Canada has the 11th most onerous business tax in the World!

[M.Dancer]

“If this were a horse race, Canada's tax system would be at the back of the pack,” says Prof. Mintz, study author and a tax expert at the University of Toronto's Rotman School of Management.

Part of the solution, he says, is a massive cut in corporate income levies that would chop the combined federal provincial business tax rate to 20 per cent from an average of 34.2 per cent today.

He suggests offsetting corporate levy reductions in part through broad-based environmental taxes on everything from coal to nuclear energy — with rates that vary “according to environmental damage.”

The study, 2007 Tax Competitiveness Report: A Call for Comprehensive Tax Reform, plays down Canada's five-notch improvement in its ranking this year, saying it's owed in large part to a temporary federal tax break for manufacturers.

Meanwhile, Canada's high-value service sectors, from communications to transportation, remain the sixth highest taxed in the world, according to Prof. Mintz.

Canada's effective rate of tax on capital is 30.9 per cent, the study found, when all levies are taken into account, including corporate income taxes and other charges on capital including sales taxes.

http://www.reportonbusiness.com/servlet/st...ry/robNews/home

I can say for sure if it's a question of competing globally against sweatshop nations like Mexico and China, reforming the business tax is a lot easier than cutting everyones wages standard of living to be par with China and Mexico.

[xul]

I can say for sure if it's a question of competing globally against sweatshop nations like Mexico and China, reforming the business tax is a lot easier than cutting everyones wages standard of living to be par with China and Mexico.

In my opinion, one cause of the fact that Canadian pay more tax than other country's is that Canada has less population with large territory. For instance, Canada, America and China has similar territory but different population(Canada 32 million, American 295 million and China 1200 million). If each of these country's governments build a highway costing $10,000 million, Canadan government will tax Canadian 10000/32=$312.5, American 10000/295=$33.9 and Chinese 10000/1200=$8.3. This is why China can produce goods with very low cost.

[capricorn]

In my opinion, one cause of the fact that Canadian pay more tax than other country's is that Canada has less population with large territory. For instance, Canada, America and China has similar territory but different population(Canada 32 million, American 295 million and China 1200 million). If each of these country's governments build a highway costing $10,000 million, Canadan government will tax Canadian 10000/32=$312.5, American 10000/295=$33.9 and Chinese 10000/1200=$8.3. This is why China can produce goods with very low cost.

Good points xul. Because of its size, Canada has to spend more on infrastructure (roads, bridges, railway, etc.) per capita than other smaller countries. These expenditures are essential to ensure pan-Canada transportation of goods and people. The problem is that too many Canadians also want generous social programs which are very expensive. Politicians, wanting to be elected, have not been capable of saying no to increased spending on social programs. IMO, governments at all levels have been cutting back on infrastructure to fund social programs. We are seeing the negative effects of those policies today.

[jennie]

But the study's prescription to remedy this situation contains a surprisingly green twist: big cuts in personal and corporate income taxes to be funded in part by a broad-based environmental tax on energy that varies according to the damage done by each fuel.

I like the sound of this, as it includes personal income taxes too!

[geoffrey]

Alas, a tax directly on Alberta?

We may pollute alot to get the energy out, but every other province relies on such energy to function (not directly Alberta oil but in the big trade scheme). An environmental tax would have to be equally born by everyone in the country, as one's production or consumption of energy plays influence on all around them.

[jennie]

Alas, a tax directly on Alberta?

We may pollute alot to get the energy out, but every other province relies on such energy to function (not directly Alberta oil but in the big trade scheme). An environmental tax would have to be equally born by everyone in the country, as one's production or consumption of energy plays influence on all around them.

The time for the " ... but ... " story is past. We must clean up production and improve conservation.

This is not a 'wouldn't it be nice if we could do both' scenario anymore.

We have to do both.

[gc1765]

Alas, a tax directly on Alberta?

We may pollute alot to get the energy out, but every other province relies on such energy to function (not directly Alberta oil but in the big trade scheme). An environmental tax would have to be equally born by everyone in the country, as one's production or consumption of energy plays influence on all around them.

It doesn't matter who you apply the tax to, either way the end user pays. If you tax the producer that will just result in higher prices which are paid by the user.

[geoffrey]

It doesn't matter who you apply the tax to, either way the end user pays. If you tax the producer that will just result in higher prices which are paid by the user.

Only in the long run. The way taxes are distributed through equalisation though creates additional risk to Alberta through any environmental taxation scheme. We already give enough, no reasonable person can ask Alberta to give more (regardless of our polution).

If they do, you'll see us make a hasty exit. Canada already is a huge burden, do you think we'll be ok with increasing that dramatically?

[mikedavid00]

I can say for sure if it's a question of competing globally against sweatshop nations like Mexico and China, reforming the business tax is a lot easier than cutting everyones wages standard of living to be par with China and Mexico.

I agree.

[mikedavid00]

In my opinion, one cause of the fact that Canadian pay more tax than other country's is that Canada has less population with large territory.

In my opinion (which is backed by fact), we pay more tax so immigrants (such as yourself) can come and live in our country and use our services when you have never paid into them.

That is just a provable fact.

If we didn't have to sponsor in people who did not benefit our country, we would not have a broken social system and such high taxes.

As long as the story of xul gets repeated over and over in Canada to the tune of 300,000 people a year, our taxes will rise slowely but surely with the majority of our immigrants livign in poverty even after 2 years.

We tax payers foot the bill for that but eventually it will reach a head and explode.

It's not Xul's fault though. You cant blame him for taking advantage of our system. And Xul, please don't insult the people here on the forum and make it like coming to Canada was a 'choice'. All it was was EASY. Not a choice. You had no choice in any other country.

Now we have to pay for it.

[mikedavid00]

The time for the " ... but ... " story is past. We must clean up production and improve conservation.

This is not a 'wouldn't it be nice if we could do both' scenario anymore.

We have to do both.

Who says we have to do anything? Dion and Suzuki?

I feel Alberta should no restricitions, no terrifs, no nothing.

If the oil sands get threatened I feel AB should seperate.

[jennie]

Who says we have to do anything? Dion and Suzuki?

I feel Alberta should no restricitions, no terrifs, no nothing.

If the oil sands get threatened I feel AB should seperate.

Go for it.

However, taxes are tied to output and profits, so I don't see the argument. Alberta happens to sit on tar sands. Ontario on real estate. Newfoundland formerly on fish, now oil.

It matters not. The resources of the country belong to us all, and we rely on them far too much. imo

[kimmy]

Alas, a tax directly on Alberta?

We may pollute alot to get the energy out, but every other province relies on such energy to function (not directly Alberta oil but in the big trade scheme). An environmental tax would have to be equally born by everyone in the country, as one's production or consumption of energy plays influence on all around them.

I see no problem at all with the idea of a tax on energy, provided that the tax is paid by the end user, rather than the producer.

The argument that it doesn't matter whether the tax is applied to the producer or consumer is a cop-out because it ignores the possibility of energy produced abroad and brought into Canada. (ie, offshore oil or electricity produced in the United States. Does the smog from coal-burning powerplants stop at the border? Ontarions have been complaining about smog from Michigan coal-burning plants for ages.)

Nor would applying the tax to consumers rather than producers let producers off the hook. Operations in the tar-sands produce huge amounts of emissions, by *consuming* fuel. They burn huge amounts of natural gas to heat their boilers and run their powerplants; simply make them pay an environmental tax on the fuel they burn.

Applying the tax to the party who is consuming the energy is the most logical and fair way of implementing any such environmental levy, and makes each consumer responsible for their energy habits.

-k

[bush_cheney2004]

Does the smog from coal-burning powerplants stop at the border? Ontarions have been complaining about smog from Michigan coal-burning plants for ages.)

No..the worst polluting coal fired plants of Nanticoke (that's in Ontario) tortures New Yorkers and New Englanders as well...for "ages".

[kimmy]

No..the worst polluting coal fired plants of Nanticoke (that's in Ontario) tortures New Yorkers and New Englanders as well...for "ages".

And? Your point?

-k

[gc1765]

There is one thing that article left out:

"Ontario workers are well-trained. That simple explanation was cited as a main reason why Toyota turned its back on hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies offered from several American states in favour of building a second Ontario plant."

"In addition to lower training costs, Canadian workers are also $4 to $5 cheaper to employ partly thanks to the taxpayer-funded health-care system in Canada, said federal Industry Minister David Emmerson."

[Guest American Woman]

(kimmy @ Sep 22 2007, 02:12 PM)

Does the smog from coal-burning powerplants stop at the border? Ontarions have been complaining about smog from Michigan coal-burning plants for ages.

No..the worst polluting coal fired plants of Nanticoke (that's in Ontario) tortures New Yorkers and New Englanders as well...for "ages".

And of course Michiganders have been complaining about the truckloads of garbage that come in from Ontario. Oh, I know. Someone gets monetary benefit from that, so I guess that makes it alright.

[bush_cheney2004]

And? Your point?

-k

The point is obvious for all to see, save for those "complaining" Ontarions [sic].

[xul]

In my opinion (which is backed by fact), we pay more tax so immigrants (such as yourself) can come and live in our country and use our services when you have never paid into them.

Yor have asked me about my private information several times. I didn't answer your question partially because of your manner, and partially becacue I were not sure discussing such issue whether according with the subject of this"Canadan Politics" forum. But now I think I can consider this issue as a kind of background or reference information for peoples here when they discuss Canadia immigrantioin policy, though I don't think I'm a typical immigrant to come Canada. So I am going to answer your all of your concern honestly.

At one point you were right. I am elder. I'm 43 and my wife 42. We have a five years old son. I'm a mechanical engineer with bachelor degree and my wife is a software engineer with master degree. Now we are working in a institute of China aerospace industry though both of us do not work on any rockets and spacecraft research. We just work on ground vehicles so it is not secret enough to avoid my immigration to a foreign country.

I have about US$400,000 assets. Perhaps this is not good to a Canadian who have the same age with me, but this is enough to guarantee my family's sustenance in the first several years when we immigrate to Canada. On my observation, the first two or three years is very important to a immigrant because industrial standards are usually different between two countries. An engineer or technician needs time to relearn his knowlege to accord to Canadian industrial standards. If a immigrant family coming from non-English speaking nation have not enough money to support their living, they will have to do some low paying job to support their family so they will have less time to improve their speciality according to Canadian criterian.

I don't thike I can find the same job in Canada as I did in China because the countries are difference. But I also don't care work from a small Canadian company in a small town.

I don't know which kind of immigrants you work with. But one my cousin came Canada 10 years ago, in Toronto, he is a engineer on IT and gain $80,000 a year. One my classmate in university, he is in Toronto too, he came Canada 7 years ago and his family income is about $70,000 a year. I'm not sure but in a Chinese immigrants forum I often visited, most guys came to Canada longer than 3 years said they can gain $30 to $40 thousands a year per family. Those Chinses doing low paying jobs usually came from Chinese small town(in China, the cost of living in a small town far more cheap than big city, but the income also far less than big city, so they can not have enough money to support their sustenance in Canada.) or low educated suburban peasants. They came Canada as relative immigrants.

Canadian welfare policy does not treat same to each immigrants. For instance, if I come Canada when I am 45 and I retire in 65, I can only get a half annuity from Canadian government than those came before 25, because I pay less tax then them. So I must depend on my own money or must work hard to save more money in pensions.

China is a developing country, people's economic state is very different between different area. In Beijing, my family income only can be considered as "middle class". But in some needy western province, a peasant one year income is less than the price of my son's toy. So there is not a "common motive" suiting all China immigrants. Some people lived in small town or suburban area come to Canada because they can not get a good income in their hometown. Middle class leave china because they concern China environmental devastation, or they disagree the way of Chinese education system(usually make kid spend more time in book and exam but less in practice), or they fear communists might deprive their assets by some Canadian way(tax more to them to fund those needy peasants), or they samplely hope have more children. Even corrupt communist officials also immigrate Canada, because they fear to be arrested. Last year, a corrupt communist banker Gao Shan, who robbed about $100 million from a China Bank he worked in a small town and immigrant to Canada. Now he is appealing to a Canada court to avoid being expeled by CIC.

I don't think there are a lot of Chinese immigrants living on Canadian welfare without work. Most Chinese family used to both husband and wife work, so they family income is easly up than any welfare funding level.

If you really believed that immigrants came to Canada only for her welfare, you would not need to condemn Canadian immigration policy again and again, you would just need to call followers acting against Canadian welfare system. So all immigrants, Chinese, Indo, Aferican,Muslim.... would disappear because there is no welfare for them and their only motive of coming Canada is for her welfare----according your theory.

Edited September 23, 2007 by xul

[xul]

The problem is that too many Canadians also want generous social programs which are very expensive. Politicians, wanting to be elected, have not been capable of saying no to increased spending on social programs. IMO, governments at all levels have been cutting back on infrastructure to fund social programs. We are seeing the negative effects of those policies today.

Europe also has the same problem. Usually, doing something the efficiency of a government is lower than a private company, because a government policy must pursue "equal" or "fair". So sometimes it is not "equal" or "fair" to some people as it would be.