# The Ontario government raised taxes



## gibor365

HR sending email....Here we go ....those thieves with " license to steal " officially raised taxes 
Why those bustards doing it retroactive?! 
I HATE THEM!!! This corrupted party and thier LGBT leader... 
_The Ontario government passed a budget on July 24, raising the base personal income tax rates by one to two percent for individuals earning over $150,000 per year retroactive to January 1, 2014. Together with the Ontario income surtax, total tax rates on income between $150,000 and $220,000 will rise to 47.97% and to 49.53% on income above $220,000. _


----------



## peterk

Ouch!

Better move to Alberta gibor! 

It's a smooth 10% flat tax. That's 39% for the top bracket above ~$136k


----------



## gibor365

peterk said:


> Ouch!
> 
> Better move to Alberta gibor!
> 
> It's a smooth 10% flat tax. That's 39% for the top bracket above ~$136k


I know that in AB and BC taxes even lower than in some States... but it's not easy to move.... This is Another reason to retire earlier and not to pay those ridiculous taxes....
I understand if they were raising taxes and same time implementing something like free/discounted dental care for seniors or kids, building new arenas etc... but they just covering millions they wasted/stole on gaz plant scandal.... We live GTA West for 15 years , huge new subdivision.... Government built nothing! No new arenas, swimming pools, tennis courts, skating rinks, trails or so...


----------



## andrewf

If you make enough money to be affected by this change, I shed no tears for you.


----------



## Nemo2

andrewf said:


> If you make enough money to be affected by this change, I shed no tears for you.


"Eat the rich!!"


----------



## Dmoney

Funny story... Was talking to my cousin a few months ago about the upcoming election. Undecided about which way to vote. The liberals were offering all-day kindergarten (FREE DAYCARE WAHOOOO!!!!!), but they would also raise taxes on their income bracket (BUT WHY THE HELL DO *I* HAVE TO PAY FOR IT?). 

Classic view - give me my goodies, but don't make me pay for it.


----------



## hboy43

andrewf said:


> If you make enough money to be affected by this change, I shed no tears for you.


I can imagine in a few years those making say $30K will be in a position to say the same about those making say $50K. Choose: Deficit or tax increases. I see no signs of spending control.

hboy43


----------



## doctrine

The raise on incomes above $150k is just noise.

Less noticed, income taxes in Ontario have indeed gone up for most people. Your Ontario tax brackets are no longer going up with inflation, which has been the case for the last 10 some years. This has a cumulative effect; one year, not a big deal, but in 5 years when the $50k brackets have moved to $60k, and $80k brackets are $96k...etc. That will be thousands of dollars per year in new tax revenue at incomes far less than $150k. If it carries on for 10 years, it will be a massive tax increase if status quo remains.


----------



## lonewolf

I can see the day cash will be trash when the government targets those working under the table for cash by making a law against owning cash.


----------



## slacker

It always bugs me when government policies don't index inflation.

For tax brackets, they want a low visibility way of raising taxes.

For tax breaks, they want a way to allow them to periodically make public announcements that says, "we're giving you a tax break".

If you make $150k, and moaning paying a little bit more, please feel free to leave this great province that has provided you with the environment to prosper. Try Yukon, I hear the tax rate there is really low.


----------



## gibor365

slacker said:


> If you make $150k, and moaning paying a little bit more, please feel free to leave this great province that has provided you with the environment to prosper. Try Yukon, I hear the tax rate there is really low.


Who provided?! Wynn?! Give me a break! I'm ready to pay higher taxes , but expect to get something in return ... Gas plant scandals or increase of public workers doing nothig doesn't count... Today is 150K, next year can be 120K, than 100K and so on...


----------



## Butters

public workers make less money than you, and also pay taxes


----------



## gibor365

SheaButters said:


> public workers make less money than you, and also pay taxes


BS. You have no idea how much I make... Public workers have benefits that I cannot dream about and I've seen official salary grades/rates paid to CRA "public" workers...it's much higher than I get paid


----------



## gibor365

Nemo2 said:


> "Eat the rich!!"


Yeah  We learn it in CCCP...take from "rich", give to "poor"...and we also know what was outcome


----------



## andrewf

On the other hand, very high income/wealth inequality tends to be bad for the health of the wealthy... Perhaps there is some middle ground that doesn't involve authoritarian regimes or heads on sticks.


----------



## MRT

gibor said:


> ...
> I HATE THEM!!! This corrupted party and thier LGBT leader...
> ...


Why is her sexual orientation relevant in the rant? That is rather irrelevant and inappropriate, if not offensive.

Hopefully the policies of the U.S. gov't may be harshly critiqued without the need to reference 'their black leader'...


----------



## Eclectic12

gibor said:


> You have no idea how much I make...


True ... though since the quote mentions $150K & up, with a rant - the message sent is that you are making over $150K.




gibor said:


> ... I've seen official salary grades/rates paid to CRA "public" workers...it's much higher than I get paid


If by CRA you mean Canada Revenue Agency - aren't there enough real tax issues provincially in Ontario without confusing the province with the Feds?
Since the issue raised is what the province is doing, the Feds are a side bar and not really relevant.

Cheers


----------



## MoreMiles

One does not make $150,000 income by accident or by luck. One has to study a lot or take high risk in business. It is not a crime to be hated. If you don't like riches, try to become one of them so there is no need to hate. I am sick of these 'I have no sympathy' posts. It is simply disgusting to blame one for high achievement.


----------



## MrMatt

andrewf said:


> If you make enough money to be affected by this change, I shed no tears for you.


Don't worry, mostly 2 types of people make that money.
Government workers, who will just get a raise to make up for it.
People with the capability to move themselves (and their jobs) to another lower tax jurisdiction.


----------



## MrMatt

Dmoney said:


> Funny story... Was talking to my cousin a few months ago about the upcoming election. Undecided about which way to vote. The liberals were offering all-day kindergarten (FREE DAYCARE WAHOOOO!!!!!), but they would also raise taxes on their income bracket (BUT WHY THE HELL DO *I* HAVE TO PAY FOR IT?).
> 
> Classic view - give me my goodies, but don't make me pay for it.


It's not free daycare, it starts too late and ends too early.

To get the extra 1.5-2 hours of before/after school care, it costs more than half what I pay for full daycare now.

Daycare includes meals (breakfast & lunch) 2 snacks, and has a max ECE/child ratio of 1:5. It costs less than double the after school care.
JK is 1 teacher, 1 ECE for 25 kids (much worse ratio at 1:12.5) no snacks, no meals, and before/after school care may only be a few older kids with an adult supervisor.

I'm technically saving a whopping few hundred a month, for a much lower level of care. A level of care that is actually ILLEGAL for anyone to offer for 4 year olds, unless it is in a school.


----------



## fraser

I do not begrudge anyone a high salary. There is lots of opportunity in Canada. People that move forward or earn higher salaries usually work hard, work smart, and take some risk.

The last article that I read on civil service salaries claimed that at the sub $100K salary and benefits level, some civil servant grades were paid as much as 20 percent higher(total wage including benefits) than private industry. BUT, at salaries above, civil servant salary packages were actually lower, with certain professional categories significantly lower.

My experience in hiring at this level is that anyone we hired from a civil service job realized a substantial increase by moving to the private sector. I also found, that in IT for example, certain public sector areas had great difficulty in attracting senior and highly skilled/specialized people because the total wage package was not competitive. This could have changed in the past three years.

Ontario will be facing a bigger challenge in two years or so. That is when the auto company guarantees run out....when their commitments not to move jobs south end. Ontario/Canada's share of the NA auto manufacturing industry has been shrinking steadily over the past 15 years. It will probably take another hit after the job guarantee period has expired.


----------



## andrewf

Apparently lack of sympathy for someone who has a lot of disposable income paying a bit more tax is now exactly the same thing as seething hatred for the wealthy. 

Of all the people who could be potential objects of my sympathy, rich people losing a small part of their disposable income is far, far down the list.


----------



## carverman

gibor said:


> HR sending email....Here we go ....those thieves with " license to steal " officially raised taxes
> Why those bustards doing it retroactive?!
> I HATE THEM!!! This corrupted party and thier LGBT leader...
> _The Ontario government passed a budget on July 24, raising the base personal income tax rates by one to two percent for individuals earning over $150,000 per year retroactive to January 1, 2014. Together with the Ontario income surtax, total tax rates on income between $150,000 and $220,000 will rise to 47.97% and to 49.53% on income above $220,000. _


Somebody's gotta pay for all these gov't services...the poor can't.
What's the old joke?...there are 13.6 milion people in Ontario as of Jan 1 this year. 

Half of them most likely are children, who use all the gov't services available and they don't pay taxes. 

Out of the 6.5 million remaining, over 3 million are seniors and people on welfare..lets split it up to 2 million seniors, who are on gov't pensions..they pay very little in taxes, the people on welfare pay $0 in taxes. 

Then from the remaining 3.5 milllion..500 thousand or more in in jail, they don't pay taxes..200 thousand are disabled,
so they don't pay taxes, 200,000 are out of the country working on foreign assignments, so they don't pay Ont taxes,

and half of the remaining are out of work (or between jobs), so they don't pay any taxes.

1 million work "under the table" for cash, and don't declare their income, so they don't pay any taxes....
the rest, the remaining million are very rich and have enough loopholes and investment write offs, so they don't pay any taxes...
So.. that just leaves a few llike youi, that will be paying more taxes to make up for those that aren't. :biggrin:


----------



## Xander

It angers me when people preach that "If you make that much money you shouldn't complain about paying more!" That is such utter BULLSH!T.
A dollar is a dollar regardless of how much you make. People who pay these extra taxes get nothing more in return from this, or any other gov't for that matter, than some who is in the lowest bracket. 
Lets look at it in a bit of a different light shall we? Let's say your brother, sister, mother, father, neighbour or whomever makes $50,000/year before tax and would like to buy a new Honda Accord. He/she goes into the dealership and the first question asked is "How much do you make?". They them $50 grand and they say, "Well then, your price on this car is $25,000".
A month or so later, after drooling over your brother's, mother's, sister's, best friend's, neighbour's etc hot new ride you decide you what a car just like it. You go into the dealership to buy the same make, model, colour and year car that you recently purchased. The sales manager asks how much you make and you respond "$70,000. "Well then" says the sales manager "this car will cost you $26,500".

Same car, same dealer only difference is your income. Fair?

(I realize that prices of cars can vary due to one's skills at negotiating. I just figured buying big ticket item like a car was something most people could relate to.)


----------



## carverman

gibor said:


> Yeah  We learn it in CCCP...take from "rich", give to "poor"...and we also know what was outcome


Is goot Rassian strategy...the rich politburo members must be supported in style.


----------



## brad

Xander said:


> People who pay these extra taxes get nothing more in return from this, or any other gov't for that matter, than some who is in the lowest bracket.


Why is it always "what am I getting in return for the taxes I pay" and not "what is society getting in return?" That seems more like the grownup way of looking at things, instead of it all being about me, me, me.


----------



## carverman

Xander said:


> It angers me when people preach that "If you make that much money you shouldn't complain about paying more!" That is such utter BULLSH!T.
> A dollar is a dollar regardless of how much you make. People who pay these extra taxes get nothing more in return from this, or any other gov't for that matter, than some who is in the lowest bracket.
> Lets look at it in a bit of a different light shall we? Let's say your brother, sister, mother, father, neighbour or whomever makes $50,000/year before tax and would like to buy a new Honda Accord. He/she goes into the dealership and the first question asked is "How much do you make?". They them $50 grand and they say, "Well then, your price on this car is $25,000".
> A month or so later, after drooling over your brother's, mother's, sister's, best friend's, neighbour's etc hot new ride you decide you what a car just like it. You go into the dealership to buy the same make, model, colour and year car that you recently purchased. The sales manager asks how much you make and you respond "$70,000. "Well then" says the sales manager "this car will cost you $26,500".
> 
> Same car, same dealer only difference is your income. Fair?
> 
> (I realize that prices of cars can vary due to one's skills at negotiating. I just figured buying big ticket item like a car was something most people could relate to.)


Hmmm..interesting..but you failed to make your point understandable. The Honda Accord will be the same price whether a person making $50K or $70K, so will the HST sales taxes on the final price of the Accord. 

It's the Ontario gov't *income taxes that "equalize' the difference between the not-so-rich person earning $50k and the richer person making $70K+. *


----------



## Ihatetaxes

I make a lot of money. I pay a lot of taxes. Life is good as I sit here at my vacation home about to go for a swim and read my book while floating in my 90 degree pool. Tennis court booked later and biggest decision of the day is what restaurant we will hit tonight.

I didn't vote for the liberals and there isn't much else I can do so might as well smile and be glad to be in a position to be paying so much tax.


----------



## gibor365

_People who pay these extra taxes get nothing more in return from this, or any other gov't for that matter, than some who is in the lowest bracket._ even opposite, people who pay higher taxes, get in return much less... 
For example, people who pay low taxes and don't pay at all get free/subsidized child care , get child support money etc.... , but who pays high taxes gets nothing .... we paid about 1,000/month for kindergarten for every child....and it wasn't any super-duper place, just regular one....or we never got "child" money for our children since we arrived to Canada, we were every year getting letter that we are not eligible....(btw, in Isreal every child get monthly payment until age 18 regrdless of his parents income)...


----------



## gibor365

After reading all post and have Déjà vu - started humming Beatles' "Back in USSR"


----------



## sags

Ihatetaxes said:


> I make a lot of money. I pay a lot of taxes. Life is good as I sit here at my vacation home about to go for a swim and read my book while floating in my 90 degree pool. Tennis court booked later and biggest decision of the day is what restaurant we will hit tonight.
> 
> I didn't vote for the liberals and there isn't much else I can do so might as well smile and be glad to be in a position to be paying so much tax.


Amen.......and good for you for making the money and enjoying the rewards.

I would be happy to have $100,000 more income..........and pay 47% of it in taxes.

I imagine a lot of people would be thrilled to do the same.

In the US.......the CBO released a report that corporation profits are at all time highs.............while corporate tax revenues are in decline.

Corporate tax "loopholes" are the reason........and they aren't "loopholes" at all. They are planned and paid for tax dodges created for the wealthy to avoid paying their fair share of taxes.

In Canada........the tax rate is one thing. How many high income or wealthy people actually pay "that" rate on "their" taxes ?

The wealthy have seen their assets triple in value and their incomes double...........since the recession.

The average person have few assets, no way to avoid paying the full amount of taxes, and their income has fallen.

I don't weep for the wealthy. They have lots of lobbyists looking out for their interests.


----------



## BoringInvestor

gibor said:


> _People who pay these extra taxes get nothing more in return from this, or any other gov't for that matter, than some who is in the lowest bracket._ even opposite, people who pay higher taxes, get in return much less...
> For example, people who pay low taxes and don't pay at all get free/subsidized child care , get child support money etc.... , but who pays high taxes gets nothing .... we paid about 1,000/month for kindergarten for every child....and it wasn't any super-duper place, just regular one....or we never got "child" money for our children since we arrived to Canada, we were every year getting letter that we are not eligible....(btw, in Isreal every child get monthly payment until age 18 regrdless of his parents income)...


Sounds like you agree with the NDP/Liberals that we should have a national day care solution.


----------



## carverman

gibor said:


> _People who pay these extra taxes get nothing more in return from this, or any other gov't for that matter, than some who is in the lowest bracket._ even opposite, people who pay higher taxes, get in return much less...


The gov't giveth..and the gov't taketh a way..it is the capitalist way Gibor, at least we have benefits, unlike the former CCCP (USSR)or Ukraine..look in the news to see what is happening there these days. In the capitalist society, we have easy access to credit and the role of the gov'ts,
besides making and enforcing laws..redistributes the wealth...the rich HAVE TO PAY MORE...because the poor can't.



> For example, people who pay low taxes and don't pay at all get free/subsidized child care , get child support money etc.... , but who pays high taxes gets nothing ....


Those that pay higher taxes can very well afford to look after themselves..the poor and those on welfare can't.
I'm sure that anyone making over $50K a year is not disadvantaged too much..I'm down to $30K a year gross on 2 gov't pensions and a company pension..and life still isn't too bad for me..sure I could use more "take home pay"..but I'm happy and think of where I would be today in Russia under Putin..or worse still..
bombed, murdered and discriminated against in the middle east.




> we paid about 1,000/month for kindergarten for every child....and it wasn't any super-duper place, just regular one....or we never got "child" money for our children since we arrived to Canada, we were every year getting letter that we are not eligible....(btw, in Isreal every child get monthly payment until age 18 regardless of his parents income)...


What made you come to Canada then?, if Israel was so good to you and your family? You can't expect every country to provide the same level of public benefits.

What is the income taxes and sales taxes in Israel?


----------



## fraser

Net family wealth in Canada has actually increased substantially over the past several years-due primarily to real estate prices.

We are higher income earners. We are very thankful that we moved from Ontario to BC to Alberta because the move increased our income and substantially and reduced our income tax burden. Every year, we hit the 'button' to see what we would have paid in those other jurisdictions.

As individuals we really do not have many tax dodges. Apart from things like flow through shares and other programs available to everyone, we have the spousal loan option and RSP's These are also available to all taxpayers. We don't have a corporation, we have none of those corporate loopholes that people like to talk about. 

We are about to make a CRA installment. Just over $13K. This in addition to our withholdings at source. We pay a lot of tax each year. Do we mind? No. We live in a fabulous country with endless opportunities for personal growth and wealth accumulation. The fact that I might pay more tax than my neighbour does not bother me in the least. 

Sure we complain about our taxes. But every night when we watch the world news we are very thankful that we live in a country like Canada. I figure that just by living here we are better off than 95 percent of the world's population. The rest is bonus. After that, being in a high tax bracket is not such a burden considering the life that we have. Not to mention the freedoms that we take for granted and enjoy so much.


----------



## carverman

sags said:


> Amen.......and good for you for making the money and enjoying the rewards.
> 
> I would be happy to have $100,000 more income..........and pay 47% of it in taxes.
> I imagine a lot of people would be thrilled to do the same.


:encouragement:



> In the US.......the CBO released a report that corporation profits are at all time highs.............while corporate tax revenues are in decline.
> Corporate tax "loopholes" are the reason........and they aren't "loopholes" at all. T*hey are planned and paid for tax dodges created for the wealthy to avoid paying their fair share of taxes.*
> In Canada........the tax rate is one thing. How many high income or wealthy people actually pay "that" rate on "their" taxes ?
> The wealthy have seen their assets triple in value and their incomes double...........since the recession.


OF course, that is why Tim Hortons was bought by Warren Buffet et al, for a mere 11 billion US (or 12 million Canadian "rasbuckniks"
which are worth less and less every year..soon we could be like those poor schmoos in Lower Slobovia...lots of rasbuckniks, but
they can't buy anything with them because they are worth nothing...<Lil Abner comic strip..many years ago> :biggrin:



> The average person have few assets, no way to avoid paying the full amount of taxes, and their income has fallen.


And that plastic money..tells you something...



> I don't weep for the wealthy. They have lots of lobbyists looking out for their interests.


:greedy_dollars:
But shouldn't somebody weep for them too..they have to pay higher taxes now?:sorrow:


----------



## gibor365

_The gov't giveth..and the gov't taketh a way..it is the capitalist way Gibor, at least we have benefits, unlike the former CCCP (USSR)or Ukraine._
I was talking about USSR (Russia now is completely different country) and yes back in USSR we had benefits like free health care (include dental) , free education (include universities) and so on.
_..look in the news to see what is happening there these days_ and what really is happening in Russia?! Peoples live better and better .... don't talk and don't care about Ukraine or for example Geogia

_What made you come to Canada then?, if Israel was so good to you and your family? _ just read thread http://canadianmoneyforum.com/showthread.php/21393-Harper-does-not-speak-for-all-of-us-on-Israel
(Harper does not speak for all of us on Israel ) - maybe you will understand.

Income tax in Israel
Annual Income level (NIS)	2012
0 – 62,400 10%
62,401 – 106,560 14%
106,561 – 173,160 21%
173,160 – 261,360 30%
261,360 – 501,960 33%
over 501,961	48%
But don't compare Israel (where defence of the country is the biggest budget spending - too many fanatics just want to wipe it out) with Ontario where tax money just wasted


----------



## gibor365

Wow! I didn't even know that Israel introduced new tax rules several years ago! If peace will be reached, it can be good idea to retire in Israel. Not to pay any taxes on dividends , interest , rent is really nice 

_10 Year Exemption from Reporting Earnings Whose Source is from Abroad[edit]

Returning residents or new immigrants, and the companies that are under their direction, are not obligated to report earnings that benefit from exemption. Only income from activities in Israel and from Israeli investments and assets that is generated following Aliyah or return to the country is subject to reporting and taxation according to regular tax laws.

Expansion of tax benefits for returning citizen and new immigrant.

Returning residents and new immigrants will now be exempt from taxes for 10 years on income generated outside Israel. This covers all income, active or passive, such as interest, dividends, pensions, royalties and rental of assets. All income, whether from the realization of assets and investments abroad or from regular income abroad, is tax exempt.
_


----------



## carverman

gibor said:


> Income tax in Israel
> Annual Income level (NIS)	2012
> 0 – 62,400 10%
> 62,401 – 106,560 14%
> 106,561 – 173,160 21%
> 173,160 – 261,360 30%
> 261,360 – 501,960 33%
> over 501,961	48%
> But don't compare Israel (where defence of the country is the biggest budget spending - too many fanatics just want to wipe it out) with *Ontario where tax money just wasted*
> 
> 
> 
> It is not all just wasted..you seem to be slightly misinformed on how the tax money is spent.
> 
> Of course, if you consider the Liberal gov't cancelling the gas generating plants in Oakville, Mississauga, eHealth and ORNGE, yes there is some "waste' that is unaccountable, but at same time, the ONT gov't seems to be generous in looking after the poor on welfare,the handicapped, the seniors, the prisoners, the gov't workers and of course it's politicians.
> 
> http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/budget/fallstatement/2013/transparency.html
> 
> Yes, our taxes are high compared to other countries, but Ontario is a huge province with almost half the population of Canada (13.6 million on Jan 1, 2014) so the money is spent here, there and everywhere...in order for our Liberal gov't (that we re-elect again and again and again) to provide us with the services we are accustomed to.
> 
> *Transparency in Taxation*
> 
> 
> 
> Personal Income Tax
> Table 1 provides estimates of tax provisions relating to the Ontario Personal Income Tax system. Business provisions listed here are for unincorporated businesses.
> 
> To qualify for the Ontario Energy and Property Tax Credit (OEPTC), Ontario Sales Tax Credit (OSTC) and Northern Ontario Energy Credit (NOEC), certain information must be reported on an individual’s personal income tax return. Beginning in July 2012, payments of the refundable OEPTC, OSTC and NOEC were combined and paid as the Ontario Trillium Benefit, which is being delivered monthly to qualifying individuals and families. Both the OSTC and the energy component of the OEPTC are netted against Sales Tax revenue, and therefore are reported as Sales Tax measures in Table 3. *The property tax component of the OEPTC is netted against Education Property Tax revenue, and therefore is reported as an Education Property Tax* measure in Table 6. The NOEC is reported in Volume I of the Public Accounts of Ontario.
> 
> The Ontario Senior Homeowners’ Property Tax Grant (OSHPTG) provides property tax relief to low- to moderate-income Ontario seniors, based on information reported on their personal income tax returns. The OSHPTG is netted against Education Property Tax revenue, and therefore is reported as an Education Property Tax measure in Table 6.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## MoreMiles

sags said:


> Amen.......and good for you for making the money and enjoying the rewards.
> 
> I would be happy to have $100,000 more income..........and pay 47% of it in taxes.
> 
> I imagine a lot of people would be thrilled to do the same.
> 
> In the US.......the CBO released a report that corporation profits are at all time highs.............while corporate tax revenues are in decline.
> 
> Corporate tax "loopholes" are the reason........and they aren't "loopholes" at all. They are planned and paid for tax dodges created for the wealthy to avoid paying their fair share of taxes.
> 
> In Canada........the tax rate is one thing. How many high income or wealthy people actually pay "that" rate on "their" taxes ?
> 
> The wealthy have seen their assets triple in value and their incomes double...........since the recession.
> 
> The average person have few assets, no way to avoid paying the full amount of taxes, and their income has fallen.
> 
> I don't weep for the wealthy. They have lots of lobbyists looking out for their interests.


Hypocrite. It's like saying if my wife is as good looking as Nicole Kidman or Taylor Swift, I would not mind sharing a bit with the other men. 

It's always easy to make claim on things you cannot have. Once you are lucky or good enough to get it, your belief will be different. Trust me.


----------



## gibor365

MoreMiles said:


> Hypocrite. It's like saying if my wife is as good looking as Nicole Kidman or Taylor Swift, I would not mind sharing a bit with the other men.
> 
> It's always easy to make claim on things you cannot have. Once you are lucky or good enough to get it, your belief will be different. Trust me.


 Ha ha ...a nice one 
I can say that "I would be happy to earn income like W. Buffet or R. Abramovitch income..........and pay 47% of it in taxes."


----------



## jumbalaya

you're not paying 47% in taxes, it's 26%~. that's not bad


----------



## andrewf

Keep in mind that people are referring to marginal rates. If you earn $200k, your average tax rate in Ontario has been 32.41% assuming all fully taxed with no deductions.
http://www.ey.com/CA/en/Services/Tax/Tax-Calculators-2014-Personal-Tax

I know no one wants to pay taxes, but nice things cost money. Since Ontario does not have the luxury of having a massive resource bounty to subsidize public services like Alberta (which spends far more per person than Ontario--way, way more on public services), that burden is going to fall on individuals. The other model is what -- South Africa where the rich live in fortified ghettos and need to fear for their safety? Because pointing to Alberta as a model is, to be blunt, idiocy. We don't have trillions of dollars worth of oil.


----------



## carverman

gibor said:


> Ha ha ...a nice one
> I can say that "I would be happy to earn income like W. Buffet or R. Abramovitch income..........and pay 47% of it in taxes."


Is small minded tinkin' comrade ..you would never live long enough to spend his income, so why would you want it in the first place? 
:biggrin:




> In two minutes, legendary investor Warren Buffett can make the same amount that takes an average American household a year to earn.
> Tack on another 66 seconds, and Buffett will out earn an $80,000 a year salary.


http://www.forbes.com/sites/chloeso...ke-warren-buffett-to-earn-your-annual-income/


----------



## carverman

andrewf said:


> Keep in mind that people are referring to marginal rates. If you earn $200k, your average tax rate in Ontario has been 32.41% assuming all fully taxed with no deductions.
> http://www.ey.com/CA/en/Services/Tax/Tax-Calculators-2014-Personal-Tax


That guide doesn't show the Federal tax payable on your income above "poverty level" nor the Ontario surtax payable on all income earned above
the threshold of 70K).
http://www.taxtips.ca/taxrates/on.htm

2014 Surtax threshold:
ON surtax rate (included in above rates)	20%-----36%	
Surtax is on ON tax greater than $ 4,331-----$ 5,543
Person with only basic personal amount - surtax starts at taxable income of	$ 70,651---	$ 83,237	

2013 Surtax threshold: 
Person with only basic personal amount - surtax starts at taxable income of	$ 69,963---	$ 82,422
ON surtax rate (included in above rates)	20%---36%
Surtax is on ON tax greater than	$ 4,289----	$ 5,489

Note that the 36% surtax is in addition to the 20% surtax, for a total surtax of 56%. The surtax increases the 2014 rate of 13.16% to 20.53% (13.16% x 1.56).


----------



## peterk

MoreMiles said:


> Hypocrite. It's like saying if my wife is as good looking as Nicole Kidman or Taylor Swift, I would not mind sharing a bit with the other men.
> 
> It's always easy to make claim on things you cannot have. Once you are lucky or good enough to get it, your belief will be different. Trust me.


Haha. Well put.

There was a quote I heard once that stuck with me. I don't recall who said it, but it was paraphrased as such:

"The aim of taxation is to provide the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people, while causing the least discomfort to the fewest number of people" 

To that end, progressive taxation makes sense, and the rich should pay a higher amount, in both dollars and percent.

My qualm, as it were, is with people (everyone who doesn't make a lot of money) claiming over and over and over again that I am not paying "my fair share"!

But I am paying my fair share, and far far more! It is in fact the taxes paid by the wealthy that is holding the entire modern world together as we know it!

And I think most rich people wouldn't mind paying more than their fair share, and holding the world together with their contributions, if ONLY they were shown the slightest bit of appreciation for it. But it never comes, not for a millisecond in this day and age. It is constant cries for more and more; that we are not giving enough; we're are greedy and evil!

In times gone by, I believe (from anecdotal evidence), a wealthy man was often revered, respected, and admired for his success. Now? You can hardly find someone to say a nice thing about wealthy people. And if someone is, they are surely being drowned out by the roar of a crowd demanding more shares of ever increasing fairness to be handed their way...


----------



## carverman

peterk said:


> In times gone by, I believe (from anecdotal evidence), a wealthy man was often revered, respected, and admired for his success. Now? You can hardly find someone to say a nice thing about wealthy people. And if someone is, they are surely being drowned out by the roar of a crowd demanding more shares of ever increasing fairness to be handed their way...


They still are to a certain degree, but not on the street by the crowd because nobody knows who they are..unless you can recognize Bill Gates, or somebody in that status of life. 
Like Rodney Dangerfield used to say: I don't get no respect!":biggrin:


----------



## andrewf

It is included Carver. You are getting confused about average vs marginal tax rates.




carverman said:


> That guide doesn't show the Federal tax payable on your income above "poverty level" nor the Ontario surtax payable on all income earned above
> the threshold of 70K).
> http://www.taxtips.ca/taxrates/on.htm
> 
> 2014 Surtax threshold:
> ON surtax rate (included in above rates)	20%-----36%
> Surtax is on ON tax greater than $ 4,331-----$ 5,543
> Person with only basic personal amount - surtax starts at taxable income of	$ 70,651---	$ 83,237
> 
> 2013 Surtax threshold:
> Person with only basic personal amount - surtax starts at taxable income of	$ 69,963---	$ 82,422
> ON surtax rate (included in above rates)	20%---36%
> Surtax is on ON tax greater than	$ 4,289----	$ 5,489
> 
> Note that the 36% surtax is in addition to the 20% surtax, for a total surtax of 56%. The surtax increases the 2014 rate of 13.16% to 20.53% (13.16% x 1.56).


----------



## sags

The wealthy don't pay anywhere near the bulk of taxes or government revenues.

The revenue from a tax hike on high incomes is puny, compared to the lost revenue with a tax cut to the middle class.

The wealthy couldn't possibly spend enough to replace the revenues generated by the middle class.


----------



## Eclectic12

carverman said:


> That guide doesn't show the Federal tax payable on your income above "poverty level" nor the Ontario surtax payable on all income earned above the threshold of 70K)...


Surtax or no surtax, when I plug in $200K of income with no income tax deducted, no RRSPs with I believe just the basic personal deduction into 2013 Ontario tax spreadsheet available at http://www.peeltech.ca/Donateanddownload.html, I end up with $72,540.58 taxes owing. 

This works out to a total for *all* taxes (i.e federal, provincial and whatever else addons) of 36.2%.

While there isn't a 2014 Ontario tax spreadsheet yet ... tax tips says that comparing the 2013 rates to 2014 rates, the marginal rate bump for the $200K earner was 1.5% on the last $63K + a bit, so the 36.2% isn't going to move a lot.

http://www.taxtips.ca/taxrates/on.htm


[ Note that the marginal rates under $150K haven't moved. ]



Cheers


----------



## gt_23

sags said:


> The wealthy don't pay anywhere near the bulk of taxes or government revenues.
> 
> The revenue from a tax hike on high incomes is puny, compared to the lost revenue with a tax cut to the middle class.
> 
> The wealthy couldn't possibly spend enough to replace the revenues generated by the middle class.


Higher taxes on the wealthy will just lead to more evasion. It has actually been made quite clear through various studies of 20th century taxation that when rates are lower, compliance and total receipts to the Gov't are higher.

So they can increase the rates all they like, but something tells me we will be having the same discussion a few years in the future when they need to raise rates again because their 2014 increase didn't bring the desired revenues.

The Ontario Liberals are totally incapable of understanding the higher order (and longer-term) consequences of their actions.


----------



## Eclectic12

Xander said:


> ... A dollar is a dollar regardless of how much you make.
> People who pay these extra taxes get nothing more in return from this, or any other gov't for that matter, than some who is in the lowest bracket...


Let's see ... I was making $25K, didn't visit the hospital for a decade, didn't have any kids going to any level of school whereas the VP making $150K with five kids in various level of school, who was visiting the hospital for his daughter on a regular basis and then had two heart attacks with intensive care stays - yet the same services were received?

... interesting.


When are we moving to the consumption model so I can get my refunds?


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12

gibor said:


> ... For example, people who pay low taxes and don't pay at all get free/subsidized child care , get child support money etc.... , but who pays high taxes gets nothing ...


Maybe I should have rented some kids so I could have taken advantage of this when I was in a low tax situation. :biggrin:


Cheers


----------



## gibor365

MRT said:


> Why is her sexual orientation relevant in the rant? That is rather irrelevant and inappropriate, if not offensive.
> 
> Hopefully the policies of the U.S. gov't may be harshly critiqued without the need to reference 'their black leader'...


To be black or yellow or white or brown is not abnormal, ....


----------



## gibor365

Eclectic12 said:


> Let's see ... I was making $25K, didn't visit the hospital for a decade, didn't have any kids going to any level of school wheras the VP making $150K with five kids in various level of school, who was visiting the hospital for his daughter on a regular basis and then had two heart attacks with intensive care stays - yet the same services were received?
> 
> ... interesting.
> 
> 
> When are we moving to the consumption model so I can get my refunds?
> 
> 
> Cheers


Frpm what I see there is usually a opposite situation, poor people have more kids than rich...

_The Ontario Liberals are totally incapable of understanding the higher order (and longer-term) consequences of their actions_ exactly.....! but now they will create thousands of another public sector positions and Libs will be ruling here forever


----------



## Eclectic12

peterk said:


> ... My qualm, as it were, is with people (everyone who doesn't make a lot of money) claiming over and over and over again that I am not paying "my fair share"!


 .... and the flip side of the coin is people who throw around the marginal tax rates and ignore that for 2013 in Ontario, $200K income with almost no deductions works out to 36%.




peterk said:


> ... But I am paying my fair share, and far far more!


I hear you ... I've been paying for other people's kids education for over twenty years.


Cheers


----------



## andrewf

gibor said:


> To be black or yellow or white or brown is not abnormal, ....


Doesn't that depend on your definition of abnormal?

Having a Mormon president (Mitt Romney) is more 'abnormal' than having a homosexual one, based purely on % of US population. 6 millions vs 9 million...


----------



## gibor365

andrewf said:


> Doesn't that depend on your definition of abnormal?
> 
> Having a Mormon president (Mitt Romney) is more 'abnormal' than having a homosexual one, based purely on % of US population. 6 millions vs 9 million...


So you are telling that non-traditional sexual orientation is same like religion?! Interesting....


----------



## andrewf

Non-traditional? Gays have been around longer than Mormons... or any other religion.


----------



## gibor365

andrewf said:


> Non-traditional? Gays have been around longer than Mormons... or any other religion.


Oh yeah, prostitutes are world 1 st occupation , so they are the most traditional?! ....or per your logic straight are non-traditional ?!

Probably you are proud about this flag on City hall of your city








maybe Toronto should be declared as red-light district?!


----------



## sags

It is no surprise the Liberals will implement the agenda that got them elected, which included higher tax rates on high incomes.

It appears Premiere Wynne will shelf plans for the Ontario Pension Plan for the time being though........as she wants to talk to all the Federal party leaders for their position on a Canada Pension Plan expansion.

I would think nothing will be done on that issue until after the Federal election next year.

http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2014/08/29/wynne_to_harper_call_me.html


----------



## andrewf

I don't particularly care. It doesn't seem most Ontarians cared about Wynne's sexuality either. Being tolerant of people who aren't just like you is part of living in a pluralist society. I would think you could appreciate the importance of that.


----------



## andrewf

sags said:


> It is no surprise the Liberals will implement the agenda that got them elected, which included higher tax rates on high incomes.
> 
> It appears Premiere Wynne will shelf plans for the Ontario Pension Plan for the time being though........as she wants to talk to all the Federal party leaders for their position on a Canada Pension Plan expansion.
> 
> I would think nothing will be done on that issue until after the Federal election next year.
> 
> http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2014/08/29/wynne_to_harper_call_me.html


She may be waiting to see what shakes out of the conservatives losing their majority if not being totally removed from office next October. There may be movement on CPP expansion after all after the next federal election.


----------



## gibor365

andrewf said:


> I don't particularly care. It doesn't seem most Ontarians cared about Wynne's sexuality either. Being tolerant of people who aren't just like you is part of living in a pluralist society. I would think you could appreciate the importance of that.


From turnaround of voters looks like majority of Ontarians don't care about anything at all.
http://rabble.ca/columnists/2014/06/number-never-just-number-voter-turnout-how-low-can-we-go
I wouldn't appreciate if "rainbow flag" was raised on the top of my City Hall... I don't appreciate hysteria started everywhere after dozen of Russian counties voted for law prohibiting homosexual propaganda among minors.


----------



## gibor365

andrewf said:


> She may be waiting to see what shakes out of the conservatives losing their majority if not being totally removed from office next October. There may be movement on CPP expansion after all after the next federal election.


Was planning to boycott federal election, but after Liberal disaster n Ontario, looks like we had to go and vote against Libs (meaning unfortunately vote for Harper)... No choice as country being destroyed


----------



## andrewf

On the bright side, when Canada is finally destroyed you will still have mother Russia to go home to.


----------



## gibor365

andrewf said:


> On the bright side, when Canada is finally destroyed you will still have mother Russia to go home to.


No, my friend, on the bright side that I can go back to Israel, as return citizen get 10 years exemption on paying income taxes on all my Canadian income (as I quoted above) and in 60's will apply for CPP/OAS which your beloved Fiberals will probably increase


----------



## sags

Wait a few years Gibor....the Liberals may turn things around in Ontario....just as they did in Ottawa......before Harper messed it up again.

If Trudeau is elected to a majority government...........marijuana will be legalized and taxed. More revenue and lower expenses in policing, and court systems.

Development of Ontario's natural resources will create more revenue, and partnerships with business will provide jobs and government revenues.

An expanded CPP will lower social costs in the future, as people fund their own retirements.

Higher transfer payments to the Provinces is more likely under a Liberal government.

But, if Harper is elected for another 4 years...........I think a lot of Canadians will think about moving with you.............


----------



## lonewolf

andrewf said:


> I don't particularly care. It doesn't seem most Ontarians cared about Wynne's sexuality either. Being tolerant of people who aren't just like you is part of living in a pluralist society. I would think you could appreciate the importance of that.


 The way the masses act is in direct relation to their mood. The higher the degree of inclusion the higher the degree of optimism. The higher the degree of exclusion the higher degree of pessimism. The 4 most dangerous words to the bulls is " its different this time" It would not surprise me if the single most dangerous word to the bulls is "WE" & the single most dangerous word to the bears is "they"


----------



## carverman

andrewf said:


> On the bright side, w*hen Canada is finally destroyed you will still have mother Russia to go home to*.


LOL! Good one Andrew!...Hmmm?...why is it that I see more Russians immigrating to Canada these days? 

My mother is Ukrainian, so I hear about "how "good" it used to be there (Not). She still has to brothers and a sister alive and living over there in the Stanislav area (closer to the Polish border), and how they write letters begging for money or "care packages" to make ends meet.

She travelled there in the mid nineties to visit family after 45 years...nothing really has changed after 45 years. 
The roads were mostly gravel with potholes, the car they had was an old Lada that broke down a couple of times in their travels from one village with relatives to another village.

She spent 3 weeks there and described it as "very uncomfortable"..food what they had was scarce and made her sick because she doesn't drink (vodka to kill the bad bacteria in your stomach) and things we take for granted in Canada.... like refridgeration, soap, toothpaste, and coffee are expensive and very hard to get there, as well
as in short supply.

After the first week, she couldn't wait long enough to get on the plane to get back to Canada, and when they arrived at Pearson Airport in Toronto, she felt like literally kissing the ground..so glad to be back!

"Mother Russia"..indeed!


----------



## gibor365

carverman said:


> LOL! Good one Andrew!...Hmmm?...why is it that I see more Russians immigrating to Canada these days?
> 
> My mother is Ukrainian, so I hear about "how "good" it used to be there (Not). She still has to brothers and a sister alive and living over there in the Stanislav area (closer to the Polish border), and how they write letters begging for money or "care packages" to make ends meet.
> 
> She travelled there in the mid nineties to visit family after 45 years...nothing really has changed after 45 years.
> The roads were mostly gravel with potholes, the car they had was an old Lada that broke down a couple of times in their travels from one village with relatives to another village.
> 
> She spent 3 weeks there and described it as "very uncomfortable"..food what they had was scarce and made her sick because she doesn't drink (vodka to kill the bad bacteria in your stomach) and things we take for granted in Canada.... like refridgeration, soap, toothpaste, and coffee are expensive and very hard to get there, as well
> as in short supply.
> 
> After the first week, she couldn't wait long enough to get on the plane to get back to Canada, and when they arrived at Pearson Airport in Toronto, she felt like literally kissing the ground..so glad to be back!
> 
> "Mother Russia"..indeed!


Exactly why Eastern part of Ukraine desperately wants to separate from Ridna Ukraina 

P.S. Immigration from Russia is declining , in last 10 years it declined by 50%


----------



## HaroldCrump

sags said:


> The wealthy don't pay anywhere near the bulk of taxes or government revenues.


Define _wealthy_, sags.
ex Premier Dalton McGuinty told us in 2011 than $500K a year is the definition of wealthy, and imposed the so-called "rich tax".
2 years later, we are being told, nope, it is actually $220K that is considered "wealthy".
But no, hold the phone, it is actually $150K...

(ref. the $500K marginal tax rate has been reduced to $220K and a new tax bracket created at $150K, which is what gibor is talking about).

So...what will be the definition of "rich" in the next budget...$100K?
Then what? $75K?

It is very fashionable to vilify the so-called "rich".
_Tax 'em_ is the war cry of the day....until you realize you are now in the tax net.

This new tax bracket of $150K ensnares a whole bunch of highly educated, professional members of society and vilifies them as "rich".
Tax rates such as these are punitive.


----------



## peterk

sags said:


> The wealthy don't pay anywhere near the bulk of taxes or government revenues.
> 
> The revenue from a tax hike on high incomes is puny, compared to the lost revenue with a tax cut to the middle class.
> 
> The wealthy couldn't possibly spend enough to replace the revenues generated by the middle class.


Oh really?

People who earn 90k+ pay 50% of the income taxes (7.5% of the population). And people who earn above 150k pay 60% of that (30% of the total) (2.1% of the population).

People who earn <40k pay 10% of the taxes (64% of the population)

People who earn 40k-90k pay 40% of the taxes (28% of the population)

Yes consumption taxes are paid a bit more "equally", but they only collect 1/3 as much as income taxes. And on a person to person basis the rich still pay more in consumption taxes...

So the wealthy are not only "anywhere near" but ARE the bulk of revenue. A tax hike on them brings in much more, and a tax cut for the middle class doesn't make that big a difference.

I'm not arguing either way in this thread if the wealthy should pay more or less. I just want to point out the facts, which are that the rich, by any definition imaginable, are certainly already paying a very large share of the taxes, despite their small numbers.


----------



## sags

From a link posted within the article you provided...........an article by the same author, Brian Lilly. 

_We showed you on this program that in Canada we already do tax the rich. In 2004, the last year that Stats Canada has figures available for, the wealthiest 0.1% of Canadians paid 7% of all personal income tax. The top 1% of Canadians paid 18% of all personal income tax. The top 5% of Canadians pay 36% of all tax._

Here he claims the richest 1% pay *18%* of all personal income tax tax............and the *wealthiest 5% pay 36% of all tax.*


----------



## sags

Consumption taxes paid by the wealthy ?.

The combined spending of the wealthy wouldn't keep a single manufacturing assembly line in operation, or a single grain farmer in business.

Why do the proponents of tax cuts for the wealthy always say......"we wouldn't collect that much more in taxes anyways"?

Because it is true...........the wealthy don't pay the taxes. The poor don't pay the taxes. The middle class pay the taxes.

I don't know exactly where I would define "wealthy" personally.

It wouldn't be at $90,000 which an average auto worker can earn with overtime.

It probably wouldn't be at $150,000 a year, which is a comfortable, but not outrageous income.

Maybe over $250,000 a year ........$500,000.......$1,000,000........$30,000,000.....when it gets high enough......just pick a number.

I do agree with some..........that the tax rates are meaningless to the wealthy.....since they don't pay it anyways.

People like Mitt Romney pay 13% a year in taxes. Warren Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway tax return is 23,000 pages long.......chalk full of tax deductions. General Electric made billions in profits.........but their tax return was so large they had to send it electronically.

They paid no tax on their profit.

People should wake up.......and stop believing all the nonsense rhetoric of "trickle down" economics.

The wealthy are doing very well..........and don't need any more help.

They "own" the politicians who provide them with a voluminous tax code full of deductions that benefit them.

It is the middle class and poor..........who are getting the financial stuffing knocked out of them.


----------



## RBull

Something isn't right with those 2 different stories and stats in post 72 as there is too much disparity in the numbers.

I note the more recent study was '09 rev can along with "interim stats by Fraser institute" whatever that means.


----------



## peterk

sags said:


> From a link posted within the article you provided...........an article by the same author, Brian Lilly.
> 
> _We showed you on this program that in Canada we already do tax the rich. In 2004, the last year that Stats Canada has figures available for, the wealthiest 0.1% of Canadians paid 7% of all personal income tax. The top 1% of Canadians paid 18% of all personal income tax. The top 5% of Canadians pay 36% of all tax._
> 
> Here he claims the richest 1% pay *18%* of all personal income tax tax............and the *wealthiest 5% pay 36% of all tax.*


And you don't feel those numbers are a significantly large portion of the tax bill? 

I'm not sure where I would define wealthy either... but 90k is almost 2x the average income... and is about the average income of educated white men age 45-55 (the highest paid demographic) and only 7.5% of the population makes more. 250k/year is the top 0.7%. Surely that is too high to be the "wealthy" threshold...


----------



## fraser

I would be considered high income by your definition(s).

Could someone tell me exactly what all those tax deductions are so I can pass them along to our accountant. We have very few...and those that we do have are available to all taxpayers.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion

^+
There are a number of professions where you make good money that would be considered high income per this thread. But the idea that they have some extraordinary deductions is misplaced - they pay at the highest marginal tax rate, so about 50% never comes home. Not saying the remaining take-home isn't above-avg, but IMO they pay more than a fair share (esp. now).


----------



## sags

Some tax avoidance tools for the wealthy............or should it be called tax evasion ?

http://opinion.financialpost.com/2013/04/05/tax-avoidance-becoming-bigger-than-the-u-s-economy/

Former Finance Minister Jim Flaherty estimated the Canadian government lost more than 1 Billion dollars a year in "offshore" accounts alone. The problem was growing so large that he finally implemented changes in his last budget to track large financial transactions.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/how...money-move-in-and-out-of-tax-havens-1.1384336

Who makes up for that loss of revenue ?.................the rest of us.


----------



## HaroldCrump

sags said:


> Who makes up for that loss of revenue ?.................the rest of us.


sags, the "rest of us" are doomed to make up for a lot of things.
Such as, you know, Billion $ boondoggles and scams every 2 years (e-Health, ORNGE, gas plants, etc.).
And such as, you know, those Sunshine list level salaries, off balance sheet expense accounts, generous, unfunded pensions for the public sector fatcats, the list goes on...

I do not see even a half-hearted attempt by the provincial govt. to first try and cutback any of these before imposing any more taxes, fees, premiums, etc. on the "rest of us".


----------



## gibor365

_Former Finance Minister Jim Flaherty estimated the Canadian government lost more than 1 Billion dollars a year in "offshore" accounts alone._ Doubt that it's true...but in any case, do you really think that who gets salary more than 150K have accounts offshore?! What a BS!!! Maybe some billionaires do.... 
Also "wealthy" and "high salaries" are 2 big differences  
You can tell whatever you think but families with 200K annual income are not rich by any means.

_There are a number of professions where you make good money_ but in order to obtain such profession, how much money you should invest first?! Do you know how much cost to become a surgeon?


----------



## fraser

All I can do is express genuine disbelief that anyone could assume that any other than a small minority of high income earners are hiding income offshore and not declaring the income. 

Take the number, any number that has been published about how many people have been identified in leaks, and then compare it to the number of high earners in Canada. The notion that this is a common practice is, well, it is just foolish beyond belief.

It is extremely unfair to represent this as fact or to imply that these high income earners do not pay their fair share of taxes because of tax dodges. You are speaking out of your hat and not from a basis of fact. And by the way, in another life I worked for a large CA firm and I participated in a fair bit of tax work for high income and wealthy taxpayers - well as a stint with Revenue Canada in business and personal field audit.

There are ways to defer taxes in Canada. They are legal. But this in no way implies that high income earners and wealthy people do not pay any tax or pay very little. It is just not so.

Trying to draw an parallel between the US tax regime and what Mitt Romney's tax bracket is to the Canadian tax regime is totally misleading.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion

sags said:


> Some tax avoidance tools for the wealthy............or should it be called tax evasion ?


Good article. We can agree that the names in it are definately of the 'wealthy'. They are well beyond $90k, $250k or even $500k/yr earners and definately have avenues for reducing or eliminating (even evading) taxes. We can bet that they wouldn't be impacted by Ontario's 'high income' tax. It falls to the (just above) average Joe.


----------



## dogcom

I am not against fair wage hikes and such in the public sector but I am against the type of action from the BCTF in BC. They want much more then the other public sector unions wanted and they have some very stupid people in the public supporting them. They want binding arbitration but the last time the government did that for the doctors our sales tax had to go up.

I think however the tax payers are really at fault here as they go about their daily lives spending and not caring and they think that the government just creates money and gives it away at no cost. So of course if your an idiot you will support any settlement as long as it ends and then ***** and complain later when taxes really do go up.


----------



## gibor365

And for those really rich people there are other options, for example famous French actor Depardieu 

_Depardieu has become a Russian citizen after the 75% French tax on wealthy citizens. A short message on the Kremlin website announced this news.

"Vladimir Putin has signed a decree granting Russian citizenship to Gerard Depardieu," the message read.

Depardieu recently announced he would give up his French passport after the government criticised his decision to move abroad to avoid higher taxes (see beow).

In December, Putin said he would be happy to welcome the actor in Russia._

http://mic.com/articles/21042/gerar...r-russia-over-misguided-75-tax-on-the-wealthy


----------



## andrewf

Downside: he has to live in Russia .


----------



## gibor365

andrewf said:


> Downside: he has to live in Russia .


Gerard doesn't think so . Probably andrewf is smarter than him... Originally he moved to Belgium and than to Russia... Now he lives in provincial small city of Saransk








http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gérard_Depardieu


----------



## sags

There were some more articles in the media recently........once again pushing for "right to work" legislation in Canada.

Imagine what "that" would do to the Ontario government's ability to raise revenue.

That is all we need.........to expand the numbers of low income working Canadians who don't pay taxes.

Where do the proponents of these ideologies..........believe government revenues are going to come from ?

They believe........low taxes for the wealthy are good, low taxes for the corporations are good, low incomes for working Canadians are good.........and to compensate for all the lost revenue.........cut programs and benefits.......because that is good too.

But don't worry.........there will be an expansion of low income employment........and that will solve everything.

It is like the .........we are losing money on each sale........but we will make it up on volume......theory.

Such a strange dogma..............these ultra conservatives espouse............


----------



## HaroldCrump

sags, there is huge moral hazard in allowing the govt. to increase its revenue more and more.
The govt. should be looking to reduce its costs to provide a given level of services.
If we agree that the current level of services is adequate, the govt. should be focused in reducing the cost of those services.
If we want more services, those should be procured at lower costs.
It is the cost of services that are out of control.


----------



## gibor365

Here we go  My wife got first bi-weekly pay and net pay is less by about $300 than it should be.... Corrupted Fiberals and their boss Mme Wynn stealing more and more from us


----------



## 0xCC

gibor said:


> Here we go  My wife got first bi-weekly pay and net pay is less by [redacted] than it should be.... Corrupted Fiberals and their boss Mme Wynn stealing more and more from us


CPP and EI deductions (both federal programs by the way) probably kicked back in since the last bi-weekly pay of last year. Using the amount the first pay of the year was reduced by as a baseline for those deductions gives enough information to figure out your (or your wife's) ballpark gross income as well.


----------



## andrewf

^This. I have to wonder how well gibor understands payroll deductions.


----------



## 0xCC

Any excuse to be upset with the Ontario Liberals I guess... I am not a fan of the Ontario Liberals (see my posts in the Ontario Pension Plan thread) but trying to say that the first pay cheque of the year differences are the result of any provincial government raising taxes is a little much.

Does that also mean that the provincial government lowers taxes in the middle of the year (in gibor's example doing the math would mean that CPP and EI deductions would reach their maximums sometime in June or maybe early July)?


----------



## sags

0xCC said:


> Any excuse to be upset with the Ontario Liberals I guess... I am not a fan of the Ontario Liberals (see my posts in the Ontario Pension Plan thread) but trying to say that the first pay cheque of the year differences are the result of any provincial government raising taxes is a little much.
> 
> Does that also mean that the provincial government lowers taxes in the middle of the year (in gibor's example doing the math would mean that CPP and EI deductions would reach their maximums sometime in June or maybe early July)?


My wife and I used to both "max out" our EI and CPP contributions around July, so the first pays in January were a bit of a shocker.

It was like taking a big pay cut..................


----------



## carverman

Something I don't have to worry about. The Nortel DB pension plan took care of any of my future worries on personal income taxes.
I'm going the other way on income..downwards.

Since the 2009 Nortel bankruptcy, I have seen my income shrink at least 35 percent, and a pension plan windup is still
ongoing... and ongoing. 

I have learned to make do on a lot less in the last 6 years. Fortunately my permanent disability tax credit and
charitable donations/medical-dental deduction help ingetting back every tax dollar I have paid in the last 5 years.


----------



## gibor365

sags said:


> My wife and I used to both "max out" our EI and CPP contributions around July, so the first pays in January were a bit of a shocker.
> 
> It was like taking a big pay cut..................


I know it very well, this is why I compared 1st paycheck of 2015 vs 1st paycheck of 2014


----------



## Eclectic12

^^^^

... which deals with "maxed out" EI & CPP but leaves lots of possibilities as to why the "net pay" that has dropped.

Have you done a line by line comparison to adjust for non-tax item increases which also reduce net pay?

I know that in my case both the health care premiums as well as the pension contributions have increased so I expect the net pay, year over year to drop even if the income tax rates stay the same.

BTW, the Tax Tips web site is listing the same rates at the moment (2015 & 2014).
http://www.taxtips.ca/taxrates/on.htm


Cheers


----------



## Jorob199r

carverman said:


> Something I don't have to worry about. The Nortel DB pension plan took care of any of my future worries on personal income taxes.
> I'm going the other way on income..downwards.
> 
> Since the 2009 Nortel bankruptcy, I have seen my income shrink at least 35 percent, and a pension plan windup is still
> ongoing... and ongoing.
> 
> I have learned to make do on a lot less in the last 6 years. Fortunately my permanent disability tax credit and
> charitable donations/medical-dental deduction help ingetting back every tax dollar I have paid in the last 5 years.


What would you have done differently if back then you know what you know now?

I have a db pension - govt, but I still invest like hell. I don't plan on it being there, or if it is, drastically reduced.


----------



## Davis

Since Ontario only increased income tax on individuals with over $150,000 of taxable income (i.e., after pension and RRSP contributions), you may have trouble hearing the teeny little violins being played in sympathy for you.


----------



## MrMatt

Davis said:


> Since Ontario only increased income tax on individuals with over $150,000 of taxable income (i.e., after pension and RRSP contributions), you may have trouble hearing the teeny little violins being played in sympathy for you.


Davis, not according to TaxTips.ca


----------



## Davis

Yep: that is what taxtips says: Ontario increased the rate on income between $150K and $220K from 11.16 percent to 12.16 percent, and on income over $220K from 12.16 to 13.16 percent. The surtaxes apply on top of these rates. The only other impact is that Health Premium thresholds are not indexed for inflation, so if your income is rising, you might pay something more there, but only across narrow ranges - most people won't see an increase. (The amounts also don't rise with inflation, so over time the $300/$450/$60/etc. amounts are being eaten away by inflation.


----------



## MrMatt

http://www.taxtips.ca/taxrates/on.htm

approx 81k- 150k is 11.16% for 2014 & 2015
150k-220k is 12.16% for both years
220k+ is 13.16% for both years.

There was no hike.


----------



## coptzr

^^^thats makes me feel warm and fuzzy for the new year...can't wait to meet one of these liberal voters so I can smack them. Seems they are all hiding, undercover as another supporter or vacationing down south.


----------



## Davis

MrMatt - you're right that rates did not rise between 2014 and 2015. Tax witholdings, however, did change. the tax increases for high income people were announced in the spring budget in 2014, and apply to the whole year. So they would not have affected the original poster's Jan 2014 paycheque -- they would affect the Jan 2015 paycheque through.


----------



## HaroldCrump

The new tax tiers already became effective in 2014 - the reduction should have been first seen in Sep or Oct.
The budget was passed in July, and the increase was retroactive.
Those subject to the new tiers should have seen the new tax rates about 2 - 3 months ago, not in Jan.


----------



## Davis

There was a reference at some point to comparing a Jan 20014 paystub to a Jan 2015 paystub, which would show a change. I started looking for it, but then stumbled across a bunch of bizarre posts where the original poster showed his/her ignorance and bigtory by attacking Premier Wynne's sexual orientation and lesbian/gay people generally. 

In a discussion about tax rates. 

Really. 

I'll make a point of not trying to help explain things to gibor again. Must be too thick to understand anything complicated.


----------



## gibor365

HaroldCrump said:


> The new tax tiers already became effective in 2014 - the reduction should have been first seen in Sep or Oct.
> The budget was passed in July, and the increase was retroactive.
> Those subject to the new tiers should have seen the new tax rates about 2 - 3 months ago, not in Jan.


That's right. Her employer sent notice that new rates will be effective from Oct 14 and because Fiberals made law retroactive for all 2014 (good that not retroactive for 10 years ), it would be included during filling tax return .... so I was surprised to see paycheck that less by about $300 comparing to Dec 2014 and about $250 less than Jan 2014 1st paycheck....even though my wife got raise in fall 2014.... It's very wierd.... I asked het to print those cheques to compare....
just wondering if Wynn introduced some new tax


----------



## gibor365

> I'll make a point of not trying to help explain things to gibor again. Must be too thick to understand anything complicated.


 even though you think that you look extremely "soficticated ", your explanaitins doesn't worth anything as you are telling just obvious staff that everybody knows...


Sorry if my comment about KWynn's non-traditional sexual orientation hurt your feelings 

The only positive thing that such tax increases help me to convince my wife to aim for early retirement.... as she's pissed off ...need to work hard , to have stress etc ...to get raise ... and at the end start getting net salary much lower....


----------



## HaroldCrump

gibor said:


> just wondering if Wynn introduced some new tax


Keep in mind that CPP premiums went up a little bit because the YMPE was increased.
I am not sure about EI...I think EI was supposed to go down in 2015.
The net effect cannot be $300 per paycheck though...should be far less.
The raise in fall 2014 would have contributed to higher taxes, too, since income tax is a % of T4 income.

I haven't received my first January salary yet (it'll be on the 15th).
If you do compare line by line, let me know what you find - I'm curious.


----------



## BoringInvestor

gibor said:


> To be black or yellow or white or brown is not abnormal, ....


FYI - neither is being gay.


----------



## gibor365

BoringInvestor said:


> FYI - neither is being gay.


FYI - it is 
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.23...37720&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739448&uid=70


----------



## gibor365

_If you do compare line by line, let me know what you find - I'm curious._ I'm curious too..... ask her to bring paystubs...but she's always too busy...



> The net effect cannot be $300 per paycheck though...should be far less


 this is the point..... 

Just wonder if any one with salary above 150K received Jan paystub?


----------



## Davis

gibor said:


> _To be black or yellow or white or brown is not abnormal, ....
> QUOTE]
> 
> Oh look at the time, it's 2015. Gibor, you are on the wrong side of history here. That attitude has been eclipsed by the march of progress. Anyone can cite a 30-year-old paper by a philosophy profess to support his case, but that doesn't make it a fact. Anyone else can cite a dozen papers to refute it. Your bigotry is no longer acceptable. You are in an ever-diminshing minority._


----------



## BoringInvestor

gibor said:


> FYI - it is
> http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.23...37720&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739448&uid=70


You quoted this source, so what is it about their argument that you found convincing?


----------



## gibor365

> You are in an ever-diminshing minority


yeap and too bad that straight becoming minority...

and LGBT flag on Toronto City Hall during last Olympic games was disgrace to the city.... good thing that i don't live there....


----------



## Davis

Michael Levin is a professor at City University of New York who has some, er, unusual views, including that black people have lower IQ test results for genetic reasons, torture is, in some cases not just morally defensible, but mandatory, and Charles Dickens' Scrooge was an entrepreneur whose employment practices benefitted his employees and society at large. Some academics at lesser institutions make their living by being controversial and promoting contrarian viewpoints.

"Straight becoming a minority"? You're having hallucinations. It is good that you don't live in Toronto. We don't take kindly to racists, anti-Semites, sexists and homophobes.


----------



## Spudd

We received a notice at my work that the child tax benefit was being removed and replaced with the UCCB, and that would affect our paychecks. I don't have any kids, so I don't have any idea how much such benefit was worth. But that might be one reason the paycheck is lower?


----------



## gibor365

Spudd said:


> We received a notice at my work that the child tax benefit was being removed and replaced with the UCCB, and that would affect our paychecks. I don't have any kids, so I don't have any idea how much such benefit was worth. But that might be one reason the paycheck is lower?


We never got child tax benefit as government was telling us that our salaries are too high 
btw, new UCCB is for everyone or also only for "poor"?


----------



## andrewf

I'll give you a hint, gibor just googled 'homosexuality abnormal' and posted a link to the first paper he found. This is also why he erroneously believed a US Army base was in Georgia the country and not Georgia the US state.


----------



## nathan79

andrewf said:


> I'll give you a hint, gibor just googled 'homosexuality abnormal' and posted a link to the first paper he found. This is also why he erroneously believed a US Army base was in Georgia the country and not Georgia the US state.


LOL! It is literally the first result on Google. Too funny.


----------



## HaroldCrump

gibor said:


> btw, new UCCB is for everyone or also only for "poor"?


UCCB has always been "universal".
It was never means-tested, and has always been taxable income.
It is not CCTB, which is already integrated into the tax credits.

As far as I know, there are only two changes to UCCB - an additional $60 for existing UCCB, and a new payment for kids between 6 - 18.
Erstwhile, UCCB payouts ended when child turned 6.


----------



## HaroldCrump

gibor said:


> btw, new UCCB is for everyone or also only for "poor"?


gibor, can you make some room in your inbox?
I was trying to send you a PM.


----------



## gibor365

No wonder Ontario has a huge deficit

_The Fraser Institute: News Release; Government Employees in Ontario Paid 11.5 Per Cent More Than Comparable Private-sector Workers






TORONTO, ONTARIO--(Marketwired - Feb. 18, 2015) - Government workers in Ontario receive higher wages and likely more generous non-wage benefits than their private sector counterparts, finds a new study by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

"As the Ontario government grapples with a $12.5 billion deficit, it has identified government-sector compensation as a way to restrain spending. Indeed, in light of ongoing collective bargaining negotiations, now is an opportune time to scrutinize the compensation of government employees, which consumes over half of program spending," said Niels Veldhuis, president of the Fraser Institute.

Using Statistics Canada's Labour Force Survey data from January to December 2013, Comparing Government and Private Sector Compensation in Ontario calculates that, on average, government workers in Ontario, including federal, provincial, and local government workers, receive 11.5 per cent higher wages than comparable workers in the private sector. 

This wage premium accounts for differences in the personal characteristics of workers such as age, gender, marital status, education, tenure, type of work, size of establishment, industry, and occupation. When unionization is accounted for, the government-sector wage premium in Ontario declines to 8.5 per cent. 

But wages are only part of an employee's total compensation. Non-wage benefits - including pensions, early retirement and job security - can represent an important portion of an overall compensation package. While individual data on these benefits are not readily available in Canada, there are strong indicators that the government sector as a whole also enjoys superior non-wage benefits. 

Specific non-wage benefits examined in the study include:
•Pensions: In 2013, 77.3 per cent of government workers in Ontario were covered by a registered pension plan compared to only 25.6 per cent in the private sector. Of those covered, 97.1 per cent of government workers enjoyed defined-benefit pensions (i.e., guaranteeing a certain level of benefits in retirement) compared to 46.9 per cent of private-sector workers. 


•Early retirement: Between 2009 and 2013, Ontario government workers retired 1.4 years earlier, on average, than the province's private-sector workers. 


•Job security: In 2013, 3.8 per cent of those employed in the private sector experienced job loss in Ontario, compared to only 0.8 per cent of those employed by government. 


•Absence rates: Full-time employees in the province's private sector were absent due to personal reasons for an average of 7.2 days in 2013; the average government worker was absent 10.4 days. 



"Of course, governments need to provide competitive compensation to attract qualified employees but the fact is wages and benefits in all levels of government are out of step with the private sector," said Charles Lammam, Fraser Institute associate director of tax and fiscal policy and study co-author. 

"If the provincial and municipal governments of Ontario want to better control their spending, one option is to ensure compensation paid to government workers broadly reflects private-sector compensation for similar positions." 

Niels Veldhuis is in Toronto and available to media.

Follow the Fraser Institute on Twitter / Like us on Facebook 

The Fraser Institute is an independent Canadian public policy research and educational organization with offices in Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, and Montreal and ties to a global network of think-tanks in 87 countries. Its mission is to measure, study, and communicate the impact of competitive markets and government intervention on the welfare of individuals. To protect the Institute's independence, it does not accept grants from governments or contracts for research. Visit www.fraserinstitute.org.








_


----------



## lonewolf

Just had family day so tax payers can pay for day off with pay for government workers & if the government workers work don't they get something like double time with day off with pay @ a latter date ? There is no free lunch someone has to pay the piper.


----------



## Davis

No, lonewolf. Government workers working on a public holiday don't get double time plus a day in lieu. Only in the fantasies of rabid anti-government types. There is enough misinformation on the Internet without you adding to it.


----------



## Guban

I don't know about the information presented in the report, but to call the Fraser Institute "non-partisan" is laughable.


----------



## lonewolf

Davis said:


> No, lonewolf. Government workers working on a public holiday don't get double time plus a day in lieu. Only in the fantasies of rabid anti-government types. There is enough misinformation on the Internet without you adding to it.


 Davis you could be right I got the info from a friend that said that a city worker they knew told her he would get double time if he worked family day.


----------



## Davis

Are you sure it wasn't the cousin of your friend's brother in law who talked to the city worker's neighbour? ;-) 

Double time on a paid holiday is not uncommon- I got that in the private sector. In the public sector, I've only ever been given time-in-lieu. 

In your first commernt you suggested getting both for the same day, which is very different from what you are saying your second comment.


----------



## supperfly17

Davis said:


> Are you sure it wasn't the cousin of your friend's brother in law who talked to the city worker's neighbour? ;-)
> 
> Double time on a paid holiday is not uncommon- I got that in the private sector. In the public sector, I've only ever been given time-in-lieu.
> 
> In your first commernt you suggested getting both for the same day, which is very different from what you are saying your second comment.



A part-time public employee working Family day will get paid 1.5 times their regular wage
A part-time public employee who is not working Family day will not get paid anything.
A full-time public employee who has a day off on Family day will get paid regular wage as if they are working
A full-time public employee working Family day will get paid 1.5 times their regular wage

Edit: A public employee who has worked 45 hours in the same week Family day falls into, and is working Family day will get paid 2x their regular wage.


Source: I work in the public sector.


----------



## sags

My wife works part time for a private employer.

She worked Family Day and earned 1.5 pay for working plus 1.0 pay for the statutory holiday pay..............2.50 days pay for working the stat.

Public employees only get .5 pay for working statutory holidays ?


----------



## Davis

No, it's regular pay plus 0.5 - "time and a half". 2.5 sounds really generous.


----------



## andrewf

People make the mistake of including the holiday pay which you receive regardless of whether you work. By working you earn 1.5x, not 2.5x.


----------



## sags

Yes, she received 1.5x for working plus her holiday pay.

I used to receive "double time pay" for working a stat plus the holiday pay, so I don't think the public service pay is overly generous for working stats.


----------



## supperfly17

sags said:


> Yes, she received 1.5x for working plus her holiday pay.
> 
> I used to receive "double time pay" for working a stat plus the holiday pay, so I don't think the public service pay is overly generous for working stats.


Not sure in which province you live in, but in Ontario, you would not get 1.5 for working plus holiday pay. Its either holiday pay if youre off, or 1.5x only for working that holiday. You dont get the bundle of both.


----------



## sags

Why would anyone volunteer to work for 1/2 pay ?

We always referred to working our stat holidays as "triple time" days.

16 hours pay for time worked plus 8 hours for the stat................24 hours pay for working an 8 hour shift on a stat holiday.


----------



## Eclectic12

That's where it varies by industry as well as what that type of work has in it's contracts.

Some examples are hotels, motels/tourist resorts, restaurants/taverns, hospitals or nursing homes and continuous operations - where the employer can require the employee to work on a holiday.



> If an employee is required to work, he or she is entitled to either:
> - his or her regular rate for the hours worked on the public holiday, plus a substitute day off work with public holiday pay;
> or
> - public holiday pay plus premium pay for each hour worked.


http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/pubs/guide/publicholidays.php#special


Note that the premium pay rate is not defined and that if the employer prefers to save cash, they can give an alternate day off.

Cheers


----------



## supperfly17

sags said:


> Why would anyone volunteer to work for 1/2 pay ?
> 
> We always referred to working our stat holidays as "triple time" days.
> 
> 16 hours pay for time worked plus 8 hours for the stat................24 hours pay for working an 8 hour shift on a stat holiday.


That does not exist today in Ontario afaik. Not sure how long ago you had "triple time" but seems like the gravy train has ended. Noone volunteers to work a holiday if youre scheduled to work it you get 1.5 times your wage only and if youre off you just get paid regular time.


----------



## nathan79

andrewf said:


> People make the mistake of including the holiday pay which you receive regardless of whether you work. By working you earn 1.5x, not 2.5x.


There's a wrinkle to that in BC, because you only get holiday pay if you worked at least 15 shifts in the previous 30 days.


----------



## gibor365

Nothing to do with Family day! Fraser Institution proved with numbers that government workers work less and get more $ for the same jobs than in provate sector.


----------



## supperfly17

gibor said:


> Nothing to do with Family day! Fraser Institution proved with numbers that government workers work less and get more $ for the same jobs than in provate sector.


That is totally true. Some public companies, even forbid employees to book overtime if they work late, especially if they are not paid hourly. We in the public sector have it much easier.


----------



## lonewolf

Self employed get nothing out of stat holidays. To make the game fair either have the stat holidays so that the day can be taken off but if taken off no pay, if worked pay straight time or allow the self employed to have the government pay their wage for the stat day off so every one gets paid. Maybe the government should pay the employer the money needed to pay the workers the money for the stat holiday. Some invisible hand will pay the piper ? The up side to all the government regulation for companies having to pay for stat holidays & benefits such as minimum wage is it makes companies more efficient & they use technology instead of workers to do the work.


----------



## Davis

I enjoy coming to CMF for stimulating debates on public issues. And sometimes just for sheer amusement. Thanks for the laugh, lonewolf.


----------



## sags

gibor said:


> Nothing to do with Family day! Fraser Institution proved with numbers that government workers work less and get more $ for the same jobs than in provate sector.


Many functions performed by the public service have no comparable jobs in the private sector.

Police officers, emergency room nurses, Crown attorneys, government lawyers, the military, and on and on...........


----------



## gibor365

sags said:


> Many functions performed by the public service have no comparable jobs in the private sector.
> 
> Police officers, emergency room nurses, Crown attorneys, government lawyers, the military, and on and on...........


Why not?! Security officers, private lawyers, private clinics etc

or maybe Fraser compare only comparable jobs ... in any case , i have more reasons to believe Fraser than to specific government worker...


----------



## andrewf

Overtime? What's overtime?


----------



## CrashTestSnoopy

Overtime = subconscious clock punching and realizing the current time is now past the regular time to leave. This word is completely foreign to entrepreneurs / business owners. We work till we succeed, simple as that.


----------



## Eclectic12

^^^^

YMMV ... that's one situation ... another is understanding that "I've already saved the company $260K this week, I won't share in any gains for completing task X - I'll stick to my weekend plans if there's no compensation" calculation.


Cheers


----------

