# Trudeau angers bankers and their lobbyists



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Trudeau says he will raise corporate taxes by 3% for the banks, on bank profits over $1 billion.

The Canadian Bankers Association responded angrily and said this will threaten economic growth. Personally I think the bankers should be thankful for all the public assistance and government stimulus they have been given.

Meanwhile, the banks are reporting strong earnings. Most of the banks reporting earnings recently have beaten analyst estimates, mainly driven by gains in the mortgage business (not a surprise in a real estate bubble). It seems that the banks are doing great during covid.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Personally I think that the government attacking the banks is dumb.
The banks have generally worked with the government to help things going smoothly.

The problem we have is that at a 50% tax rate, the government is really running out of options to fund all the programs they want.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

james4beach said:


> It seems that the banks are doing great during covid.


Well, we certainly don't want businesses doing well. We better put a stop to that nonsense.

ltr


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

I'll believe it when I see it.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Let the banks keep the extra 3% on their profits over $1 billion and eliminate the tax free status of the TFSA and RRSP (that helps the banks peddle their porfitable mutual funds) and the CMHC guaranteeing their mortgage profits.

Let the banks earn the money in the open market without any government guarantees. Oh........eliminate the Federal deposit insurance as well.

Holy mackerel the banks are greedy, self centered pricks.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

Having a specific surtax for ~7 specific corporations is pretty poor tax policy. I believe the proposal is going over like a lead balloon because most people know exactly how this "tax on profits" will be recouped - higher fees on all of us that are unavoidable because of the oligopoly of the banks. The banks pay $12 billion in taxes a year, and the government won't do anything to seriously threaten that, just like they don't seriously threaten cell phone bills as they collect billions and billions in spectrum auctions.

The real story is rampant government spending with no end in sight must result in higher tax increases on everyday people so there you have it. If it keeps up, everything is on the table - capital gains on housing, loss of TFSA tax status, increased RRSP taxes, increased income taxes, increased sales taxes. It's all coming if spending doesn't stop.


----------



## Covariance (Oct 20, 2020)

james4beach said:


> Trudeau says he will raise corporate taxes by 3% for the banks, on bank profits over $1 billion.
> 
> The Canadian Bankers Association responded angrily and said this will threaten economic growth. Personally I think the bankers should be thankful for all the public assistance and government stimulus they have been given.
> 
> Meanwhile, the banks are reporting strong earnings. Most of the banks reporting earnings recently have beaten analyst estimates, mainly driven by gains in the mortgage business (not a surprise in a real estate bubble). It seems that the banks are doing great during covid.


Obviously not an economic or industrial strategy driven measure. And short sited. Things like this and other recent examples undermine the case for companies to invest in Canada. Without investment there are less jobs.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I don't disagree that centering out the banks for extra taxes isn't good overall tax policy and won't make a dent in the deficit, but it is about optics.

After all, if the government said they guarantee any payday loans if the interest rate is capped at 10% annually, many would start lending online.

It is more like........the banks bite the hand that feeds them.


----------



## damian13ster (Apr 19, 2021)

And at the same time lowering CMHC premium, socializing risks, screwing over taxpayer, and giving all the profit to banks?
Pure populism


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Let the banks keep the extra 3% on their profits over $1 billion and eliminate the tax free status of the TFSA and RRSP (that helps the banks peddle their porfitable mutual funds) and the CMHC guaranteeing their mortgage profits.
> 
> Let the banks earn the money in the open market without any government guarantees. Oh........eliminate the Federal deposit insurance as well.
> 
> Holy mackerel the banks are greedy, self centered pricks.


RRSPs are a pension replacement for those who don't work for the government.

FDIC protects the account holders, not the bank.

You sound like the guy who wants to shorten healthcare waitlists with random euthanasia.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I know what they are and I know they help increase bank profits.

If it wasn't for FDIC insurance people may not park their money in banks. If it weren't for RRSP tax avoidance people may not buy the bank's mutual funds.

It appears you don't know how banks make money.


----------



## Covariance (Oct 20, 2020)

sags said:


> It is more like........the banks bite the hand that feeds them.


I see it the other way around. The gov't bites the hand that feeds them.


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

Government overspending is the root of it IMO. Trudeau squanders taxpayers' money on any idea that comes into his head, especially if he thinks it will get him more votes. Lets face it, any increase in costs for the banks, will be passed down to customers.


----------



## damian13ster (Apr 19, 2021)

sags said:


> I know what they are and I know they help increase bank profits.
> 
> If it wasn't for FDIC insurance people may not park their money in banks. If it weren't for RRSP tax avoidance people may not buy the bank's mutual funds.
> 
> It appears you don't know how banks make money.


I have RRPS and TFSA outside of big banks. Majority of my friends do as well as simply they provide cheaper service.
RRSP and TFSA are the biggest reason middle class even exists in Canada. They don't help the wealthy. Cap on it is too small to matter for the wealthy.
You are literally proposing screwing middle class. No wonder you vote Liberal with belief that middle class should be destroyed.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I agree this is populism by a desperate political party who cannot use an abacus to calculate a net sum zero (or less) result.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

damian13ster said:


> I have RRPS and TFSA outside of big banks. Majority of my friends do as well as simply they provide cheaper service.
> RRSP and TFSA are the biggest reason middle class even exists in Canada. They don't help the wealthy. Cap on it is too small to matter for the wealthy.
> You are literally proposing screwing middle class. No wonder you vote Liberal with belief that middle class should be destroyed.


If people have their RRSP or TFSA invested in the bank's mutual funds........the banks are screwing them.

That is..... if any of the many posts on mutual fund fees and charges are accurate.....or are you saying they aren't accurate ?

The banks earn profits from lending mortgage money at 0 % risk to themselves, thanks to a taxpayer guarantee.

Maybe we should have a Go Fund Me campaign for the banks........or organize a group hug.

People can say the extra tax on bank profits are symbolic and make no difference........but I am not about to pity cry for the banks.


----------



## damian13ster (Apr 19, 2021)

So you want to take away any chance for retirement saving for entire middle class because couple people CHOOSE to have mutual funds from banks?
You do realize that not a single financial institution will prevent you from opening RRSP or TFSA if you don't purchase their funds?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

If the banks didn't profit from TFSAs and RRSPs they would stop administering them tomorrow.

If they cared about their customers they would stop raising all their fees, but they don't so they won't.

I hate to be the one to break the news to you......but banks are not your friend.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Now Trudeau pissed off bank workers and there about half million of them + member of their families. More corporate taxes , less incentives to employees. Hopefully all of them will vote against Liberals!


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Btw, is it the reason that yesterday all banks were down around 2% and also down today while markets are up?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

That is probably why shackles get raised when proposing taxing the banks on financial forums.


----------



## mattw (May 14, 2013)

sags said:


> If the banks didn't profit from TFSAs and RRSPs they would stop administering them tomorrow.
> 
> If they cared about their customers they would stop raising all their fees, but they don't so they won't.
> 
> I hate to be the one to break the news to you......but banks are not your friend.


Why would a business operate a division that doesn't earn a profit. Are there better options then bank MF? Hell ya - but guess what people like convenience and still is better over a savings account.
Same reason I went to a mechanic shop last week. Could I have done it on my own? Potentially. But I don't have time to waste figuring it out or want to. It's called offering a service.

Why would you think a business is your friend anyway?


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

Why would anyone think that a promise made during an election is a promise that might be fulfilled after the election?


----------



## diharv (Apr 19, 2011)

ian said:


> Why would anyone think that a promise made during an election is a promise that might be fulfilled after the election?


I was hoping that as this election campaign has now sunk to the point that it has become a competition of who can promise the stupidest most outlandish programs, ideas, and voter bribes, like that idiotic ageist housing TFSA or whatever the hell it is. There appears to be no limit or concern as to the amount of billions being promised to be thrown around. The money does not exist so why fulfill the promise? Though I do wish the LPC would solicit me for a donation so I can send them Monopoly money.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Yeah this is why I ignore many of the promises... they don't sway me.

What I'm looking at are big picture policies, values, and priorities of the government including handling of the pandemic. Also the broad economy, trajectory, and quality of life in the country.


----------



## diharv (Apr 19, 2011)

The fluff being thrown around that supposedly should help deal with deep rooted problems that they themselves enabled, just reeks of desperation. The first time I started paying attention and noticing this was with Harper just before he lost. Every day a new ridiculous promise. Its ratcheted up to dangerous levels now though. Why the hell should a stupid proof of vaccine card program cost $1 billion? My covid card from BC Services I have saved to my phone cost nothing.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

What is the very first thing a new Government does after being elected when one of their election promises is to balance the budget by 20XX ????

Easy question.

They 'do an audit' and claim the deficit is much larger that was reported, the previous Gov't made such a mess of things, and unfortunately they are therefore unable to fulfill that promise. The upside is they are now the Gov't and pledge to get the country's (or the province's) fiscal spending on the 'right track' by 20XX

Then they promise another date.....one that is ALWAYS past the date of the next required election.

You can take that one to the bank. Along with their emissions promise.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> I know what they are and I know they help increase bank profits.
> 
> If it wasn't for FDIC insurance people may not park their money in banks. If it weren't for RRSP tax avoidance people may not buy the bank's mutual funds.
> 
> It appears you don't know how banks make money.


If it wasn't for FDIC insurance, ordinary Canadians would be at risk of losing money in bank collapse.
RRSPs aren't tax avoidance.

I know exactly how banks make money, but it isn't from my RRSP. I'm pretty sure the $20/yr in commissions barely covers the costs of the statements they mail me.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Yeah this is why I ignore many of the promises... they don't sway me.
> 
> What I'm looking at are big picture policies, values, and priorities of the government including handling of the pandemic. Also the broad economy, trajectory, and quality of life in the country.


That's exactly why I won't be voting Liberal.
Their values and priorities, even concern for the typical Canadian are just lacking.


----------



## Retired Peasant (Apr 22, 2013)

Why does everyone keep referring to FDIC? It's CDIC.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

diharv said:


> The fluff being thrown around that supposedly should help deal with deep rooted problems that they themselves enabled, just reeks of desperation. The first time I started paying attention and noticing this was with Harper just before he lost. Every day a new ridiculous promise. Its ratcheted up to dangerous levels now though. Why the hell should a stupid proof of vaccine card program cost $1 billion? My covid card from BC Services I have saved to my phone cost nothing.


They won't actually spend that amount. It is another empty promise for election purposes. It would have been better for them to establish some standards. But that assumes there is someone competent available.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Retired Peasant said:


> Why does everyone keep referring to FDIC? It's CDIC.


Because they don't know what they are talking about? Perhaps have never been to the CDIC website either to understand how it works?


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

I do not buy the values and the priories business.

I believe that when elected, both parties are the virtually same. The only differences tend to be misreading public opinion, loose cannons, or fissures within the Party from time to time. Personality/popularity is as important as anything else.

Each will have one eye on polls to determine policy, the other on getting re-elected.

The rest if fluff. In between they pass pass the odd good bill or make some good policy decisions.


----------



## Retiredguy (Jul 24, 2013)

Anyone who has a pension including CPP, should be concerned. I'd expect to see one or more of the banks in all pension investment portfolios that help sustain the health of their pension. (If not all, 99%). Also, most RRIF and RRSP will have them as well, etc. But since most people can only think "banks bad" b/c they charge user fees I'm not optimistic they can connect the dots. 

Disclosure: I own shares in 4 of the banks, and my DB pension has bank share holdings, as does my (our) CPP of course. The only thing our Non Reg accounts and TFSA's generate for TDDI is the occasional $10 trade fee. In fact I have had a TDDI (GLIS, Waterhouse) account for 34 years and never paid a account fee, only trading fees, which per trade have declined substantially over the years.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Retiredguy said:


> Anyone who has a pension including CPP, should be concerned. I'd expect to see one or more of the banks in all pension investment portfolios that help sustain the health of their pension. (If not all, 99%). Also, most RRIF and RRSP will have them as well, etc. But since most people can only think "banks bad" b/c they charge user fees I'm not optimistic they can connect the dots.
> 
> Disclosure: I own shares in 4 of the banks, and my DB pension has bank share holdings, as does my (our) CPP of course. The only thing our Non Reg accounts and TFSA's generate for TDDI is the occasional $10 trade fee. In fact I have had a TDDI (GLIS, Waterhouse) account for 34 years and never paid a account fee, only trading fees, which per trade have declined substantially over the years.


To summarize, everyone except HOBOs should be concerned, even simple seniors who has only bank account.
Liberals may ,with this idiotic money tax grab, hammered last nail to their coffin


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

gibor365 said:


> To summarize, everyone except HOBOs should be concerned, even simple seniors who has only bank account.
> Liberals may ,with this idiotic money tax grab, hammered last nail to their coffin


This is really looking like the Liberal election of unforced errors.
Trying to catch post covid support, but call an election during the 4th wave.
Push plans to hurt their "friends" on Bay Street


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> Push plans to hurt their "friends" on Bay Street


I think most of Bay Street recognizes that they get way too many freebies from the government. These people aren't stupid.

They are a heavily government supported industry in just about every respect. They should be treated more like utilities and probably should be taxed much more heavily.


----------



## damian13ster (Apr 19, 2021)

Government is literally dependent on the banks. It wouldn't exist without them buying up Canadian bonds that pretty much no one else wants.
That's why the Liberals want lower premiums for CMHC. To screw taxpayers even more and give more profit to the banks.
Banks have tons of leverage over government.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> I think most of Bay Street recognizes that they get way too many freebies from the government. These people aren't stupid.
> 
> They are a heavily government supported industry in just about every respect. They should be treated more like utilities and probably should be taxed much more heavily.


Utilities also get regulated profit, something the banks don't get.
I don't see the government handing out monopolies to banks, like they do for utilities.

I think banks should be split into their respective functions.
Utility functions should be regulated and supported.
Other stuff should shouldn't be supported by the government.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> I think banks should be split into their respective functions.


I agree, they should be split up.

The capital markets (hedge funds) divisions need to operate separately from traditional depository banking. This is how Wall Street used to be, before the 1990s.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> I agree, they should be split up.
> 
> The capital markets (hedge funds) divisions need to operate separately from traditional depository banking. This is how Wall Street used to be, before the 1990s.


And insurance shouldn't be in banking. Except for _maybe_ annuities, but I'm not even sure there.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> And insurance shouldn't be in banking. Except for _maybe_ annuities, but I'm not even sure there.


 ... you might want to ask the insurance companies if they want that. 

I think the banks will get into grocery stores next if they see a BIG dollar sign there.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... you might want to ask the insurance companies if they want that.
> 
> I think the banks will get into grocery stores next if they see a BIG dollar sign there.


I don't care what the companies want.
I want a fair system that functions efficiently for the benefit of the people.

Also many retailers are getting their own banks or forging partnerships. Loblaws with CIBC, Canadian Tire just made Canadian Tire bank.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> I don't care what the companies want.


 ... you might not care and neither do those companies care as to what you want. Ie. the insurance companies are gonna to lobby the government against the banks on selling annuities. Or did they do that already as I don't think you can buy an annuity at a bank currently.



> I want a fair system that functions efficiently for the benefit of the people.


 ... laughable ... dream on. Let's start with an "uncorrupted" systems first ... let alone "fair". What's fair?


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I don't have any material resentment or anger towards our big banks. I profit handsomely from them and would like them to continue to be one of the pillars of our economy. If I don't like their services, I can go elsewhere for more efficient and cost effective options. Open Banking will make that even more feasible when it comes.... 2025? Later? Trudeau is just grasping for votes. Hopefully, he gets royally s*****d on Sept 20th... but may not.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... laughable ... dream on. Let's start with an "uncorrupted" systems first ... let alone "fair". What's fair?


Lets start with basic human rights, like don't be racist and sexist.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> Lets start with basic human rights, like don't be racist and sexist.


 ... those words definitely do NOT belong in the banks' lingo.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... those words definitely do NOT belong in the banks' lingo.


No, but I'd at least expect the Government to denounce systematic racism in the banking industry.









Scotiabank, CIBC to fill 3.5% of top roles with Black employees - BNN Bloomberg


Bank of Nova Scotia and Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce say they will fill at least 3.5 per cent of senior executive and board positions in Canada with Black leaders by 2025.




www.bnnbloomberg.ca


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> No, but I'd at least expect the Government to denounce systematic racism in the banking industry.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 ... seems like someone felt short-changed (again) by the bank's temporary mandate with that link. 

Why do you need the "government" to outline the Canadian's Charter to the banks? Or better yet, denounce what's practiced on that Charter? Can the banks people not read?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... seems like someone felt short-changed (again) by the bank's temporary mandate with that link.
> 
> Why do you need the "government" to outline the Canadian's Charter to the banks? Or better yet, denounce what's practiced on that Charter? Can the banks people not read?


The question was "what is fair?", and I put forward one of the most obviously unfair policies (racial discrimination)


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> No, but I'd at least expect the Government to denounce systematic racism in the banking industry.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is racism in its prime! I couldn’t imagine that Canada is so racist country!
Do those banks want to have 3.5% of top executives Black!
I have a couple of questions...

is 50% or 25% Blacks will be included in 3.5% calculation?! Or it will be prorated?!
are Southern Indians considered Blacks?!
what about Ethiopian black Jews?!
would be Justin Trudeau considered Black ( with his famous blackface image)?!
Imho, they need to hire advisor from former Apartheid South African government, to decide who is black and who is not 🤣


Btw, in anti Semitic Russian Empire there was a similar % of Jews who can study in University!
I expect next step that Canadian banks will set % also for Jewish, Chinese etc. Who cares about professionalism?!

NBA teams should follow and set % of Non-black players on roster 😂


----------

