Taxed to Death - A summary of NDP’s new taxes

[misher]

The below are the new taxes from the NDP. Taken from https://www.straight.com/news/114026...tax-experiment

$2.5 billion payroll tax
$1.3 billion carbon tax increase—the NDP phased out the requirement for carbon tax to be offset with other tax cuts
$480 million speculation tax
$115 million expanded foreign buyer tax
$243 million increase in property transfer tax
$450 million school tax
$285 million increased tobacco tax
$86 million in other tax measures, including levies on luxury cars
1.5 cent/litre gas tax equals approx $24 per year for each vehicle
B.C. Hydro 25-cent monthly levy
Income earners over $150,000 annually to face a new personal tax rate of 16.8 percent up from 14.7 percent
Increase in the general corporate income tax to 12 percent from 11 percent


There’s also a nice summary of how taxes cause deadweight loss and economic stagnation. I also like how he points out that we’re taxing unfairly as we’re taxing people using the 3m+ school tax as a form of asset tax but ignoring stocks and other types of assets. I don’t own a Vancouver house but I agree that it’s unfair to target real estate owners over other forms of investment owners.

[whatnext]

BC Liberal shill alert.

[misher]

Originally Posted by whatnext

BC Liberal shill alert.

Liberals are still pro tax lol. Personally I’d prefer Conservative if we had it. What’s with people throwing accusations of secret motives instead of intelligent replies. Replies like these taxes are good because of so and so statistics. Personally I don’t disagree with all these taxes.

[Sheba]

...and of course no comments about the payroll tax replacing MSP premiums. Or about bridge tolls being removed. Or about how taxes in BC are not the highest in Canada. Or the mess the BC Liberals left behind.

[misher]

Originally Posted by Sheba

...and of course no comments about the payroll tax replacing MSP premiums. Or about bridge tolls being removed. Or about how taxes in BC are not the highest in Canada. Or the mess the BC Liberals left behind.

First point I totally agree with though I heard there double charging for the first year which doesn’t make sense?

NDP left a mess when the Liberals tookover too, if you recall 2001 the NDP were so hated then that they only kept 2 seats.

After a decade of major political snafus that included accusations of theft, criminal charges and the fast ferries scandal, British Columbians, it seems, were ready for change.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4068827

Honestly it doesn’t feel like there is much difference they both accuse each other of the same things. Raising taxes is not a real solution. Real solutions are things like privatizing insurance, selling advertising on the bridge, creating micro unit rental condos/hotels, partnering with companies to build housing underground or on the water. Solutions that make you feel your government is run by smart people instead of high schoolers.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by whatnext

BC Liberal shill alert.

Yeah, I don't even know why I bother clicking on any thread started by misher. They're either clickbait or BC Liberal propoganda.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Yeah, I don't even know why I bother clicking on any thread started by misher. They're either clickbait or BC Liberal propoganda.

He's someone best put on your ignore list. It's almost like he makes money for each post here, like a Vancouver version of a Russian internet troll...

[Sheba]

I'll play along today...

The deceit that was the BC Liberals’ case for power

For most of their 16 years in power, the BC Liberals relied on the same line of attack against their NDP opponents: They were the business-savvy party that understood what it meant to guard the public purse while the New Democrats were hopeless incompetents who ran the province into the ground in the 1990s.

It was a strategy that worked until it didn’t and the Liberals succumbed to their own arrogant ways.

And the past few months have revealed just what an outrageous deceit the Liberals’ long-held case for power actually was. Yes, governments taking over from a party that was in power as long as the Liberals always uncover a skeleton or two. But the mess the former administration left behind for its NDP successor to clean up is, on many levels, shocking in its scope and magnitude. And we’re discovering new things by the day.

...

Yes, the same government, whose members often sneered at and mocked the NDP opposition any time a matter concerning business competence came up. The Liberals were fond of bragging about how their government was loaded with MLAs who had corporate experience, people who actually ran things in their previous life, while the NDP was just a washed up bunch of former social workers and union activists, “socialists” who couldn’t run a lemonade stand.

Now it’s those same “socialists” who have to try to fix the plethora of vexing issues left behind by a gang that loved the trappings of power but often didn’t want to do the hard work of governing.

The problems are everywhere. The terrible bind at the province’s insurance company is another example. When the New Democrats took over, they discovered just what a financial basket case the Crown corporation was, and getting worse by the day. The Liberals siphoned more than $1-billion from ICBC’s financial reserves to help balance their budgets. No wonder they made it look easy. Then there was the Site C dam, whose costs were far greater than the Liberals let on. Add to that Metro Vancouver’s transit plan, stalled because of the petulant, ego-driven actions of the former government. Consequently, all sorts of work that could have begun years ago got put off. And let’s not forget the housing crisis, which the Liberals denied existed until prices were out of control.

We could go on. And on.

Suffice to say that it will be a long time before the Liberals can, with a straight face, attempt to use “fiscal stewardship” as the reason to vote for them. In fact, it may be the NDP that resorts to talking about the former government’s 16-year reign of error, and why the province doesn’t want to revisit those days any time soon.

[WarrenC12]

Funny the author lists all of these taxes and provides no citations on where these numbers came from. I'm aware of most of these tax increases, or changes in the case of MSP and Payroll tax. However the $285M for tobacco was interesting, I had no idea we were raising taxes on cigarettes so much, then I actually googled and found this:

During yesterday’s provincial budget announcement, the BC NDP announced another tax increase on tobacco beginning on April 1, 2018. The tax rate on cigarettes will rise from 24.7 cents to 27.5 cents per cigarette, which is equivalent to a hike from $49.40 to $55 per carton of 200 cigarettes.

The increase is forecast to generate an additional $95 million for the provincial government for the 2018-19 fiscal year, which will grow BC’s tobacco tax revenues to a total of $825 million per year.

After that, I can take the rest of this with a giant grain of salt. The BC Liberals were criminally mismanaging some of the biggest pieces of BC's Economy and deserved to be thrown out. The NDP have been doing fine so far, better than I expected.

The article lists these billions in taxes up front and then spends most of the time attacking the school tax and David Eby specifically. It's obviously a hit piece written by a bitter old person living in a Point Grey mansion worth well over $3M. I'll get out my violin.

misher, you're going to have to try a little harder with your arguments. At least Stingray would have some semblance of understanding what he was talking about.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

misher, you're going to have to try a little harder with your arguments. At least Stingray would have some semblance of understanding what he was talking about.

In misher's defence, they at least have the ability to admit being wrong. In the same position, Stingray would say the refuter's "bias" was showing and start yet another month-long verbal slugfest.

[misher]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Funny the author lists all of these taxes and provides no citations on where these numbers came from. I'm aware of most of these tax increases, or changes in the case of MSP and Payroll tax. However the $285M for tobacco was interesting, I had no idea we were raising taxes on cigarettes so much, then I actually googled and found this:



After that, I can take the rest of this with a giant grain of salt. The BC Liberals were criminally mismanaging some of the biggest pieces of BC's Economy and deserved to be thrown out. The NDP have been doing fine so far, better than I expected.

The article lists these billions in taxes up front and then spends most of the time attacking the school tax and David Eby specifically. It's obviously a hit piece written by a bitter old person living in a Point Grey mansion worth well over $3M. I'll get out my violin.

misher, you're going to have to try a little harder with your arguments. At least Stingray would have some semblance of understanding what he was talking about.

It’s a trend now that people are ok with taxes as long as it doesn’t affect them. It’s just sad. Let’s say you bought stocks and suddenly the government started taxing your stock portfolio? It’s a similar situation. Hell many people’s pension funds were invested in Vancouver real estate.

I’m not pro liberal I’m anti tax. Taxes on income make some sense. But in the end every additional tax required a ton of administration. Having 5 taxes is much easier to organize than having 20. Were killing our economy as every tax slows it down.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by misher

It’s a trend now that people are ok with taxes as long as it doesn’t affect them. It’s just sad. Let’s say you bought stocks and suddenly the government started taxing your stock portfolio? It’s a similar situation. Hell many people’s pension funds were invested in Vancouver real estate.

I’m not pro liberal I’m anti tax. Taxes on income make some sense. But in the end every additional tax required a ton of administration. Having 5 taxes is much easier to organize than having 20. Were killing our economy as every tax slows it down.

1. That's been a trend since the dawn of taxation.

2. The public at large was demanding something be done about real estate, foreign ownership, etc. The income tax system (main source of government revenue) is nation-based. The flow of capital around the world, undeclared and untaxed, is forcing governments to adjust. How fair is it that people living in multi-million dollar mansions here aren't paying a dime of income tax because their declared income is so low? Consequently they are eligible for a number of low income benefits and subsidies.

3. Taxes on income don't make as much sense as consumption taxes. We should have had the HST. I support the carbon tax, and luxury taxes on houses, cars, etc. All should be used to reduce the rate of income taxes.

[misher]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

1. That's been a trend since the dawn of taxation.

2. The public at large was demanding something be done about real estate, foreign ownership, etc. The income tax system (main source of government revenue) is nation-based. The flow of capital around the world, undeclared and untaxed, is forcing governments to adjust. How fair is it that people living in multi-million dollar mansions here aren't paying a dime of income tax because their declared income is so low? Consequently they are eligible for a number of low income benefits and subsidies.


3. Taxes on income don't make as much sense as consumption taxes. We should have had the HST. I support the carbon tax, and luxury taxes on houses, cars, etc. All should be used to reduce the rate of income taxes.

It’s not that I disagree but points I would make are:

2. What about people who bought there homes and have lived there 20 years and are on a set income. Should people be punished because there house went up in value?

2. What about people who are only living in a small part of the house and have 3+ rental units in the house. Should they be punished instead of people who opted to own 3 rental apartments and live in one apartment?

2. What about those whose income tax is high?

2. Shouldn’t housing taxes be based on the services provided to households? When did property taxes shift from being used to maintain the neighborhoods to being used as a source of income for social programs?

2. Don’t you feel it’s deceptive and petty when our government calls a tax with a name that doesn’t reflect its actual use to make it politically acceptable. The school tax doesn’t go to schools. The speculation tax doesn’t target speculators. If the government truly supports these taxes why not call them what they are: a luxury home tax and a second/empty home tax. Calling something different than what it is to trick people gives me a bad taste in my mouth.


3. What stops people from making money here but spending it somewhere else? Too many taxes and people will be buying things in Alberta/America. People spending money elsewhere hurts our economy. As much as people hate it foreign investment has greatly benefited our economy.

[Cypherus]

Originally Posted by misher

It’s not that I disagree but points I would make are:

2. What about people who bought there homes and have lived there 20 years and are on a set income. Should people be punished because there house went up in value?

For income tax purposes, you are not taxed on unrealized gains on your property. It is municipal issue concerning property taxes (particularly in Vancouver) which is not a major concern across the board.

Also, you may have people living here for 20 years receiving GST credits and Canada Child Benefits, while not reporting the income earned outside of Canada which is a requirement for all Canadian residents (permanent or citizen). Common issue in Canada https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-age...te-sector.html The CRA updates this page every 3 months and auditors are having a hey day with finding unreported income in Vancouver and Toronto.

2. What about people who are only living in a small part of the house and have 3+ rental units in the house. Should they be punished instead of people who opted to own 3 rental apartments and live in one apartment?

What's the big deal? Both pursuits are to earn income which is subject to tax. A person who converts their principle residence into an income generating asset over 50% loses out on their principle residence exemption, whereas someone who is smart and maintains their principle residence while renting out three other properties is a good strategy. In a way, the latter has to pay more property taxes and capital gains taxes when the properties are sold (which is acceptable since realized gains are more likelier to be higher and taxed appropriately), and they also attract better rental income due to a number of factors (location, tenants, privacy for occupants, etc).

2. What about those whose income tax is high?

You earn more, you pay more. I have no sympathy for people who drive around in BMWs or Mercedes after flipping Vancouver real estate and have to pay their fair share of taxes. More likely however, those people are under-reporting their gains (claiming successive principle residence exemptions or being nominees for their rich parents), leaving the rest of us to pay their share.

2. Shouldn’t housing taxes be based on the services provided to households? When did property taxes shift from being used to maintain the neighborhoods to being used as a source of income for social programs?

Property taxes have always been based on location and the city to which the property resides, which reflects the services provided to it, land value (location), and demand side pressure (market value). Don't like high property taxes, don't live in an affluent or high demand area with rising market values. Wow what a revelation....

2. Don’t you feel it’s deceptive and petty when our government calls a tax with a name that doesn’t reflect its actual use to make it politically acceptable. The school tax doesn’t go to schools. The speculation tax doesn’t target speculators. If the government truly supports these taxes why not call them what they are: a luxury home tax and a second/empty home tax. Calling something different than what it is to trick people gives me a bad taste in my mouth.

Just an issue of semantics. It does not destabilize the merits of imposing tax. Also, the speculator tax does just that - targets speculators - but there are plenty of loopholes. One, it does not apply to pre-sales. You seem to overlook the other side of the equations in order to sound convincing.

3. What stops people from making money here but spending it somewhere else? Too many taxes and people will be buying things in Alberta/America. People spending money elsewhere hurts our economy. As much as people hate it foreign investment has greatly benefited our economy.

What's wrong with a person spending their disposable income in way that they deem to be the most fit in a free, democratic society? Sure, that may mean shopping in Bellingham. The rationale is usually nothing to do with government, but with private enterprise not being competitive when it comes to their pricing strategies in Canada (usually higher than US).

And why have sympathy against people subject to high taxes and who have the ability to pay, then have no sympathy for possibly the same people who have that disposable income and choose to spend it outside of Canada. Makes no sense.

[a very long weekend]

$2.5 billion payroll tax
$1.3 billion carbon tax increase—the NDP phased out the requirement for carbon tax to be offset with other tax cuts
$480 million speculation tax
$115 million expanded foreign buyer tax
$243 million increase in property transfer tax
$450 million school tax
$285 million increased tobacco tax
$86 million in other tax measures, including levies on luxury cars
1.5 cent/litre gas tax equals approx $24 per year for each vehicle
B.C. Hydro 25-cent monthly levy
Income earners over $150,000 annually to face a new personal tax rate of 16.8 percent up from 14.7 percent
Increase in the general corporate income tax to 12 percent from 11 percent

Of these (if true), only the payroll tax and corporate income tax are obviously bad. The cost of eliminating the MSP premiums should be borne by individuals in personal income tax, not by businesses. More business taxes slows hiring, and drives up the price of goods and services. With personal income taxes, the potentially harmful effects are mitigated by progressive taxation.

Other than that:
- carbon tax pushes down carbon emissions;
- speculation/foreign buyer/transfer are trying to increase affordability by hitting demand, this is a political decision because NIMBYism prevents real supply-side action;
- school tax is positive;
- tobacco tax is positive;
- luxury taxes are positive, for the most part;
- gas taxes are positive, though they do create drag it's a trade-off that's worth it for other reasons;
- hydro increase is negligible;
- higher personal income taxes aren't negative for the highest bracket, even if the $150,000 starting bracket is too low.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by misher

$2.5 billion payroll tax
$1.3 billion carbon tax increase—the NDP phased out the requirement for carbon tax to be offset with other tax cuts
$480 million speculation tax
$115 million expanded foreign buyer tax
$243 million increase in property transfer tax
$450 million school tax
$285 million increased tobacco tax
$86 million in other tax measures, including levies on luxury cars
1.5 cent/litre gas tax equals approx $24 per year for each vehicle
B.C. Hydro 25-cent monthly levy
Income earners over $150,000 annually to face a new personal tax rate of 16.8 percent up from 14.7 percent
Increase in the general corporate income tax to 12 percent from 11 percent

These are not annual figures, they're estimates for three years of additional taxes. They come from a Vancouver Sun piece that whoever pulled this list together didn't read. The increase in each year is far less.

The payroll tax is expected to raise $1.85bn in 2018/2019. MSP raised $2.6bn, so there's a shortfall coming from general taxation
Carbon tax increase will raise an additional $424m a year
The speculation tax is expected to raise $87m in 2018/2019
The foreign buyers tax is expected to raise $35m in 2018/2019
The new school tax only raises $50m in 2018/2019, but that goes up too $200m in subsequent years
The tobacco tax increase brings in $95m more a year
the new cannabis tax is estimated to bring in $50m in 2018/2019
the new tax on AirBnB is expected to bring in $16m in 2018/2019
the new luxury car tax is expected to bring in $10m in 2018/2019

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Changing City

These are not annual figures, they're estimates for three years of additional taxes. They come from a Vancouver Sun piece that whoever pulled this list together didn't read. The increase in each year is far less.

The payroll tax is expected to raise $1.85bn in 2018/2019. MSP raised $2.6bn, so there's a shortfall coming from general taxation
Carbon tax increase will raise an additional $424m a year
The speculation tax is expected to raise $87m in 2018/2019
The foreign buyers tax is expected to raise $35m in 2018/2019
The new school tax only raises $50m in 2018/2019, but that goes up too $200m in subsequent years
The tobacco tax increase brings in $95m more a year
the new cannabis tax is estimated to bring in $50m in 2018/2019
the new tax on AirBnB is expected to bring in $16m in 2018/2019
the new luxury car tax is expected to bring in $10m in 2018/2019

The Sun, being a Postmedia rag, probably just regurgitated this discredited Fraser Institute piece.

Fortunately some (sadly not the supposedly progressive Georgia Straight) analyzed their "facts" and found them wanting:

The Fraser Institute strikes again – this time, sending out press releases that don’t reflect the findings of their own report on British Columbia’s tax code.

The right-wing think tank issued an alarming press release this week declaring that “BC government tax changes will cost (the) average family nearly $1,000 per year.”

The research bulletin examines tax changes introduced by BC’s NDP government, which include the popular speculation tax, surtax increases on luxury real estate, and an employer health tax.

Although the Fraser Institute’s research consistently fails to stand up to basic fact-checks, some of BC’s biggest media outlets like Global News and The Province passed along the right-wing think tank’s dubious findings without a critical lens...

...The Fraser Institute’s report imagines all taxes – including taxes on businesses and employers – as part of the tax bill of an “average family.”

In addition to counting a tax on luxury cars valued at over $125,000 and a tax on real estate worth over $3 million on the tax bill of the “average family,” the right-wing think tank also quietly includes corporate income taxes and other taxes paid for by employers.

Or take the Employer Health Tax as another example– that’s a tax introduced by the BC government to eliminate Medical Service Premiums. The Fraser Institute shifts the entire cost of that tax onto the bill of the “average family” without factoring in the $1,800 per year which most families in BC will save as a result of cutting the old Medical Service Premiums...

https://pressprogress.ca/no-fraser-i...year-in-taxes/

[misher]

Originally Posted by whatnext

The Sun, being a Postmedia rag, probably just regurgitated this discredited Fraser Institute piece.

Fortunately some (sadly not the supposedly progressive Georgia Straight) analyzed their "facts" and found them wanting:

The Fraser Institute strikes again – this time, sending out press releases that don’t reflect the findings of their own report on British Columbia’s tax code.

The right-wing think tank issued an alarming press release this week declaring that “BC government tax changes will cost (the) average family nearly $1,000 per year.”

The research bulletin examines tax changes introduced by BC’s NDP government, which include the popular speculation tax, surtax increases on luxury real estate, and an employer health tax.

Although the Fraser Institute’s research consistently fails to stand up to basic fact-checks, some of BC’s biggest media outlets like Global News and The Province passed along the right-wing think tank’s dubious findings without a critical lens...

...The Fraser Institute’s report imagines all taxes – including taxes on businesses and employers – as part of the tax bill of an “average family.”

In addition to counting a tax on luxury cars valued at over $125,000 and a tax on real estate worth over $3 million on the tax bill of the “average family,” the right-wing think tank also quietly includes corporate income taxes and other taxes paid for by employers.

Or take the Employer Health Tax as another example– that’s a tax introduced by the BC government to eliminate Medical Service Premiums. The Fraser Institute shifts the entire cost of that tax onto the bill of the “average family” without factoring in the $1,800 per year which most families in BC will save as a result of cutting the old Medical Service Premiums...

https://pressprogress.ca/no-fraser-i...year-in-taxes/

Isn’t a house 3mil+ the average family for nearly half of the COV’s houses? It’s not like 3+ is a luxury house, the houses are usually worth 200-300k and the land is assessed at a couple million. Imagine if inflation keeps up and someday most houses in the COV will have the school tax.

I do agree that the article was a bit deceptive!

[Ben Dover]

Ah yes...the Fraser Institute. Right-wing mouthpieces...

I remember reading an article about how they present themselves as the righteous guardian for the taxpayer's sake....then offering advice to others on how to avoid Canadian taxes by sheltering their money off-shore.
Typical rightist hypocrites...

As for the title of this thread, I would rather be looking at direct taxation as opposed to hidden "user fees" that never existed and that increase semi-annually.
It's already been shown that the BC Liberals were fiscally incompetent (ICBC for an example...there are more). Any tax increases we see now are a DIRECT result of their inability to budget, or the many court cases they LOST when they broke the law or violated the Charter of Rights.

My "favourite" old saw from these ex-Socreds is when they whine about how "the NDP are a tax and spend government!". Dumbasses......that's how government works!

[bluefox]

"Taxed to death" and yet you were still alive enough to post this.