spends very little to collect these funds unlike their costs to collect income taxes which are extensive. Using this model makes the most sense then. That in turn dictates a system of taxation that is based upon transactions and not income, it is not personal just business. This system is completely blind in its application.

The biggest reason that the government spends little to collect the GST is that it hoists those costs onto retail businesses. In a fairer system, it would actually have to reimburse businesses for acting as its tax collector.

Private industry collects GST on a daily basis but submits it to the government quarterly, it banks the money and claims the interest earned as a fee, thats how it was set up in the first place.

[Renegade]

Equal between business and personal tax payers. The level of taxation woud be the same for everybody.

Meaning that Bell Canada, Mom & Pop grocery, Ken Thompson, and you or I would pay the same dollar amount in tax?

[SamStranger]

hahah I laugh at all you "banker" type nerds- who for some really odd reason actually like taxes. For God's sake- the GST is not a good thing. Having to pay 7% or 6% of even 5% on every good or service you buy is horrible. Alberta is smart- they don't even have PST because they see the economic benifit to people. if your taxed less youll spend more. Simple math. Simple- very simple.

Whats even more ammusing is the Liberals and NDP who fight to keep the GST at 7%, even though they voted AGAINST it in 1990- and caused a huuuuge stir in the senate when Mulrooney appointed 8 pc senators. I know ive repeated this many times in this thread, but you guys seem to forget that. The Liberals and NDP have no credibillity when it comes to taxes.

[geoffrey]

Whats even more ammusing is the Liberals and NDP who fight to keep the GST at 7%, even though they voted AGAINST it in 1990- and caused a huuuuge stir in the senate when Mulrooney appointed 8 pc senators. I know ive repeated this many times in this thread, but you guys seem to forget that. The Liberals and NDP have no credibillity when it comes to taxes.

Agreed. But niether does the CPC now.

[White Doors]

hahah I laugh at all you "banker" type nerds- who for some really odd reason actually like taxes. For God's sake- the GST is not a good thing. Having to pay 7% or 6% of even 5% on every good or service you buy is horrible. Alberta is smart- they don't even have PST because they see the economic benifit to people. if your taxed less youll spend more. Simple math. Simple- very simple.

Whats even more ammusing is the Liberals and NDP who fight to keep the GST at 7%, even though they voted AGAINST it in 1990- and caused a huuuuge stir in the senate when Mulrooney appointed 8 pc senators. I know ive repeated this many times in this thread, but you guys seem to forget that. The Liberals and NDP have no credibillity when it comes to taxes.

yes, taxes are bad. Any economist worth his/her salt will tell you that consumption taxes are LESS bad than income taxes. plain and simple truth.

[geoffrey]

yes, taxes are bad. Any economist worth his/her salt will tell you that consumption taxes are LESS bad than income taxes. plain and simple truth.

That's such a myth. Of the three real-world economists I know personally, they all disagree. Consumption taxes are worse.

But your right in one regard, all taxes need to be cut, considerably. We all pay way too much for what mostly equates to second-rate health care, second-rate roads and tons of 'culture' building money (read: keep buying Quebec money).

[SamStranger]

Whats even more ammusing is the Liberals and NDP who fight to keep the GST at 7%, even though they voted AGAINST it in 1990- and caused a huuuuge stir in the senate when Mulrooney appointed 8 pc senators. I know ive repeated this many times in this thread, but you guys seem to forget that. The Liberals and NDP have no credibillity when it comes to taxes.

Agreed. But niether does the CPC now.

Well yes and no. The tories are looking to "drastically" (as Flarherty said) cut personal Income Tax. Im not sure if he means actually lowering the % of Federal Income tax taken off each pay? I am very happy with the direction of the GST- cutting it was a good start, its time to put forward leglislation to ABOLISH it by 2010.

I can see it now. Election 2007- Tory platform:

ABOLISH THE GST BY JANUARY 1ST 2010.

As far as the Income Trust Tax is concerned- it doesnt effect me directly so im not worried. According to most economists its a good thing because corporations owe the government billions of dollars.