Althia Raj
GET UPDATES FROM Althia:

Canada Budget 2012: Alternative Federal Budget Proposes Tax Hikes On Wealthy, Corporations

Posted: 03/15/2012 8:24 am Updated: 03/15/2012 11:32 am

The federal government should create a new tax bracket for Canada’s biggest earners as a way to avoid cuts to social spending and "restore fairness to the tax system," a prominent public policy think tank says.

The "alternative federal budget" released by the progressive Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives on Thursday does away with the Conservative government's spending cuts and replaces them with increased revenue in the form of higher corporate taxes and a new top income tax bracket.

The alternative budget would create a top income tax bracket of 35 per cent for people earning over $250,000, and would roll back a series of corporate tax cuts started under the previous Liberal government and continued under the Conservatives that has seen corporations’ federal tax burden drop from 29 per cent to 15 per cent. The alternative budget would raise that to 21 per cent.

The CCPA's budget comes two weeks ahead of the release of the Conservative government’s federal budget, on March 29, and is part of an effort by the budget’s authors to make Canada’s tax system more redistributive -- something they say has been lacking from the policies of the governing Conservatives.

"The Alternative Federal Budget provides those priorities that are important to Canadians, a national pharmacare program, national subsidized childcare ... It's not a matter of financing it's a matter of political will," senior CCPA economist David MacDonald said. "These cuts that the government [is] suggesting are not necessary. We could go in a very different direction — and it's purely a matter of choice."

The AFB asks Canada’s richest one per cent, who are doing better than they have since the 1920s and whose tax rates are at an 80-year low, to contribute their fair share,” the CCPA stated in a summary of its budget.

Many economists have linked Canada’s growing income gap on a steady decrease in the relative tax burden carried by businesses and the wealthy.

“Canada could easily raise its federal corporate rate by several percentage points and remain the lowest on the list of G7 countries,” the alternative budget states.

Currently, Canada has four federal income tax brackets, compared to six in the United States. The top federal tax rate in the U.S. is 35 per cent; in Canada, it’s 29 per cent.

The added revenue the alternative budget would raise would be used, among other things, to fund a job-creation program the budget’s authors say would create 329,000 jobs at its peak and reduce the unemployment rate to 6 per cent.

The budget would also restore post-secondary education funding to pre-1992 levels, when funding cutbacks began increasing tuition rates at double the rate of inflation, according to the CCPA.

“The middle class is in a slump, young people are struggling to start their lives, infrastructure is crumbling, and concerns about environmental sustainability are brushed off in the rush to sell our natural resources. Canadians need an action plan that wrestles with these big issues and that’s exactly what the Alternative Federal Budget offers,” CCPA Senior Economist Armine Yalnizyan said in a statement.

However, even with the higher taxes, the CCPA’s alternative budget still projects larger deficits down the road than the government forecasts.

While the Finance Department’s projections show a federal deficit of $31 billion for the 2012-13 fiscal year, dropping to $7.5 billion by 2013-14, the alternative budget forecasts a deficit of $44 billion for 2012-13, dropping to $9 billion by 2013-14.

CCPA economist Armine Yalnizyan argued the federal government is "way ahead" of where forecasts predicted Canada would be in reducing the deficit -- somewhere between $6 billion and $8 billion ahead of schedule in this last fiscal year. So the government could balance the books basically without doing anything, just by cashing in on the commodity price boom, Yalnizyan said.

The CCPA has been releasing alternative budgets for years as a way of highlighting opposition to government fiscal policy.

The March 29 federal budget is expected to double down on the Conservatives’ austerity agenda, with departments being asked to find between 5 and 10 per cent in spending reductions.

Many economists and financial institutions -- even those generally supportive of austerity measures -- have suggested Canada is in a strong enough fiscal position not to need drastic budget cuts.

Moody’s chief analyst for Canada, Steven Hess, told the Wall Street Journal there is a “risk to growth” if Canada cuts its deficits too deeply and too quickly.

The CCPA’s alternative budget agreed with that assessment.

“Austerity programs weaken the economy, and their implementation in many European countries has tipped the EU back into recession, fueled unemployment, and increased their debts and deficits,” the CCPA stated in its budget summary.

This story has been updated from its original version to include comment from CCPA analysts.

FOLLOW CANADA BUSINESS

 
 
  • Comments
  • 37
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
02:31 PM on 03/15/2012
The Opposition Parties need to grow spines and stop lending legitimacy to this govt by engaging the CON agenda until they clear up the election fraud mess.
This current regime has no business passing any law until such times as they demonstrate they are the legitimate govt of Canada.
Until the Voter Suppression mess is cleaned up, the current govt has a serious legitimacy problem, and until they act to get to the real facts, they have no business doing anything else.
Its a waste of the taxpayers money to be passing bills that could eventually be thrown out because of the illegitimacy of the election!
Until it is ascertained the last election was legit, and all the MPs currently in the house were duly and fairly elected, Parliament should not be acting to pass anything other than a full inquiry to determine the constitutionality of the current House!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ProgressiveCDN
A Progressive Moderate
01:55 PM on 03/15/2012
Bravo, CCPA!! What a great alternative this budget would be! If only our government was guided by rationality and logic rather than ideology....

This alternative comes a day after I made many of the same points. The Liberals and NDP would do well to tout this alternative budget in the days and weeks leading up to the CONs budget.

Read More Here: http://liberallibra.wordpress.com/2012/03/14/21st-ce-canada/
photo
zimpeterw
A politically incorrect, contrarian ex zimbabwean
11:02 AM on 03/15/2012
I cannot believe how so many otherwise sensible people call for the wealthy to be taxed at a higher rate so that they pay "their fair share". There is no moral case for any one person to pay a higher rate than an other, irrespective of income. At the same %, high earners are already paying considerably more in total $ than low earners.

As for the argument that the rich use more services, sure they do and they pay for that by paying sales tax on all the extra stuff they buy or use.

The only way for every one to pay "their fair share" is a flat income tax rate and a high sales tax on everything except basic foodstuffs so that the genuinely poor do not starve.

The days of becoming super rich through inheritance are largely gone, a CEO or other senior executives income should be determined by his / her performance and negotiation with the shareholders of the business.

And no I am not rich, far from it but I live in Canada because I do not want to live in a communist state. Constant calls to punish the rich and equalise income will turn us into yet another failed communist state faster than a few CEO's being multi millionaires ever will.

Remember as soon a mechanism is introduced to limit high incomes (through new taxes or wage controls) that mechanism is in place to limit every ones income.
01:23 PM on 03/15/2012
I somewhat agree with what you're saying, individuals should be able to reap the benefits of their rewards. If they are CEO's performing well, by all means they should be rewarded with an equally good salary. Bonuses, however, might be another story. But that's another conversation.

I don't think taxing those that make large salaries in an attempt to equalise income would turn us into a failed communist state. That's a poor argument. This is about addressing growing income inequality, where middle class wages have been largely stagnant since the 80's. It is not about making sure the assembly line worker makes as much as the CEO, but ensuring that people can buy a house and put food on the table.

The corporate tax rate, moreover, is absurdly low at the present time. Not trying to put words in your mouth, but that should be taken into account as it might serve to rein in those salaries that are grossly disproportionate to the work that is actually being done by some CEOs.
photo
Jay from Ottawa
sovereignty sale, 1.3T OBO
03:13 PM on 03/15/2012
I'm going to use the company I work for as a example.

Last year, it made a after tax profit of 120M. It's 300 employees, cost them 15M a year.

They could, if they wanted to, DOUBLE everyones salary, and still have made 105M after taxes. Can you imagine how much other enterprises around my city would gain from these 300 people suddenly have a extra 50k to spend in a year ?

Now imagine if every single company, like this one, which can easily afford to double wages, did so voluntarily. Our country would be swimming in extra income taxes, businesses would be swimming in extra revenue, demand for everything would go up, jobs would be sprouting up to meet increased demand, more Canadians would have money in the bank for a rainy day and for college and university for their children, considerably less people would have to rely on social programs and welfare, everyone would benefit, and our country would be swimming in revenue, so much so, that it could easily consider a, as you put it, flat tax, or heck, we could keep progressive tax rates and just scrap income tax instead.

The problem with my pipe dream of course, is "did so voluntarily". But because 105M isn't enough, everyone suffers, and that suffering trickles down.
10:47 AM on 03/16/2012
The communism remark that's a little over the top, the issue of income inequality has more to do with wealth more or less being "parked" and segregated from the rest of the economy which leads to a kind of hoarding of wealth (not implying anything sinister by the wealthy) it just happens, and healthy economies as per Adam Smith assume that people in control of excess wealth will continue to put the bulk of that wealth "back to work" and truly be drivers of economic creation.
10:48 AM on 03/16/2012
2/2 The problem is that as fortunes become larger huge amounts of that wealth winds up doing nothing. For example, if someone uses $X of their "excess" wealth to finance an undertaking of somekind (for profit of course) like new business or technology etc. they have (assuming some degree of success) created opportunity and wealth for themselves and others and the area surrounding, this is good. If said person takes the $X and buys say a bunch of stock in Apple then unless they have done so via some kind of IPO or secondary offering then that wealth has done nothing except (assuming some degree of success) bulid upon itself under the ownership of an individual who really hasn't any market use for it and this effect can snowball. Either way results in the "rich getting richer" but in one case they do so in a way that employs/works with others buliding wealth for all, the other way simply creates upon itself for that soul indivdual and closes existing wealth off from the rest of economy.
photo
turkeylurky
Just keepin it real........
11:01 AM on 03/15/2012
Sounds like a reasonable proposal.
And while we're at it, let's also cut Gov't spending by a few points.
I'm not sure we, in the private sector, can afford to continue to borrow from future generations in order to pay for 3.5 million public employees - particularly when those public employees earn more and have much higher benefits and gold plated pensions than those paying the bill.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tiger of BC
10:51 AM on 03/15/2012
Harper will never go for anything like this - he agrees with the Tea Party - only focus on the spending - ignore the revenue side of the equation - it's all part of the plan, people.... You think this wealth disparity was an accident? This has been a long time coming.

We need an election here to try and stop this runaway train - the copyright bill, the crime, bill, the spending cuts - this is really not turning out well...
thephuqqer
not the chicken plucker.
10:47 AM on 03/15/2012
As some pundits have said; 'We don't want the trickle-down effect from corporations who receive big tax breaks, we need the flooding-down effect', and so far, that hasn't happened.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Marg Wood
Peace
06:07 PM on 03/16/2012
The tricle down affect is a joke! The more tax breaks you give Corporations the more money they get to keep! They outsource jobs so they get to keep even more! The whole idea that started with Ronald Reagan is the cause of the problems the USA is facing now, that and deregualtion. Our governments was smart enough to keep regualtions in place and have good social safety nets. Our present government is very close to the american republicans. The first place they will cut will be social benifits. Do we need all those war ships and plains? What war are they buying them for? Do we need more jails to put minor offender in, with minium sentenceing? If a person earns $100,000.and pays 30% not including tax credits and only 50% of capital gains, he would have $70,000. left and more with other credits. If someone earns $40,000. at 30%, he would have $28,000. He has no money to envest so no break on capital gains! The rich can more easily pay a bigger percentage of income tax and the wealther they are the higher the percentage of tax should be paid and they will still be wealthy! The higher the income the bigger the percentage they should pay! It seems only those who have big incomes would be against this.
10:31 AM on 03/15/2012
It's nice to see for a change, a 'think tank' make recommendations based on real evidence and thought, rather than ideology and mindless talking points. The myth that lower taxes for the wealthy and corporations are good for everyone has been proven beyond a doubt to be false. Canada's tax rates for the wealthy and corporations are now at record low levels. But the economy not booming. Where are the jobs?

A short look through history shows more robust economies occurred when tax rates for the upper class were higher, and when the government spent more money to improve demand by average Canadians not less. Increasing demand by the middle class is the key to when business will expand. Business leaders are not fools. They will not invest in their businesses or hire new workers unless there is sufficient demand for their goods and services.
photo
Jay from Ottawa
sovereignty sale, 1.3T OBO
10:29 AM on 03/15/2012
I personally can't believe that someone earning 135k a year, pays the same percentage in taxes than someone making 3,000,000 a year.

There's a enormous difference between someone 135k and someone whose earnings is in the millions.

My CEO makes 14,000$ every week, and somehow, it's considered a very, very small salary for a CEO... He can afford to pay more taxes. Even if he was taxed at 50%, he'd earn 7,000$ a week, which, like I said, is considered a small CEO pay. It also doesn't included bonuses.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
contest d
10:18 AM on 03/15/2012
It's a start. However, the conversation really needs to be about the top 25%, and then even the next 25% of income earners, if (the West) wants fewer regional/global conflicts in its future.

As long as 'wealth creation' (ie. hoarding) is being confused with democracy, as Western governments (Cons and Libs) have done over the last few decades, systemic social dysfunction will be unavoidable.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tony Pepperoni
Where did all the good Republicans go?
06:21 PM on 03/15/2012
Who are these 25% making more than the top 25%?
photo
freeSpeakr
I stand on the shoulders of giants
09:58 AM on 03/15/2012
Why is this economic debasement occurring?

Tragically, it comes from the fact that Americans, and indeed most citizens of western-style democratic gov'ts operating under similar social and economic ideologies, have forfeited their gov't to a small group of corporate "citizens" who collectively embody the new "king". If a corporation can be a person in the courts, the regulator of human relationships, then a group of corporations in collusion could also be collectively considered a "king". IMO anyway.”

wow. you Reeeeeeeally don't get it, do you?

Well, when you build a community, a society, and, indeed, a nation out of Greed, Fear, and the Delusion of Separation, then mount all that on top of continuous war, perpetual debt and planned obsolescence, you condemn that nation to descend into the pit of a dystopian, neo-feudalist oligarchic kakistocracy. Good Luck.
09:57 AM on 03/15/2012
no article on tax burden of immigrants?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
contest d
11:19 AM on 03/15/2012
In case you meant that immigrants are not paying their fair share, then that article is right after the one on why homosexuality is a sin, hence same-sex marriage should not be legalized, and the other that demonstrates why contraception should not be publicly funded, because it only promotes abject promiscuity among the heathen.

You should also check-out the article on guidelines for big pharma to circumvent human testing protocols for new drugs here by partnering with corrupt medical officials in developing countries (eg. S. America and Africa).... it represents a huge cost savings for companies, greatly benefits shareholders and directors, and trickles down to society-at-large by showing us how to use economic efficiency like a blunt moral instrument!

Fyi, those articles can be found at Fox news, The Fraser Institute, The Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute, etc.

ps. if your post was sarcastic, than mine is in support of it.
thediamond0000
as above, so below.
12:12 PM on 03/15/2012
no, completely different situation.
photo
freeSpeakr
I stand on the shoulders of giants
09:56 AM on 03/15/2012
It is the first duty of the citizenry to oppose unjust conditions.

http://goo.gl/7cS7J
09:40 AM on 03/15/2012
Do not trust liberals, not only with the budget, but not with anything else.
photo
Blodo
Time to build a better world
10:13 AM on 03/15/2012
The current government inherited a surplus from the Liberals and turned it into a deficit.

In the history of this country, not one, not ONE federal Conservative government has left the country's finances in better shape than it found them in, as measured by debt-GDP. That's an incredible record and leaves me shaking my head in amazement that people can still harbour the myth that the Tories are fiscal conservatives. They aren't; they are money-wasting, borrow-and-spend ideologues who, once again, are driving this country further into the red.
03:58 PM on 03/15/2012
Yes, they inherited a $60 billion surplus- the same amount Martin and the Liberals borrowed (stole, misappropriated or whatever) from the EI fund-when the economy of the world was steaming along. Martin and the Liberals did not have to deal with the recession most of the world is still in.
When Cretchin came to power he blamed the high unemployment rate on the GST, free trade etc. etc.- it was a global event! a recession if you will.
If you compare Canada with the state of Calfornia (population and economy wise they are almost the same) Calfornia had almost twice the unemployment rate and was further in debt that this country was.
In short, in the economic times that Martin enjoyed when he was finance minister he should have done better without the $60 billion from the EI fund.
thediamond0000
as above, so below.
12:12 PM on 03/15/2012
but trust cons to run a surplus right into the ground?
georgee2
My Canada Includes Everyone
09:35 AM on 03/15/2012
Steve & Jim won't be happy until all of Canada is in the same mess Jim left Ontario in when he was finance minister there.
09:34 AM on 03/15/2012
The Obama way is a loser's way.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DirkNeptune
I love raspberry pie, damn it.
10:47 AM on 03/15/2012
That's your opinion. How about some facts to back up what you say?