• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Finally....

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Finally....

    ....A sensible analysis of the proposed tax changes.

    "Farmers need more light, less heat, in tax proposal debate
    By Jan Slomp, National Farmers Union President

    The federal government is proposing changes to the Income Tax Act aimed at collecting revenue from corporations that are using certain measures as loopholes to shelter profits from being taxed at the same rate as other Canadians’ income.

    There is a very heated debate in the farm community about these tax proposals, largely because some organizations and the media in general, have failed to analyze the proposals, omitted key details or have not mentioned that the government is holding public consultations. The actions of very wealthy players who are abusing provisions that were intended to help small business owners have focused attention on tax-dodging practices, resulting in the government’s proposal.

    Canada’s democratic system lives by the grace of fairly collected tax and prudently managed government expenditures. It is vitally important that tax loopholes are closed. The proposed changes are clearly set out to do just that.

    The Government is looking at three specific type of tax evasion:
    Income sprinkling (when corporations pay dividends to family members who do not contribute to the business, for the sole purpose of avoiding taxes).
    Passive investment (when a wealthy person uses their private corporation to make investments in mutual funds, stock markets, bonds, etc. instead of investing under their own name, allowing them to pay less tax and increase their private fortune faster).
    Converting income into capital gains (setting up shell companies and using the corporation’s income to buy and sell shares in these companies, resulting in profits being counted as capital gains from these transactions instead of income from their corporation, and thus taxed at a lower rate).
    The majority of farm family income in Canada comes from off-farm jobs, which is taxed upfront. The proposed changes do not apply to all revenues, but only to net profits -- the money left after all expenses (including salaries) are paid. And the proposed changes do not affect the existing provision for a lifetime capital gains exemption of $1 million when passing the farm on to the next generation.

    The 2016 Census data indicates only 25% of Canadian farms are incorporated, so for 75% of farmers this tax loophole conversation is irrelevant. Several incorporated NFU farmers have asked their accountants’ opinion on implications for their farms and all were assured that the proposed legislation would have no negative impacts for them. Only a very small portion of incorporated farms are profitable enough to warrant the cost of accountant fees to set up loophole arrangements.

    The Canadian Taxpayers Federation has led the bandwagon very successfully. We all should know by now that they, along with the Fraser Institute and the other corporate-funded think tanks, have the interests of the 1% at heart. They know how to rally the masses, create Trump-like hype characterized by shallow rhetoric, lack of substance and purely misleading statements. The media has contributed by reporting this hype and neglecting to do a thorough analysis. The 1% knows that they are not the majority, so they dress up their wish list as if it is actually good for society.

    The farm population is often targeted by opinion manipulators and demagogues working for the elite. In Canada, trust in farmers is ranked very high. Canadians know about the struggle that farmers face, as well as how much they depend on farmers feeding them. Canadians care when farmers are publically outraged. The 1% uses this information, and in this case, mobilizes farmers’ outrage to maintain lucrative tax loopholes for themselves as if they also help farmers.

    There is a way forward to help farmers by proposing positive amendments to the Income Tax Act. Farmers are struggling to make a living on the farm. Farm debt is at an all time high. An aging farm population struggles to maintain income security when they help set up a new generation on the farm. Farmland values are disproportionate to farm income, making the farm transfer to the next generation even more complicated.

    A few practical steps helping farmers would be:
    Increase the one time capital gains exemption to maintain income for the retiring farmers and facilitate transfers to the next generation.
    Encourage and facilitate beginning farmers with new incentives and tax breaks.
    Tax absentee and speculative land ownership to bring farmland values back in line with farm incomes to facilitate land affordability for the next generation of farmers.
    Use tax incentives to facilitate the formation of Land Trusts.
    We need to collect taxes where they are due and we need to use the consultation opportunities given by the Federal Government to advocate for the kind of tax measures that farmers actually need and that are beneficial for the Canadian public."

    #2
    Fake news nothing to see here.

    Comment


      #3
      Good old National Socialist Union. And they wonder why more farmers aren't members...

      Comment


        #4
        It did mention prudently managed government expenditures. Ok good place to start is to more prudently manage expenditures. We can cut back on terrorism spending for starters. I happen to have a corp. that does have a some passive investments in it while I am looking for an opportunity to come available. Right now any interest income into a corp in AB is taxed at 46% so I would say that it high enough and the reason you don't want interest to flow into the corp. Dividends into a corp is taxed in the corp at I don't even know exactly what rate (It is called part 4 tax, not the small business rate) but those taxes are refundable when your company pays dividends to shareholders. Taxes are applied at regular dividend rates on your person and these are not eligible dividends as in theory they are derived from business profits that had the small business tax applied to them originally. So you can shift the dividends to a year you have lower personal income but this is the only advantage you get from investing through a company. A company also spends more in accounting fee and you get the corporate registry fee every year. in hind sight I would not have incorporated but circumstances were different years ago.

        Comment


          #5
          What a pile of doodoo. Yes. Lets close the loopholes. Lets quit letting people buy an RRSP just to avoid tax. Thats bad. Lets stop letting cattle producers increase their inventory at year end just to avoid tax. Thats bad. Lets be sure those young doctors never get out of debt after years of taking loans. Who needs them anyway. Why let those grain farmers hide their grain in the bin over year end. Make them declare it. They are bad. Dont let them buy next years inputs before year end just to avoid tax. Thats awful even if they intend to use it. All these damn corporations that farm must be big rich buggers with no social conscience steeling from the poor. They are all bad because I hate to see people doing well and I dont know how they do it. Good grief. I could go on but the president of my farm corporation has to get back to work because he has work no one else will do.

          Comment


            #6
            well doesn't that put grassfarmer in perspective eh!!

            "Only a very small portion of incorporated farms are profitable enough to warrant the cost of accountant fees to set up loophole arrangements."
            That's your perspective of the farming community? Not only is that pathetic its actually disgusting.

            Comment


              #7
              Several incorporated NFU farmers have asked their accountants’ opinion on implications for their farms and all were assured that the proposed legislation would have no negative impacts for them. Only a very small portion of incorporated farms are profitable enough to warrant the cost of accountant fees to set up loophole arrangements.

              vvalk, just pointing out that the quote is saying,
              only a very small portion of incorporated NFU farms are profitable to warrant the cost of accountant fees,

              Comment


                #8
                Still No F_____ Use.

                Comment


                  #9
                  I was actually reading the article closely until this paragraph......

                  Originally posted by grassfarmer View Post
                  The Canadian Taxpayers Federation has led the bandwagon very successfully. We all should know by now that they, along with the Fraser Institute and the other corporate-funded think tanks, have the interests of the 1% at heart. They know how to rally the masses, create Trump-like hype characterized by shallow rhetoric, lack of substance and purely misleading statements. The media has contributed by reporting this hype and neglecting to do a thorough analysis. The 1% knows that they are not the majority, so they dress up their wish list as if it is actually good for society.
                  What is with lefty liberals and their derangement with all things Trump??
                  They can't even write a respectable article expressing their opinion about something that has nothing to do with Trump (like him or not) without frothing at the mouth about him?

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by vvalk View Post
                    well doesn't that put grassfarmer in perspective eh!!

                    "Only a very small portion of incorporated farms are profitable enough to warrant the cost of accountant fees to set up loophole arrangements."
                    That's your perspective of the farming community? Not only is that pathetic its actually disgusting.
                    Got to love the attitude that making lots of money is some sort of crime. Wealth creation is the backbone of our who economy and standard of living in Canada. Farmers are wealth creators. Who do you liberal lovers think already pays the bulk of the taxes in Canada. Yeah you guessed it People who make money and the more your make the more you pay exponentially.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      This would be a chance for the Senate to prove they are worth something by blocking this tax bill. We know they will just rubberstamp it like the useless outfit they are.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        What about the change that taxes anyone passing farm to children MORE and non related buyers LESS?

                        Comment


                          #13
                          I would summarize the article this way. It is a good thing that those making a profit should pay more.

                          But while you are making changes why not give us a few new loopholes so we can pay less.

                          By the way the changes will come by regulation not a bill so it doesn't go through parliament for approval.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Guess I learned something today,

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Grassfarmer you Dotard


                              How much of a ‘fair share’ do Canada’s top earners pay? You might be surprised
                              Charles Lammam and Ben Eisen: Canada’s tax system is progressive, extracting proportionately more money from those on the higher end of the income scale


                              Special to Financial Post
                              Special to Financial Post
                              September 27, 2016
                              6:07 PM EDT
                              Filed under
                              FP Comment
                              Comment
                              Facebook
                              Twitter
                              Email
                              More
                              “Like all Canadians, I am very concerned over allegations that some wealthy Canadians are not paying their fair share of taxes.” That’s a recent statement from Diane Lebouthillier, federal minister of national revenue. While Lebouthillier was talking about real estate speculators, the notion that top earners don’t pay their “fair share” is a recurring narrative about Canada’s tax system. Of course, “fair share” is never actually defined. But the implication is that top earners are getting away without paying much tax.

                              The data tell a different story. In reality, Canada’s tax system is progressive, extracting proportionately more money from those on the higher end of the income scale.

                              But data alone cannot determine whether the distribution of the tax burden in Canada is “fair” because what’s fair is different to different people. One thing is certain — the notion that upper-earners face a lighter tax burden is false.

                              First, consider the personal income taxes paid by the top 10 per cent of earners — the country’s high-skilled, educated workers including entrepreneurs, business professionals, engineers, doctors and lawyers. According to Statistics Canada data, in 2013 the top 10 per cent earned 35 per cent of Canada’s total income yet paid 54 per cent of federal and provincial income taxes.

                              But that of course is just income taxes. Canadians pay a wide range of other taxes — some visible, many hidden — including payroll taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, fuel taxes, profit taxes, “sin” taxes on liquor and tobacco, and much more. When we account for all these taxes, our calculations find that the top 10 per cent earns 32 per cent of all income in Canada but pays 40 per cent of all taxes.


                              Canada’s top personal income tax rate is second highest among G7 countries, behind only France

                              Meanwhile, middle- and lower-income earners pay proportionately less. Consider that the bottom half of earners in Canada earn 22 per cent of all income yet pay only 15 per cent of all taxes.

                              The imbalance between lower and higher income groups, in terms of the percentage of income earned and total taxes paid, challenges the narrative that high-income earners don’t pay their “fair share” of taxes. What’s more, it flatly disproves the notion that upper-earners get off easy.

                              Another way to look at the issue is by considering the average tax rate of Canadians in different income groups. After accounting for all taxes imposed by the federal, provincial and local governments, Canadians in higher income groups pay a higher average tax rate. For the top 10 per cent of earners, the average total tax rate is 56 per cent — much higher than the 13 per cent average rate of the bottom 10 per cent.


                              For more context, look abroad. The top personal income tax rate in Canada (federal and provincial combined) now stands at 54 per cent — high by international standards. In fact, Canada’s top personal income tax rate is sixth highest among 34 industrialized countries and second highest among G7 countries, behind only France.

                              A high and uncompetitive personal income tax rate is harmful to Canada’s economy. Why? Because top-earning Canadians can lose to taxes more than 50 cents of every extra dollar they earn in labour income, discouraging them from working, saving, investing and being entrepreneurial. While tax rates that increase rapidly as Canadians earn more income aren’t intended to stop people from working and being more successful, research shows they have that very effect.

                              Despite the reoccurring narrative, and recent musings by Lebouthillier, Canada’s top earners already shoulder much of the country’s tax burden.

                              Charles Lammam and Ben Eisen are analysts at the Fraser Institute

                              Comment

                              • Reply to this Thread
                              • Return to Topic List
                              Working...