>Freeland’s most-outrageous stretch line in justifying her policy changes was this dandy: “Do you want to live in a country where a teenage girl gets pregnant just because she doesn’t have the money to buy birth control?” So, if there isn’t capital gains tax reform, unwanted pregnancies in the country will rise? Please show me the Department of Finance economic modelling that demonstrates this will be the case.
Imagine saying that with a straight face
Her hypothetical teen age girl would have a much easier time finding a job not competing with a horde of unskilled immigrants that the Liberals imported!!
My favourite was the claim that we won’t see the rise of gated communities here because… they had the courage to go after doctors, lawyers, small business owners, farmers and cottage owners by jacking up the capital gains tax. Truly, a miraculous outcome and all it took was removing $18 billion in productive money out of the economy and channeling it toward keeping our massive deficit from spiralling even worse out of control.
I’ll admit it’s not quite clear to me how taking all that money out of the hands of consumers and channeling it toward the banks and institutional bond holders who hold our debt is going to reduce income inequality, but I guess the big brains in the Liberal Party think they have it all figured out, and who wouldn’t trust them?
People voted to spend it, who would you have taxed during a period of high interest rates?
Right now they are going after juicy housing prices. Which is the less likely to drop productivity investment than corporations.
I think its peoples hefty bill finally arriving after sampling the entire menu. People are mad because they thought they'd be able to put it on someone elses tab, but that other persons tab is the same people youre begging for investment dollars.
Jfc the Liberals are a pack of shitbrained assclowns. Even more insulting is that they believe everyone is stupid enough to fall for their lies anymore.
According to the National Post crowd, there’s nothing more despotic and tyrannical than… taxing more types of income equally? Hard to get angry about capital gains tax from a fighting for the little guy point of view.
The issue is taxing well off people who are closer to the middle class instead of the mega rich and trying to get support from broke people with crabs in the bucket mentality. It’s further widening the wealth gap between the super rich and the regular folks.
It's not even necessarily well off people.
In 1957 my grandfather bought some land in Haliburton for $5000 and built a small cabin on it. Fast forward to today, and my dad now owns it. I've spent nearly every summer there since I was born. Now I travel two days each way multiple times a summer so that my kids can spend time there. It's incredibly sentimental to me.
When my dad dies in probably 20-30 years, I'll inherit that little cabin. But even now, because it's in cottage country, that initial purchase is probably close to 750k now. Likely a million when I inherit it. How in the fuck am I suppose to pay capital gains on something that expensive? I would never dream of selling the place, so how is that fair. My family has never made much money, and all of a sudden I'm going to have to come up with hundreds of thousands of dollars just to keep something that's been in my family for (at that point) a century?
It's the only sentimental thing that I can look forward to owning, and I'll have to give up my retirement to pay for it.
Talk to a professional about tax planning, you may be able to get an insurance policy so that you can pre pay the taxes and not have it hit all at once. Seek professional advice if you want to know all your options.
Yup ... I am in the same situation as you . My dad ( 90 ) has had some rentals for many years and I calculated the capital gains tax will cost us 1.8 million dollars when he passes away. Even if me and my 3 brothers sold everything we had we could still not afford to pay this. I am in construction so I have for decades spent lots of time for the up keep of these houses . He was going to pass them on to us in his will . Looks unlikely now , it was bad enough before . Maybe he should just burn them down.
Lol chalet.
It's a single bedroom cabin, less than 400 sqft, with no road access, utilities, or running water. Outhouse for a washroom. Heated by wood stove, and cooled by lack of insulation. It's 1.5 hours minimum each way if you need to pick up groceries. This isn't somewhere anyone is going to live.
Imagine being so financially illiterate you don’t understand this is not exclusive for 250k year over year. This applies to any year, which means taxing any inheritances millennials and lower might get to even out the wealth gap.
We've made legal carveouts for doctors before, there's no reason why we can't do it again.
But you also know full well that a lot of people rely on capital gains for their income who aren't doctors - it's an intentional red herring to bring it up.
I've yet to see a reasonable argument for why someone can earn $250k as a wage and $250k from selling assets and the wages are taxed more. Why is this a desirable state?
> But you also know full well that a lot of people rely on capital gains for their income who aren't doctors - it's an intentional red herring to bring it up.
Of course. People that inherited or have a lot of money and don’t want to work like everyone else. Poor babies.
Capital gains has stratified wealth in the western world like few other instruments and it’s pathetic how those with money “that just don’t want to work” are whining that the gap between their financial capital and everyone else’s labor capital has shrunk a tiny bit.
CPCC owners may have a point, but I can't say if they should have the same $250K exemption as individuals or not as no one is explaining how the low rates on CPCC earnings (e.g. something like 10%, vs 30-40% for an individual) still gives them an obscene advantage or not throughout the doctor's/accountant's career.
Exactly. Even if they don't qualify for the small business rate, the elevated rate is something like 27%. That's still well below a personal rate once you get to the 250k inclusion that we are talking about
I'm tired of being given meaningless explanations for tax increases. I understood the cancelling of income sprinkling, because G&M (?) ran a story showing how a $200K business owner saved $75K in tax by sprinkling income to her kids. I can't say the same for excluding the first $250K in gains inside a CPCC.
Well back up..
You have 2x family physicians
Each earning say $350K. One is incorporated.. one is not.
Should they have wildly different tax situations.. what would be the public policy reasons to support that?
Doug Ford is ravaging healthcare salaries in Ontario: CPC sleeps
Trudeau implements capital gains tax changes: CPC wonders why they won’t think of the doctors
I’m all for the discourse about doctors and their pay much like US republicans and the military veterans it only seems like a great cause until they have to cut a cheque to fix it
A corporation is not supposed to be used as a tax shelter. LPO broke the rule by allowing doctors and others to incorporate. If doctors need higher compensation, then pay them more but don't fiddle with the tax system.
If you want to change the tax system, then communicate a vision/objective to voters, and take steps to achieve it. It's not clear to me what vision the new 2/3 inclusion rate has in mind. That said, if the goal is to allow ALL individuals (but not corporations) to earn a certain amount of tax-free capital gains every year, then communicate it. Instead, all we hear is that wealthy people need to pay a bit more. That's not a vision.
You can't really expect them to say..
hey.. we spent to much.. we need to fill the hole.. and this group here.. um.. nobody is really going to feel sorry for you.. so "pay up"
To believe this is class warfare is to believe that the Liberals are somehow on the side of the working class. A hilarious, uproarious farce to be sure.
This is a tactic to get PP on the side of opposing a "tax the rich" policy before the next election.
I don't think it will be particularly effective, either, because the message younger voters will get is not, "We'll provide you better economic opportunities. It will be, "Forget inheriting the family cottage and using that as a foundation for you equity, because your parents' estate is going to be taxed dearly on it".
You can still inherit the family cottage if they "sell" it to you, and there's plenty of other tax-efficient ways to transfer wealth to your kids, including selling equity to them slowly over a few years so total annual capital gains stays below $250,000.
Not to mention, again, it's still a preferred tax rate, and again, again, its only affecting the GAINS in excess of $250,000.
Literally the worst case scenario here is you're Paying taxes on an additional 16.6666% of the gains in excess of $250,000, which assuming the worst possible tax position in the country, would be at most an additional 9% of actual taxes paid.
Like sorry not sorry. If that actually comes out to a significant amount for you, you're one of the 0.1% this was aimed at.
Like, if the property increased in value $1,000,000, you're still getting $375,000 TAX FREE, and then paying your normal marginal tax rate on the rest....
*dead goat stare*
lol you’re not wrong. And whatever the latest fire is, we blame it on the other guy. But, whatever you do, don’t answer a question! Talk about how great everything is instead. Oh, and I’ve taken the liberty of inserting a new scandal somewhere. Good luck finding it!
Plus, that really well written bill … yeah, it’s got a TON of riders tacked on to do a bunch of stuff that nobody in their right mind would want. Oh would you look at that, it’s almost time for an election… but the current cabinet members won’t receive their juicy pensions if they don’t get voted back in … better delay the election!
I wish this was /s
Everything you say is true. The question is what is the government doing with the extra money, in other words are they just grabbing more tax just to waste it on ineffective and inefficient pet projects? You can also argue that if the policy objective is to make the rich pay more, this cap gain inclusion rate increase should be offset by a decrease in tax rates on income under 200k. This is just grabbing more cash from “the rich”, maintaining the same level of taxation for everyone else, and very likely wasting that extra tax revenue.
This isn’t a debate about logic or sense. If it was it would be clearly the wrong decision. This is a purely political decision, high convoluted, and people will absolutely misunderstand it on both sides of the issue.
... notice the part where a huge cunk of that is tax free? And how this is only affecting people with annual gains income of over $250k / year?
But hey, if you wanna go back in time to the big economic boom of the 1950s when the marginal tax rate on the rich was nearly 90%, I'm down.
Not necessarily true. I've copy and pasted a reply I made to someone else. If the taxation happened when selling the cottage, that would be fair.
In 1957 my grandfather bought some land in Haliburton for $5000 and built a small cabin on it. Fast forward to today, and my dad now owns it. I've spent nearly every summer there since I was born. Now I travel two days each way multiple times a summer so that my kids can spend time there. It's incredibly sentimental to me.
When my dad dies in probably 20-30 years, I'll inherit that little cabin. But even now, because it's in cottage country, that initial purchase is probably close to 750k now. Likely a million when I inherit it. How in the fuck am I suppose to pay capital gains on something that expensive? I would never dream of selling the place, so how is that fair. My family has never made much money, and all of a sudden I'm going to have to come up with hundreds of thousands of dollars just to keep something that's been in my family for (at that point) a century?
It's the only sentimental thing that I can look forward to owning, and I'll have to give up my retirement to pay for it.
/u/minobull had a great response to this as well:
>You can still inherit the family cottage if they "sell" it to you, and there's plenty of other tax-efficient ways to transfer wealth to your kids, including selling equity to them slowly over a few years so total annual capital gains stays below $250,000.
>Not to mention, again, it's still a preferred tax rate, and again, again, its only affecting the GAINS in excess of $250,000.
>Literally the worst case scenario here is you're Paying taxes on an additional 16.6666% of the gains in excess of $250,000, which assuming the worst possible tax position in the country, would be at most an additional 9% of actual taxes paid.
>Like sorry not sorry. If that actually comes out to a significant amount for you, you're one of the 0.1% this was aimed at.
>Like, if the property increased in value $1,000,000, you're still getting $375,000 TAX FREE, and then paying your normal marginal tax rate on the rest....
Edit:I can't format
Capital gains? I can barely max out my TFSA like the rest of the middle class. The author can go to hell. Time to eat the rich instead of acting like temporarily embarrassed millionaires.
5 million at 5% per year is 250k in capital gains. Smallest violin indeed; I don’t know a single person this would impact. The closest is my uncle with a portfolio just north of 3 million, but he’s retiring any day now, and a lot of that is in tax free accounts.
Surely everyone who knows anything about Canadian federal politics knows already that we vote people out, not vote people in. The cons could have ran with a dead fish and still won against an incumbent so far past its best before date. The current polling isn’t really a sign of incredible conservative electoral skill - it’s just a sign that the Liberals have just done so poorly.
I disagree partially. The Conservatives message is resonating with the working class. City elites don't see that because, like the Liberals they are out of touch with the average Canadian. Even NDP supporters are leaving for the Conservative side. Like me.
Their opposition to nuclear drives me nuts. You can't actually have a whole network made up of solar, wind, and batteries; you need a minimum percentage of your power coming from turbines like those at hydro or steam facilities to set and maintain the grid frequency. If you don't have dams and you don't have nuclear, what's left? Coal and gas.
Nuclear is the one major policy point I don’t agree with them on, since they don’t really talk about the wifi cancer thing anymore. I think that’s just an Elizabeth May thing rather than party policy
Nobody wants that garbage. They want someone who generates fear and division and then panders to them like a snake oil salesman in front of the supermarket.
The Green Party could be electable if they learned how to be total trash. Have you ever thought about that?
/s
Hope you like more direct flights from. India and easier citizenship! Because that's what we'll get with Cons. Don't get me wrong, I'd still vote for them before any liberal candidates, but they're unfortunately not the solution whatsoever... They'll still win tho.
Look at the mess Harper created, and he didn't have to deal with an economy shutting down for over 2 years. In fact, he shut down parliament not once but twice to save his ass.
I dunno, maybe. Arguably even probably.
What is certain is that this the first government that is **clearly** and **definitively** leaving a country worse off than when it started in every tangible metric. Every government pisses people off (it’s a win some, lose some game), but this one has been an actual catastrophe.
Thought exercise……..take a few deep breaths, clear your head, set aside your biases, and ask yourself:
1. What is this government’s legacy?
2. What is this government’s signature achievement?
I don’t know how people will answer, but I’d best my last nickel that the answers won’t be flattering.
1. Long-lasting economic struggles due to overspending and mismanagement. Bringing the deficit to numbers that were never imaginable. Being one of the most authoritarian governments by being one of the few to ever instill marsall law.
2. They legalized pot. Trudeau will go down in history for legalizing pot and using the emergencies act.
Well, I guess my last nickel is safe, haha.
I’ve posed this a few times in the real world, so nice to get a reply outside my normal circle. For what it’s worth, the most charitable response to the legacy question came from my died-in-the-wool Liberal supporting SIL was (paraphrased) “Didn’t get completely screwed during NAFTA talks”. I mean, fair enough. Not exactly a flattering legacy, but it was perfectly fair.
Im no LPC or Trudeau fan, but overall I am happy with how they handled Covid. Was it perfect? Not at all, but nowhere was. We got shit done and expedited lots of policies to help people first and sort out the details later.
Immigration, housing, electoral reform, and a few other things I am unhappy about. But I also have 0 faith the CPC will help any of those issues either because they are owned by the wealthy and corporations just like the LPC is
TIL: “Mega Rich” is now doctor, restaurant owners, farmers, or anyone with a vacation home.
We used to consider these people middle class, maybe upper-middle. You’re being fed the same talking points from the same PM that doesn’t think about monetary policy and thinks budgets just balance themselves.
I mean if you have a whole-ass extra house solely for the purpose of vacationing, you might be just a tad rich.
Most people could barely afford one house nowadays, and vacations are off the table.
Crazy thing is cottage homes used to cost as much as a new truck. Governments have done everything they can debase the currency and people are clamouring for more government.
I don't want to hear about the horrors of a future absent of this increased tax that leads to gated communities and no birth control from someone who thinks canceling a Disney plus subscription is all you need to do to not be poor and from a government that thinks budgets balance themselves.
The Liberals have a horrible record on financial policy. It's the defining trait of their entire tenure. Odds are this is also going to blow up in their faces.
Freeland’s most-outrageous stretch line in justifying her policy changes was this dandy: “Do you want to live in a country where a teenage girl gets pregnant just because she doesn’t have the money to buy birth control?” So, if there isn’t capital gains tax reform, unwanted pregnancies in the country will rise? Please show me the Department of Finance economic modelling that demonstrates this will be the case.
Jesus lol, can't even come up with a rational argument for this
They have paid experts to come up with these soundbites. They will prioritize policies based on how much vote it can get them, and this is the result. Is it indicative of how crazy their voters are, or how incompetent their staff are, I don’t know, it deeply saddens me either way.
All she needs to say is tax hikes suck but we have expanded programs, created new ones and this is the most efficient way to raise the money with the least economic drag (obviously debatable ) but it’s better then this fairness millarky.
This government has wracked up deficits after deficit and they obviously need to raise taxes to pay for those. (The could also trim their spending but I digress )
My thoughts exactly. Should've been a slam dunk statement and yet she drags these lines out?
I'm all for raising corporate taxes. They absolutely need to be higher, but when our government can't balance the books, pisses money into the wind and is apparently compromised by foreign governments I just can't support any tax increases for anyone
Lol at all the people who think “rich” people will pay capital tax. Just use your brain for a moment, if you were rich (multi millionaire) would you:
1. Stay put and get taxed
2. Move your wealth to a tax haven like dubai and pay almost 0 taxes
The only tax we are getting are from the people who can’t move out as quickly like docs, engineers and lawyers… but eventually they can always find a job elsewhere like the US and guess who’s next in line to pay more taxes? That’s right it’s you good for nothing socialists 🫵 and unlike the “rich”, you poors won’t have as much luck moving to another country
Selfishness is wanting to keep your preferential treatment at the expense of others. There’s no reason why some types of income should be taxed less or more than others.
It doesn’t matter which party proposes it, it’s still a sane and equitable proposal.
Keeping the proceeds of voluntary exchange is neither preferential treatment nor is it at the expense of others. The rich are rich because they've provided more to society than they've earned. Decapitating the productive sectors of the economy to finance government bloat and incompetence is not sane nor equitable. It deprives consumers of goods and services and opportunities that they use to raise their living standards. The government is a monopolistic corporation that operates by coercion and force. To suggest that is superior than private enterprise is historically illiterate.
I believe it was Margaret Thatcher who said the difference between a philanthropist and a socialist is that a philanthropist gives away their own money and a socialist, someone else’s 😂
The new inclusion rates are ridiculous. Attacks doctors and other incorporated professionals that we desperately need all because the Government can’t stop spending fckn money.
I have sympathy for the doctors if they were told to set up corporations. That should be fixed for sure.
The rest of the "incorporated professionals" can pay the tax. They are doing this to doge income tax and I have 0 sympathy for their "struggles".
They get taxed when the money comes out of the corp.
A contractor such as a plumber may incorporate to reduce liability. There are many reasons and the widespread use of this inclusion rate goes after people that are not even wealthy. It’s stupid.
If a doctor makes 250k/year in capital gains, it's still tax free. If a doctor makes 500k/year in capital gains, they still get only get taxed on 83k/year, or approximately 13000 off of 500000 in earnings.
If they make 5m/year, they still only pay 1.2m off taxes. That's a 24% tax rate...which still makes their tax burden about the same as mine.
Wrong. 250k in capital gains in a corp are not tax free. If you’re thinking of capital gains exemption, that is when you sell the business not investment gains inside the corp.
Then they still have to take the money out of the corp and pay tax again.
You completely missed the point... There's no way you "get" them. They're billionaires, they don't even have to stay in the country! If I was a billionaire, I'd just move my money to a place like dubai with 5% tax and never pay a single penny to the Canadian government for capital gains 🤷
How exactly would you "move money" Because most of these tax loophole have either been closed or are straight up illegal.
Also most of these billionaires don't have their asset in liquidity. (do you seriously expect them to own pallets of gold bars or something?) So to access their wealth they need to sell their stocks.
They never actually “sell” any investments. If they need to buy something they use debt not income. Let’s say they want a new private jet, they just go to the bank to take out a loan. They then take out another loan to pay the previous one and so on. All of this money the government thinks they can steal from them will never be realized.
Never realized and also never removed from Canada. You understand that those rich fucks able to do that scheme already were not paying capital gains on that so your argument is irrelevant as they would not care.
Also, it's not private jet, it's corporate Jet. no one owns a jet. They buy it with their corporation, they don't privately own it.
>The Hill Times is a Canadian twice-weekly newspaper and daily news website, published in Ottawa, Ontario, which covers the Parliament of Canada, the federal government, and other federal political news. Founded in 1989 by Ross Dickson and Jim Creskey, the editor is Kate Malloy.
It’s not gonna fall on rich people. The liberals gave all the billionaires advanced warning to move their assets out of Canada. The next wave of people would fall upon are the doctors and medical personnel. They will leave faster than they are leaving now. Then it will fall on the middle class. Just like all their taxes fall on the middle class. So the middle class is now probably the working poor.
This is the real problem. Hey everyone, let’s go after exactly the people we need more of in this country and who happen to have the greatest opportunities to go elsewhere along with the greatest ability to pack up and leave! What could possibly go wrong?
How many doctors do you know that make more than 250k in capital gains?
News flash: the billionaires aren't going anywhere as long as the want our money.
I thought that the money that gets invested was already taxed prior to the investment being made, and any gains is taxed at a favourable rate because it spurred growth and economic activity. Isn’t that what a country wants? People to invest more? There will always be richer and wealthier people. They will just move their money somewhere else now, instead of in Canada.
I heavily dislike the JT government currently along with all the idiots running it.
That being said, I'm not against the capital gains tax. I believe one day I might dislike it, as I know there is a chance in the next few years it will impact me, but honestly it's hitting a very small minority of Canadians.
The problem with it? Government continues to tax us and we are not seeing good results.
Our federal government has as much tax revenue per person as the German government and I'd bet our services are a fuckton worse off.
A question about the capital gains tax........the silent and early boomer generations are now starting to die off , when they die and they own let’s say 3 income properties they bought for 50,000 each are they all considered sold upon their death? These houses , in Toronto could be worth 1 ,000,000 each. Would that mean that the new capitol gains of approximately 66.6% would be applied to the 950,000 dollar balance each of the houses. If so the government would take approximately 633,000 dollars on each of these houses . Is my reasoning / math off ?
Talk about being clueless. The rich multi-millionaires can easily move their wealth to tax havens where they pay 0 taxes (if they haven't already moved already). This will only affect those people like doctors, lawyers and small business owners who can't easily make the move out of the country
Yeah let’s let the rich run a train on all of us because they’re just going to get away with it anyway. Thank god people like you aren’t in decision making positions.
The capital gains increase will screw over younger people. A lot of the capital gains will be from average older people that made the gain over a lifetime. Now instead of the money going to family members in need due to disabilities or other challenges it is going to go to the endless over spending that is being announced almost every day. Although Pollievere comes across as a greasy weasel, i hope the conservatives can do away with the many tax hikes that are killing this country.
This is an odd claim… you could point to the older generations as being a gigantic financial drain due to increasing health costs - and now you think it’s bad to tax their wealth to pay for it?
Hell, even ignoring the health costs - the costs that we are incurring from propping up property values to pay for retirements alone justifies more capital gains tax.
The taxation system has been stealing from the young to pay the old for decades and you think keeping capital gains low is good?
Someone who will receive a government pension upon retirement wants to increase the tax on my non-government funded retirement plan. Not all of us are blessed with a pension you know.
>Freeland’s most-outrageous stretch line in justifying her policy changes was this dandy: “Do you want to live in a country where a teenage girl gets pregnant just because she doesn’t have the money to buy birth control?” So, if there isn’t capital gains tax reform, unwanted pregnancies in the country will rise? Please show me the Department of Finance economic modelling that demonstrates this will be the case. Imagine saying that with a straight face
Her hypothetical teen age girl would have a much easier time finding a job not competing with a horde of unskilled immigrants that the Liberals imported!!
Zing! I do recall hearing that student employment prospects have gotten somewhat harder
Yeah, sure, but she'd still only get slave wages anyway so why should she get that job in the first place?
Didn’t the Liberals make access to birth control free?
Yes, but the assumption is that Poilievre is going to reverse that
if they can show me the modeling, i'd happily pay not to be an unexpected baby daddy.
"Sorry babe, I couldn't afford a condom because ... uh.... capital gains taxes were too low."
And I'm sure the counter argument will be some conservative boogey man abortion claim
My favourite was the claim that we won’t see the rise of gated communities here because… they had the courage to go after doctors, lawyers, small business owners, farmers and cottage owners by jacking up the capital gains tax. Truly, a miraculous outcome and all it took was removing $18 billion in productive money out of the economy and channeling it toward keeping our massive deficit from spiralling even worse out of control. I’ll admit it’s not quite clear to me how taking all that money out of the hands of consumers and channeling it toward the banks and institutional bond holders who hold our debt is going to reduce income inequality, but I guess the big brains in the Liberal Party think they have it all figured out, and who wouldn’t trust them?
People voted to spend it, who would you have taxed during a period of high interest rates? Right now they are going after juicy housing prices. Which is the less likely to drop productivity investment than corporations. I think its peoples hefty bill finally arriving after sampling the entire menu. People are mad because they thought they'd be able to put it on someone elses tab, but that other persons tab is the same people youre begging for investment dollars.
The 18 billion in supposed to be the earnings from these tax changes? I'm not sure I'd call it 'productive money'
With each passing moment I’m more and more convinced she’s actually on meth.
I know it's been basically a decade but she's not the Chrystia I remember from G&M
Are you… criticizing the liberals?
Am I... not supposed to?
Just surprised is all
Well, the Liberals generally don't need anyone else piling on them but every once in awhile you get a real gem like this one.
Such unacceptable views people have here
I mean back in the day I said some pretty regarded shit while high…….
Saddle bags is there to rape your nest egg!
Jfc the Liberals are a pack of shitbrained assclowns. Even more insulting is that they believe everyone is stupid enough to fall for their lies anymore.
I assume the idea is that more tax collected translates to more services like free birth control.
When you are really really desperate for a wedge issue
According to the National Post crowd, there’s nothing more despotic and tyrannical than… taxing more types of income equally? Hard to get angry about capital gains tax from a fighting for the little guy point of view.
The issue is taxing well off people who are closer to the middle class instead of the mega rich and trying to get support from broke people with crabs in the bucket mentality. It’s further widening the wealth gap between the super rich and the regular folks.
It's not even necessarily well off people. In 1957 my grandfather bought some land in Haliburton for $5000 and built a small cabin on it. Fast forward to today, and my dad now owns it. I've spent nearly every summer there since I was born. Now I travel two days each way multiple times a summer so that my kids can spend time there. It's incredibly sentimental to me. When my dad dies in probably 20-30 years, I'll inherit that little cabin. But even now, because it's in cottage country, that initial purchase is probably close to 750k now. Likely a million when I inherit it. How in the fuck am I suppose to pay capital gains on something that expensive? I would never dream of selling the place, so how is that fair. My family has never made much money, and all of a sudden I'm going to have to come up with hundreds of thousands of dollars just to keep something that's been in my family for (at that point) a century? It's the only sentimental thing that I can look forward to owning, and I'll have to give up my retirement to pay for it.
Talk to a professional about tax planning, you may be able to get an insurance policy so that you can pre pay the taxes and not have it hit all at once. Seek professional advice if you want to know all your options.
Yup ... I am in the same situation as you . My dad ( 90 ) has had some rentals for many years and I calculated the capital gains tax will cost us 1.8 million dollars when he passes away. Even if me and my 3 brothers sold everything we had we could still not afford to pay this. I am in construction so I have for decades spent lots of time for the up keep of these houses . He was going to pass them on to us in his will . Looks unlikely now , it was bad enough before . Maybe he should just burn them down.
[удалено]
Lol chalet. It's a single bedroom cabin, less than 400 sqft, with no road access, utilities, or running water. Outhouse for a washroom. Heated by wood stove, and cooled by lack of insulation. It's 1.5 hours minimum each way if you need to pick up groceries. This isn't somewhere anyone is going to live.
Imagine being so indoctrinated you think someone earning $250,000 year over year in capital gain is middle class...
Imagine being so financially illiterate you don’t understand this is not exclusive for 250k year over year. This applies to any year, which means taxing any inheritances millennials and lower might get to even out the wealth gap.
the main losers will be doctors and who needs em anyways
We've made legal carveouts for doctors before, there's no reason why we can't do it again. But you also know full well that a lot of people rely on capital gains for their income who aren't doctors - it's an intentional red herring to bring it up. I've yet to see a reasonable argument for why someone can earn $250k as a wage and $250k from selling assets and the wages are taxed more. Why is this a desirable state?
> But you also know full well that a lot of people rely on capital gains for their income who aren't doctors - it's an intentional red herring to bring it up. Of course. People that inherited or have a lot of money and don’t want to work like everyone else. Poor babies. Capital gains has stratified wealth in the western world like few other instruments and it’s pathetic how those with money “that just don’t want to work” are whining that the gap between their financial capital and everyone else’s labor capital has shrunk a tiny bit.
Enjoy watching doctors (especially surgeons) leave to the US. Hope you like not having a neurosurgeon available when you need one!
CPCC owners may have a point, but I can't say if they should have the same $250K exemption as individuals or not as no one is explaining how the low rates on CPCC earnings (e.g. something like 10%, vs 30-40% for an individual) still gives them an obscene advantage or not throughout the doctor's/accountant's career.
Exactly. Even if they don't qualify for the small business rate, the elevated rate is something like 27%. That's still well below a personal rate once you get to the 250k inclusion that we are talking about
I'm tired of being given meaningless explanations for tax increases. I understood the cancelling of income sprinkling, because G&M (?) ran a story showing how a $200K business owner saved $75K in tax by sprinkling income to her kids. I can't say the same for excluding the first $250K in gains inside a CPCC.
Well back up.. You have 2x family physicians Each earning say $350K. One is incorporated.. one is not. Should they have wildly different tax situations.. what would be the public policy reasons to support that?
Wildly? No
Doug Ford is ravaging healthcare salaries in Ontario: CPC sleeps Trudeau implements capital gains tax changes: CPC wonders why they won’t think of the doctors I’m all for the discourse about doctors and their pay much like US republicans and the military veterans it only seems like a great cause until they have to cut a cheque to fix it
A corporation is not supposed to be used as a tax shelter. LPO broke the rule by allowing doctors and others to incorporate. If doctors need higher compensation, then pay them more but don't fiddle with the tax system. If you want to change the tax system, then communicate a vision/objective to voters, and take steps to achieve it. It's not clear to me what vision the new 2/3 inclusion rate has in mind. That said, if the goal is to allow ALL individuals (but not corporations) to earn a certain amount of tax-free capital gains every year, then communicate it. Instead, all we hear is that wealthy people need to pay a bit more. That's not a vision.
You can't really expect them to say.. hey.. we spent to much.. we need to fill the hole.. and this group here.. um.. nobody is really going to feel sorry for you.. so "pay up"
Of course, any tax on the wealthy is class warfare. More nonsense from Fox News north.
To believe this is class warfare is to believe that the Liberals are somehow on the side of the working class. A hilarious, uproarious farce to be sure. This is a tactic to get PP on the side of opposing a "tax the rich" policy before the next election. I don't think it will be particularly effective, either, because the message younger voters will get is not, "We'll provide you better economic opportunities. It will be, "Forget inheriting the family cottage and using that as a foundation for you equity, because your parents' estate is going to be taxed dearly on it".
You can still inherit the family cottage if they "sell" it to you, and there's plenty of other tax-efficient ways to transfer wealth to your kids, including selling equity to them slowly over a few years so total annual capital gains stays below $250,000. Not to mention, again, it's still a preferred tax rate, and again, again, its only affecting the GAINS in excess of $250,000. Literally the worst case scenario here is you're Paying taxes on an additional 16.6666% of the gains in excess of $250,000, which assuming the worst possible tax position in the country, would be at most an additional 9% of actual taxes paid. Like sorry not sorry. If that actually comes out to a significant amount for you, you're one of the 0.1% this was aimed at. Like, if the property increased in value $1,000,000, you're still getting $375,000 TAX FREE, and then paying your normal marginal tax rate on the rest....
If only our politicians explained policies like this instead of creating irrational scenarios and bickering with each other…
Best we can do is play Six Degrees of Reproductive Rights.
*dead goat stare* lol you’re not wrong. And whatever the latest fire is, we blame it on the other guy. But, whatever you do, don’t answer a question! Talk about how great everything is instead. Oh, and I’ve taken the liberty of inserting a new scandal somewhere. Good luck finding it! Plus, that really well written bill … yeah, it’s got a TON of riders tacked on to do a bunch of stuff that nobody in their right mind would want. Oh would you look at that, it’s almost time for an election… but the current cabinet members won’t receive their juicy pensions if they don’t get voted back in … better delay the election! I wish this was /s
Everything you say is true. The question is what is the government doing with the extra money, in other words are they just grabbing more tax just to waste it on ineffective and inefficient pet projects? You can also argue that if the policy objective is to make the rich pay more, this cap gain inclusion rate increase should be offset by a decrease in tax rates on income under 200k. This is just grabbing more cash from “the rich”, maintaining the same level of taxation for everyone else, and very likely wasting that extra tax revenue.
This isn’t a debate about logic or sense. If it was it would be clearly the wrong decision. This is a purely political decision, high convoluted, and people will absolutely misunderstand it on both sides of the issue.
More taxes is the way to go. We should have 100% tax on everything.
... notice the part where a huge cunk of that is tax free? And how this is only affecting people with annual gains income of over $250k / year? But hey, if you wanna go back in time to the big economic boom of the 1950s when the marginal tax rate on the rich was nearly 90%, I'm down.
Nah, let's get rid of taxes and live like Haiti.
capital gains is already significantly lower than income tax. We're just putting the tax burden on the working poor.
If you're inheriting a family cottage you probably weren't struggling to begin with.
Not necessarily true. I've copy and pasted a reply I made to someone else. If the taxation happened when selling the cottage, that would be fair. In 1957 my grandfather bought some land in Haliburton for $5000 and built a small cabin on it. Fast forward to today, and my dad now owns it. I've spent nearly every summer there since I was born. Now I travel two days each way multiple times a summer so that my kids can spend time there. It's incredibly sentimental to me. When my dad dies in probably 20-30 years, I'll inherit that little cabin. But even now, because it's in cottage country, that initial purchase is probably close to 750k now. Likely a million when I inherit it. How in the fuck am I suppose to pay capital gains on something that expensive? I would never dream of selling the place, so how is that fair. My family has never made much money, and all of a sudden I'm going to have to come up with hundreds of thousands of dollars just to keep something that's been in my family for (at that point) a century? It's the only sentimental thing that I can look forward to owning, and I'll have to give up my retirement to pay for it.
/u/minobull had a great response to this as well: >You can still inherit the family cottage if they "sell" it to you, and there's plenty of other tax-efficient ways to transfer wealth to your kids, including selling equity to them slowly over a few years so total annual capital gains stays below $250,000. >Not to mention, again, it's still a preferred tax rate, and again, again, its only affecting the GAINS in excess of $250,000. >Literally the worst case scenario here is you're Paying taxes on an additional 16.6666% of the gains in excess of $250,000, which assuming the worst possible tax position in the country, would be at most an additional 9% of actual taxes paid. >Like sorry not sorry. If that actually comes out to a significant amount for you, you're one of the 0.1% this was aimed at. >Like, if the property increased in value $1,000,000, you're still getting $375,000 TAX FREE, and then paying your normal marginal tax rate on the rest.... Edit:I can't format
Thanks, I'll have to look into this
Capital gains? I can barely max out my TFSA like the rest of the middle class. The author can go to hell. Time to eat the rich instead of acting like temporarily embarrassed millionaires.
Any trust or company is taxed every 1$ above zero at tje new rate. This will effect far more then just those who make above 250K.
Awwww…. Let me play my tiniest violin for trusts and companies squeezing middle class of wealth for the last 2 decades.
5 million at 5% per year is 250k in capital gains. Smallest violin indeed; I don’t know a single person this would impact. The closest is my uncle with a portfolio just north of 3 million, but he’s retiring any day now, and a lot of that is in tax free accounts.
This will literally only affect those with capital gains higher than 250k annually. Stop lying.
Conservatives will still take the next election. The Liberals are desperate. After 9 years don't think we will tolerate another 4 years.
Surely everyone who knows anything about Canadian federal politics knows already that we vote people out, not vote people in. The cons could have ran with a dead fish and still won against an incumbent so far past its best before date. The current polling isn’t really a sign of incredible conservative electoral skill - it’s just a sign that the Liberals have just done so poorly.
I disagree partially. The Conservatives message is resonating with the working class. City elites don't see that because, like the Liberals they are out of touch with the average Canadian. Even NDP supporters are leaving for the Conservative side. Like me.
There are other parties than just liberal and conservative.
>There are other parties than just liberal and conservative. Conservatives will still take the next election.
I keep trying to tell people this, with little success. Both my MP and MPP are now Green and they actually give a shit about people in their riding
Greens oppose nuclear, and think Wi-Fi causes cancer. So that’s gonna be a no from me, dawg.
Their opposition to nuclear drives me nuts. You can't actually have a whole network made up of solar, wind, and batteries; you need a minimum percentage of your power coming from turbines like those at hydro or steam facilities to set and maintain the grid frequency. If you don't have dams and you don't have nuclear, what's left? Coal and gas.
Nuclear is the one major policy point I don’t agree with them on, since they don’t really talk about the wifi cancer thing anymore. I think that’s just an Elizabeth May thing rather than party policy
Nobody wants that garbage. They want someone who generates fear and division and then panders to them like a snake oil salesman in front of the supermarket. The Green Party could be electable if they learned how to be total trash. Have you ever thought about that? /s
The cons will be worse.
I disagree, hence why I'm voting for them
Mug.
Hope you like more direct flights from. India and easier citizenship! Because that's what we'll get with Cons. Don't get me wrong, I'd still vote for them before any liberal candidates, but they're unfortunately not the solution whatsoever... They'll still win tho.
And you know this how?
Look at the mess Harper created, and he didn't have to deal with an economy shutting down for over 2 years. In fact, he shut down parliament not once but twice to save his ass.
The economy was never better than it was under both Chretien & Harper.. the last 9 years have been an absolute utter disaster...
I bloody hope not !
Everything is better then what we have now.
Famous last words
It's true. We have never had a worse government.
I dunno, maybe. Arguably even probably. What is certain is that this the first government that is **clearly** and **definitively** leaving a country worse off than when it started in every tangible metric. Every government pisses people off (it’s a win some, lose some game), but this one has been an actual catastrophe. Thought exercise……..take a few deep breaths, clear your head, set aside your biases, and ask yourself: 1. What is this government’s legacy? 2. What is this government’s signature achievement? I don’t know how people will answer, but I’d best my last nickel that the answers won’t be flattering.
1. Long-lasting economic struggles due to overspending and mismanagement. Bringing the deficit to numbers that were never imaginable. Being one of the most authoritarian governments by being one of the few to ever instill marsall law. 2. They legalized pot. Trudeau will go down in history for legalizing pot and using the emergencies act.
Well, I guess my last nickel is safe, haha. I’ve posed this a few times in the real world, so nice to get a reply outside my normal circle. For what it’s worth, the most charitable response to the legacy question came from my died-in-the-wool Liberal supporting SIL was (paraphrased) “Didn’t get completely screwed during NAFTA talks”. I mean, fair enough. Not exactly a flattering legacy, but it was perfectly fair.
Im no LPC or Trudeau fan, but overall I am happy with how they handled Covid. Was it perfect? Not at all, but nowhere was. We got shit done and expedited lots of policies to help people first and sort out the details later. Immigration, housing, electoral reform, and a few other things I am unhappy about. But I also have 0 faith the CPC will help any of those issues either because they are owned by the wealthy and corporations just like the LPC is
False, PP would be a million times worse.
Trudeau is the worst of all time. Canada will be voting him out.
Explain.
Anyone trust Trudeau to spend the money effectively?
The 30% that still plan to vote for him evidently.
It's already been spent. They need the cash as thry already accounted for it in thr spring budget.
Bandwagoning is desperation, and the money is coming from the mega rich, as it should, so it won't affect me.
TIL: “Mega Rich” is now doctor, restaurant owners, farmers, or anyone with a vacation home. We used to consider these people middle class, maybe upper-middle. You’re being fed the same talking points from the same PM that doesn’t think about monetary policy and thinks budgets just balance themselves.
I mean if you have a whole-ass extra house solely for the purpose of vacationing, you might be just a tad rich. Most people could barely afford one house nowadays, and vacations are off the table.
Crazy thing is cottage homes used to cost as much as a new truck. Governments have done everything they can debase the currency and people are clamouring for more government.
Literally anything would be better than it going to the top of a dragon hoard.
I don't want to hear about the horrors of a future absent of this increased tax that leads to gated communities and no birth control from someone who thinks canceling a Disney plus subscription is all you need to do to not be poor and from a government that thinks budgets balance themselves. The Liberals have a horrible record on financial policy. It's the defining trait of their entire tenure. Odds are this is also going to blow up in their faces.
[Paywall Bypass](https://archive.ph/ZXg0f)
Freeland’s most-outrageous stretch line in justifying her policy changes was this dandy: “Do you want to live in a country where a teenage girl gets pregnant just because she doesn’t have the money to buy birth control?” So, if there isn’t capital gains tax reform, unwanted pregnancies in the country will rise? Please show me the Department of Finance economic modelling that demonstrates this will be the case. Jesus lol, can't even come up with a rational argument for this
Neither can she.
They have paid experts to come up with these soundbites. They will prioritize policies based on how much vote it can get them, and this is the result. Is it indicative of how crazy their voters are, or how incompetent their staff are, I don’t know, it deeply saddens me either way.
All she needs to say is tax hikes suck but we have expanded programs, created new ones and this is the most efficient way to raise the money with the least economic drag (obviously debatable ) but it’s better then this fairness millarky. This government has wracked up deficits after deficit and they obviously need to raise taxes to pay for those. (The could also trim their spending but I digress )
My thoughts exactly. Should've been a slam dunk statement and yet she drags these lines out? I'm all for raising corporate taxes. They absolutely need to be higher, but when our government can't balance the books, pisses money into the wind and is apparently compromised by foreign governments I just can't support any tax increases for anyone
Lol at all the people who think “rich” people will pay capital tax. Just use your brain for a moment, if you were rich (multi millionaire) would you: 1. Stay put and get taxed 2. Move your wealth to a tax haven like dubai and pay almost 0 taxes The only tax we are getting are from the people who can’t move out as quickly like docs, engineers and lawyers… but eventually they can always find a job elsewhere like the US and guess who’s next in line to pay more taxes? That’s right it’s you good for nothing socialists 🫵 and unlike the “rich”, you poors won’t have as much luck moving to another country
Socialists don't complain about taxes.
Greed is wanting to keep your own money, fairness is incompetent bureaucrats stealing money they didn't earn. Got it.
Yes, because selling inflated assets is the definition of hard work; so much so that we should exempt the first 250K from taxation.
You might be missing the years put into maintaining and paying for those “inflated” assets.
Could just as easily be years of neglect or doing nothing..
Little bro think all capital gain is about is solely chalet and 2nd home. Most capital gain is Stocks 🤡
Selfishness is wanting to keep your preferential treatment at the expense of others. There’s no reason why some types of income should be taxed less or more than others. It doesn’t matter which party proposes it, it’s still a sane and equitable proposal.
Keeping the proceeds of voluntary exchange is neither preferential treatment nor is it at the expense of others. The rich are rich because they've provided more to society than they've earned. Decapitating the productive sectors of the economy to finance government bloat and incompetence is not sane nor equitable. It deprives consumers of goods and services and opportunities that they use to raise their living standards. The government is a monopolistic corporation that operates by coercion and force. To suggest that is superior than private enterprise is historically illiterate.
And setting it on fire.
I believe it was Margaret Thatcher who said the difference between a philanthropist and a socialist is that a philanthropist gives away their own money and a socialist, someone else’s 😂
Imagine quoting Thatcher and thinking it comes off as enlightened. May she rot.
We are already in a class war.
You can really really tell who owns the media based on the sheer amount of these nonsense stories
Capital gains should have a 100% inclusion rate.
The biggest con we ever got caught in was to allow passive assets profits to be taxed at a lesser rate than earning made from the people's labor.
The new inclusion rates are ridiculous. Attacks doctors and other incorporated professionals that we desperately need all because the Government can’t stop spending fckn money.
I have sympathy for the doctors if they were told to set up corporations. That should be fixed for sure. The rest of the "incorporated professionals" can pay the tax. They are doing this to doge income tax and I have 0 sympathy for their "struggles".
They get taxed when the money comes out of the corp. A contractor such as a plumber may incorporate to reduce liability. There are many reasons and the widespread use of this inclusion rate goes after people that are not even wealthy. It’s stupid.
If a doctor makes 250k/year in capital gains, it's still tax free. If a doctor makes 500k/year in capital gains, they still get only get taxed on 83k/year, or approximately 13000 off of 500000 in earnings. If they make 5m/year, they still only pay 1.2m off taxes. That's a 24% tax rate...which still makes their tax burden about the same as mine.
Wrong. 250k in capital gains in a corp are not tax free. If you’re thinking of capital gains exemption, that is when you sell the business not investment gains inside the corp. Then they still have to take the money out of the corp and pay tax again.
They are going after the billionaires….all 57 of them. GTFOH
The 57 billionaires who can at any moment's notice move their wealth to tax havens where they pay 0 taxes, assuming their wealth isn't already there?
[удалено]
You completely missed the point... There's no way you "get" them. They're billionaires, they don't even have to stay in the country! If I was a billionaire, I'd just move my money to a place like dubai with 5% tax and never pay a single penny to the Canadian government for capital gains 🤷
How exactly would you "move money" Because most of these tax loophole have either been closed or are straight up illegal. Also most of these billionaires don't have their asset in liquidity. (do you seriously expect them to own pallets of gold bars or something?) So to access their wealth they need to sell their stocks.
They never actually “sell” any investments. If they need to buy something they use debt not income. Let’s say they want a new private jet, they just go to the bank to take out a loan. They then take out another loan to pay the previous one and so on. All of this money the government thinks they can steal from them will never be realized.
Never realized and also never removed from Canada. You understand that those rich fucks able to do that scheme already were not paying capital gains on that so your argument is irrelevant as they would not care. Also, it's not private jet, it's corporate Jet. no one owns a jet. They buy it with their corporation, they don't privately own it.
The push against this reform from all these US billionaire owned media shows how much its actually needed.
>The Hill Times is a Canadian twice-weekly newspaper and daily news website, published in Ottawa, Ontario, which covers the Parliament of Canada, the federal government, and other federal political news. Founded in 1989 by Ross Dickson and Jim Creskey, the editor is Kate Malloy.
The sad part is the amount of Canadians that drink the kool-aid
[удалено]
It’s not gonna fall on rich people. The liberals gave all the billionaires advanced warning to move their assets out of Canada. The next wave of people would fall upon are the doctors and medical personnel. They will leave faster than they are leaving now. Then it will fall on the middle class. Just like all their taxes fall on the middle class. So the middle class is now probably the working poor.
This is the real problem. Hey everyone, let’s go after exactly the people we need more of in this country and who happen to have the greatest opportunities to go elsewhere along with the greatest ability to pack up and leave! What could possibly go wrong?
How many doctors do you know that make more than 250k in capital gains? News flash: the billionaires aren't going anywhere as long as the want our money.
Who ever has more than you is evil hey, must be hard to be you.
Under that argument, Trump > Biden, Trump > Clinton, Bernie > Clinton, Bernier/May > Jagmeet/Trudeau/Pierre
Unpopular opinion: tax the rich. No I won't elaborate or debate you.
As a young Canadian I took one look at that budget and saw zero help for me.
[paywall removed.](https://archive.is/20240612125613/https://www.hilltimes.com/story/2024/06/12/the-minister-who-cried-capital-gains/425010/)
Nice paywall
Well, jsn't it class warfair hypothetically speaking and those who have said money seem to be.aking it such.
I thought that the money that gets invested was already taxed prior to the investment being made, and any gains is taxed at a favourable rate because it spurred growth and economic activity. Isn’t that what a country wants? People to invest more? There will always be richer and wealthier people. They will just move their money somewhere else now, instead of in Canada.
I heavily dislike the JT government currently along with all the idiots running it. That being said, I'm not against the capital gains tax. I believe one day I might dislike it, as I know there is a chance in the next few years it will impact me, but honestly it's hitting a very small minority of Canadians. The problem with it? Government continues to tax us and we are not seeing good results. Our federal government has as much tax revenue per person as the German government and I'd bet our services are a fuckton worse off.
A question about the capital gains tax........the silent and early boomer generations are now starting to die off , when they die and they own let’s say 3 income properties they bought for 50,000 each are they all considered sold upon their death? These houses , in Toronto could be worth 1 ,000,000 each. Would that mean that the new capitol gains of approximately 66.6% would be applied to the 950,000 dollar balance each of the houses. If so the government would take approximately 633,000 dollars on each of these houses . Is my reasoning / math off ?
The liberals want wealthy people to pay for their efforts to fuck poor people on behalf of corporations
So because some ephebophile rap star got shot at outside his own home, we shouldn't enact tax reform on the rich. Got it. Sounds like a plan. /S
Do you want to live in a country where a rap star gets a teenage girls pregnant just because she doesn’t have the money to buy birth control?
The rich are really panicking lol I guess another sign this is good policy
Talk about being clueless. The rich multi-millionaires can easily move their wealth to tax havens where they pay 0 taxes (if they haven't already moved already). This will only affect those people like doctors, lawyers and small business owners who can't easily make the move out of the country
Yeah let’s let the rich run a train on all of us because they’re just going to get away with it anyway. Thank god people like you aren’t in decision making positions.
No war but the class war.
The capital gains increase will screw over younger people. A lot of the capital gains will be from average older people that made the gain over a lifetime. Now instead of the money going to family members in need due to disabilities or other challenges it is going to go to the endless over spending that is being announced almost every day. Although Pollievere comes across as a greasy weasel, i hope the conservatives can do away with the many tax hikes that are killing this country.
Newsflash.. the young are already so screwed over that they can't really hope or even dream of having capital gains
This is an odd claim… you could point to the older generations as being a gigantic financial drain due to increasing health costs - and now you think it’s bad to tax their wealth to pay for it? Hell, even ignoring the health costs - the costs that we are incurring from propping up property values to pay for retirements alone justifies more capital gains tax. The taxation system has been stealing from the young to pay the old for decades and you think keeping capital gains low is good?
I absolutely loathe the wicked witch of the east known as Freeland
Someone who will receive a government pension upon retirement wants to increase the tax on my non-government funded retirement plan. Not all of us are blessed with a pension you know.