Morneau's Proposed 700% Tax Hike On Retired Business Owners Is Unfair
m.huffingtonpost.ca/tim-paziuk/bill-morneau-t...
huffingtonpost.caPosted Sep 16, 2017, 3:47 AM UTC
831
huffingtonpost.caIt's not reasonable to allow people to set up a financial plan for retirement for years or decades and then suddenly pull the rug out from under them.
6
[deleted]
3
what Morneau failed to illustrate in his example of the 2 neighbours earning $220K, and the hard working employee paying $35,000 per year more in income tax than their self-employed neighbour is what the dollar value of the employee's benefits are - company pension plan, health care, vacation, sick leave and other benefits provided by the company to the employee, something the self-employed neighbour did not benefit from.
5
Mr. Morneau should also know that many small businesses in Canada struggle for years before becoming profitable. Others fail. We take major risks to become successful. And there is no government compensation when we fail. Unlike government employees, small business owners must provide for their own retirement plans and benefits. With interest rates at all time lows, this has meant taking additional risks in the securities markets. Punitive taxation policies will only dampen our entrepreneurial spirit. Why would we take the risk? Better that we all get government jobs and sit back and collect our pensions and benefits.
3†
I know a few retired business owners facing this. Changing the rules in passive investments in a private corporation will affect many people earning less than $150k especially those already retired.
0†
Per the article, this issue impacts 1.5% of taxpayers.
Why should I, literally the 98.5%, care?
3
You need not care. All I hear is over blown rhetoric from doctors, chamber of commerce groups, who appear not to understand the bill.
5
lol are you daft? the issue in no way affects 1.5 percent of taxpayers, and the article never says that. The entire premise of the article was surrounding a retired company owner who earns nothing and draws dividends from retirement investment in a corporation.
0†
Daft? There's really no reason to be rude.
This quote is in the article: "According to Statistics Canada, in 2015 there were 390,220 Canadians who reported incomes of $200,000+ (which is 1.5 per cent of taxpayers)"
And yes, I misunderstood the premise. Sorry for offending you.
How many retirees will this effect then? And what is the average amount of dividends drawn in a year?
7
you're daft because you tried suggesting that the article stated that these tax measures only effect those making 200k+ a year, when the article did the opposite and gave an example of someone who earns much less. 2/3rds of small business owners in Canada pull in less than 70k a year. People like you framing this as a taxing the rich issue parroting flat out lies from Morneau and Trudeau is disingenuous and frankly disgusting.
4
More fear mongering. No, tax changes are fantastic and their business relies on tax loopholes to survive - its a failed business and should close.
-1†
The example from the article isn't a tax loophole, nor is it a failed business. It's a retiree who put his retirement into his company instead of a RRSP - perfectly legal.
8
Tell that to the income trusts Harper taxed into oblivion. It's common for parties to close loopholes to tackle a deficit.
People should be applauding Trudeau's efforts to tackle the deficit. The alternative is cutting essential services. And those services are already garbage.
1†
People should be applauding Trudeau's efforts to tackle the deficit.
The deficit that he made way larger than promised? I'm not going to applaud a guy that tries to make the tax code even more unfair.
The alternative is cutting essential services. And those services are already garbage.
How about we fix those actual services? Besides, there are easier ways to balance the budget.
In 2014, Harper ran a deficit of 5.2 Billion (later numbers don't seem to be available yet). The government of Canada spent 5 billion on foreign aid. Cut that, reduce unemployment a bit, and you have a balanced budget.
Trudeau is forecasting a 28.5 billion dollar deficit this year, yet the essential services of today were essential services in 2014, too.
We can cut spending back to 2014 levels, rather than trying to harass small businesses.
3
It's not harassing small businesses. You have larger companies exploiting a tax loophole. How is it making it "more unfair" by closing that loophole. They even said they were looking at ways to limit it so it wouldn't hurt the little guys.
And reduce unemployment to balance the budget? What? That would mean hiring more. Which is spending more.
And Harper absolutely mismanaged the budget. The debt ballooned under the Conservatives after years of it being stable under the Libs.
And unlike Harper, the Libs are actually spending on infrastructure. Which creates jobs.
2
You're going to get downvoted by government employees... just letting you know.
0
How about getting spending, salaries and pensions under control...
-2
a proud Canadian would support the hard work of their fellow Canadians, not take pleasure in seeing gov'ts screwing them over.
5
This is a tough issue because the tools that help small businesses owners SURVIVE get used by large, profitable and rich businesses to avoid paying taxes.
Morneau should make sure the changes only apply from a certain amount and not below.
A small business owner who scrapes a personal income of below $100,000 is not the one that does tax evasion... Large corporation owners who pay themselves millions are.
This really is an easy win for them if they would just listen to reason.