Jump to content

      



























Photo

Trudeau's small business tax changes


  • Please log in to reply
267 replies to this topic

#101 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,770 posts

Posted 20 September 2017 - 09:38 AM

Oh yeah, we see eye-to-eye in that regard, for sure. If anything we should be expanding more resources at catching people who are consciously gaming the system or who are making honest mistakes. Blanket policy changes hurt law abiding, honest and hard working Canadians who have structured their affairs with the tax regime currently in place.

 

I sincerely hope Trudeau reconsiders this decision. It could lead to unintended consequences, particularly in Ontario where these tax changes were implemented to keep the country's largest pool of doctors from fleeing to the US.


  • Awaiting Juno likes this

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#102 sdwright.vic

sdwright.vic

    Colwood

  • Member
  • 6,685 posts

Posted 20 September 2017 - 09:38 AM

You mean like Trudeau and Morneau?


Oh come on really?
Predictive text and a tiny keyboard are not my friends!

#103 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 21,019 posts

Posted 20 September 2017 - 10:47 AM

Oh come on really?

 

Really. Check out the front page of the Globe and Mail today on Trudeau dodging questions on his trusts and taxes.



#104 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,770 posts

Posted 20 September 2017 - 10:52 AM

From the article:

 

Justin Trudeau, whose family used an estate trust to save taxes on its fortune, would not say Tuesday whether he believes he's paying his fair share of taxes even as he pushes ahead with plans to end some tax breaks for small businesses.

 

The Prime Minister called a mid-morning news conference in Ottawa to talk up the Liberal economic record and staunchly defend the government's controversial small-business tax changes.

 

Mr. Trudeau appeared to be caught off guard when reporters pressed him on why he was prepared to ban certain tax-avoidance measures that benefit small business when his own family has used other legal structures to also lower total taxes paid on the wealth left by his late father, Pierre Trudeau.


  • lanforod and tjv like this

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#105 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 21,019 posts

Posted 20 September 2017 - 10:52 AM

Well your the one that thinks everyone is so honest. Yet I have 180 files and as soon as I close one, there is always one to take it's place. Maybe a little less anger at the government and more at these people. After all, If people paid their taxes, I wouldn't have a job, eh?

 

And how many of those 180 is the crown proceeding with tax evasion charges against? My bet is that the answer is less than 5%. So you nail a whack of small businesses for forgetting to self-assess a cross border purchase or for a mistake in the application of a new tax policy. You then tell them that you are going to go back 7 years and re-assess them on the basis that the error was prevalent all along unless they agree to sign an admission of guilt and pay you a settlement. The business can either pay the few grand you are asking for or they can fight you in tax court and spend $100K and wait 10 years for a resolution. You then add the business to your trophy list and reaffirm your belief that everyone is a crook. Good for you.

 

I am not singling you out, as I said earlier that I know a lot of auditors and the jaded approach to their jobs is prevalent. 


Edited by spanky123, 20 September 2017 - 10:53 AM.


#106 sdwright.vic

sdwright.vic

    Colwood

  • Member
  • 6,685 posts

Posted 20 September 2017 - 11:06 AM

Really. Check out the front page of the Globe and Mail today on Trudeau dodging questions on his trusts and taxes.


Trust are not Trust Funds when it comes to what I am speaking about.
Predictive text and a tiny keyboard are not my friends!

#107 sdwright.vic

sdwright.vic

    Colwood

  • Member
  • 6,685 posts

Posted 20 September 2017 - 11:20 AM

Spanky I am not an Auditor... and the GST people are not paying has nothing to with your example above. These people are taking and collecting tax and not sending it. The Government call payroll and GST Trust Funds as they are held in "trust" to be sent to the Government.

Let me ask you, how would you feel employer who us taking money off you cheque to pay your taxes never forwarded them on?
Predictive text and a tiny keyboard are not my friends!

#108 sdwright.vic

sdwright.vic

    Colwood

  • Member
  • 6,685 posts

Posted 20 September 2017 - 11:23 AM

From the article:

Justin Trudeau, whose family used an estate trust to save taxes on its fortune, would not say Tuesday whether he believes he's paying his fair share of taxes even as he pushes ahead with plans to end some tax breaks for small businesses.

The Prime Minister called a mid-morning news conference in Ottawa to talk up the Liberal economic record and staunchly defend the government's controversial small-business tax changes.

Mr. Trudeau appeared to be caught off guard when reporters pressed him on why he was prepared to ban certain tax-avoidance measures that benefit small business when his own family has used other legal structures to also lower total taxes paid on the wealth left by his late father, Pierre Trudeau.


So once again... I am not talking about estate trust. So this article does not affect my stance
Predictive text and a tiny keyboard are not my friends!

#109 tjv

tjv
  • Member
  • 2,403 posts

Posted 20 September 2017 - 06:49 PM

Reality is the vast majority still use an agent and pay $34k or similar. Plenty of alternative options out there consumers know about but they don't embrace.

 

The competition bureau did their job in 2010 to open up the market place and the consumer hasn't really followed suite.

Absolutely, do it yourself and save 34k.  my offer without a realtor made me best bid on my house.  I made an exact tied offer with someone who was using a realtor to buy, but of course I pointed out my offer doesn't require realtor fees putting tens of thousands of dollars in their pocket.  I got the house and talked later with the seller and he told me point blank that it was a good thing I didn't use a realtor

 

I would recommend everyone do to the same when buying.


  • Matt R. and sdwright.vic like this

#110 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 12,787 posts

Posted 25 September 2017 - 07:55 PM

trust.jpeg


Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

#111 lanforod

lanforod
  • Member
  • 11,391 posts
  • LocationSaanich

Posted 25 September 2017 - 07:56 PM

My facebook feed has been blowing up about this, all angry and against it. For those of you who lean more left, has your feed been more supportive of these tax changes?



#112 Mattjvd

Mattjvd
  • Member
  • 1,046 posts

Posted 25 September 2017 - 09:41 PM

My facebook feed has been blowing up about this, all angry and against it. For those of you who lean more left, has your feed been more supportive of these tax changes?


Very little on my feed, and I would think I'm in a more left leaning circle. I've had some good dicussion just trying to understand the ins and outs of the changes. There seems to be a lot of misinformation. I'm in the midst of a career change and I'm currently an accounting student, I'd love to pick my tax professor's brain about it some time soon.

Edited by Mattjvd, 25 September 2017 - 09:41 PM.


#113 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 21,019 posts

Posted 26 September 2017 - 05:58 AM

My facebook feed has been blowing up about this, all angry and against it. For those of you who lean more left, has your feed been more supportive of these tax changes?

 

Like most issues this boils down to either your impacted or you are not. Those who are impacted are pretty uniformly upset, others either don't care or think that the rich should pay more anyways. Great timing as there is a groundswell of worry over affordable housing and this gives the 'not so wealthy' a group to direct their anger against. Standard divide and conquer politics.


  • rjag likes this

#114 sdwright.vic

sdwright.vic

    Colwood

  • Member
  • 6,685 posts

Posted 26 September 2017 - 06:16 AM

I would recommend everyone do to the same when buying.


All you really need is a good lawyer (which you will need anyway), a good inspector and the ability to do your own homework/ research.
Predictive text and a tiny keyboard are not my friends!

#115 lanforod

lanforod
  • Member
  • 11,391 posts
  • LocationSaanich

Posted 26 September 2017 - 07:20 AM

One large group affected by this is doctors. I think they have legitimate beef with it. Their salaries are somewhat depressed here because of the way these private corporations can be setup and taxed. They get very few of the benefits most Canadian workers get, with a lot more risk.

Folks who feel they are not affected by these changes need to think hard about whether jobs lost and doctors leaving would affect them in the long run.

 

An open letter posted by a doctor:

Open letter to Finance Minister Bill Morneau:

Attention: The Honourable Bill Morneau, P.C. M.P, Minister of Finance

Dear Mr. Morneau,

It’s somewhat surprising perhaps, in a news cycle dominated by wall-to-wall coverage of Hurricane Irma, Hurricane Harvey, and the non-meteorological but very real Hurricane Trump, that your proposed changes to the way private corporations are taxed continue to draw the spotlight of Canadian media. It’s surely a measure of the degree of consternation, anxiety, and outright anger that your proposals continue to generate among thousands of hard-working Canadians who feel sideswiped and maligned by these changes.

I read with incredulity, for example, the September 6 comments by Barb Shellian, president of the Canadian Nursing Association, with respect to doctors and taxes. Apparently, the nursing group has “studied” your draft proposal to change the tax rules that govern incorporated physicians, and broadly supports your far-reaching proposals in the interests of “fairness.” While “registered nurses aren’t trying to provoke a confrontation with doctors, income is income,” reasons Ms. Shellian.

Sadly, her remarks are emblematic of the misconceptions that many people, including those in your administration, hold concerning the “business” of being a doctor. And, should you unilaterally push forward your initiative to up-end the current tax framework within which we practice, confrontation and turmoil will certainly ensue, and all Canadians will be worse off for it.

It’s perhaps predictable that a “special interest group” would push back strongly against a new government scheme to lift more tax dollars from its collective pockets, and I suppose you would argue that in this respect doctors are no different. I would counter that, in fact, the conditions in which doctors operate are different – very different. Allow me to explain.

Since we’re talking about tax policy, let’s talk numbers and one number in particular: thirteen, as in thirteen years.

A typical specialist physician obtains a four-year undergraduate degree, followed by four years in medical school, and tops that off with five years pursuing specialty training in residency, for a total of thirteen years. The road is somewhat shorter for general practitioners, but often significantly longer for some specialties – neurosurgeons, to take one example, can spend 20 years (!) in continuous study and training – try pitching that to a fresh crop of bright aspiring 18-year-old high school graduates.

In my own case, after fourteen years in university and in training, I finally began practice as an emergency physician at Alberta Children’s Hospital in Calgary.

Fourteen years - years that my contemporaries used to develop careers, grow businesses, and start families; years in which they began building nest-eggs for their children’s education, and for their own retirements.

I built a nest-egg of a rather different variety during those fourteen years, composed of an enormous yolk of debt surrounded by an expanding egg-white of interest.

But no matter: I had finally “made it.” I joined the stellar group of physicians at the local children’s hospital, and began my life as an independent, well-remunerated doctor. Together with my wife, also a debt-laden newly-minted product of fourteen years of training en-route to becoming an obstetrician, we started chipping away at the mountain of money that we owed, took out a mortgage on a home, finally bought a new car, and soon became proud parents.

And as we built our practices and grew our family, my outlook could have been fairly summed up by that line from an old Timbuk 3 song : “The future’s so bright I gotta wear shades.”

But then - only two years into my emergency medicine practice - a brain tumour blocked out the sun pretty much entirely.

All those long years in study and training left me spectacularly well-equipped to care for my patients. Unfortunately, those same long years of debt accumulation and foregone income left me just as spectacularly ill-equipped to absorb the financial impact of being catastrophically knocked out of my practice.

Because unlike the majority of the registered nurses Ms. Shellian represents, most physicians are not salaried. Like most physicians, I contract my services to government as a small businessperson.

That means that - unlike nurses - I have no government-supplied safety net.

When illness struck, my income went to zero – not exactly a kind return on my huge investment in medical education.

No paid sick leave. Nada. No-one to ride to the rescue, to say, in effect: “You’ve sacrificed and invested all these years as a healthy young adult, foregone income, incurred huge debt, striving to become a doctor in service to Canadian society, so let us help you.”

Nope. Nothing.

The road ahead was strewn with multiple craniotomies, radiation, meningitis, and too many complications to count. We had two young children, and my wife was forced to take long leaves of absence from her practice to tend both to them and to my complicated medical battle – leaves of absence that were completely unpaid and during which she still needed to cover substantial office overhead.

I was fortunate – thanks to the very same highly trained and incredibly skilled surgeons and doctors that your government is now painting as tax-dodgers, I’ve survived, so far. After two full years of struggle and recovery, I was able to limp back to practice on a part-time basis, and my wife was able to resume her practice full-time.

The effect on our finances, of course, was horrific. We were essentially bankrupt, and once again starting from scratch.

And my battle is not done. My health never returned to baseline, and my cancer has recurred repeatedly in the past two years, with consequent long periods of absence from practice. I’ve undergone two more craniotomies, and to put it bluntly, I’m running out of end zone.

And now your government proposes to tax us even more heavily, and to make it even more difficult to try to save for periods of illness, and for retirement, and for our children’s education.

I’m making the difficult decision to share my very personal story with you not to elicit sympathy, but rather to illustrate the enormous financial risk we as physicians undertake to become doctors.

My situation is far from unique. We are physicians, but we are all too often patients, too. Life happens to us, too. We all have medical colleagues who have been struck down by illness, who have had to struggle in the face of no income, to stay afloat and to provide for their families after long years of study and training to become doctors.

I know that you have already had an earful of feedback from upset medical professionals, all valid, regarding the fact that most physicians receive no pension, no paid vacation, no government-supplied maternity leave, and no paid sick leave.

I feel compelled to add my voice to that chorus; I sincerely hope you will read my letter.

I have the utmost respect for the challenges of your high office; I know that you hold your responsibilities gravely. And so I trust that you can begin to appreciate the scope of the damage you are about to inflict on Canadian health care.

Sincerely,

Jacob Edward Les, MD



#116 lanforod

lanforod
  • Member
  • 11,391 posts
  • LocationSaanich

Posted 26 September 2017 - 07:24 AM

21557578_1507348615978796_85999248807250



#117 lanforod

lanforod
  • Member
  • 11,391 posts
  • LocationSaanich

Posted 26 September 2017 - 07:27 AM

A second letter by the same doctor as above: 

(Second) Open Letter to Finance Minister Bill Morneau

Attention: The Honourable Bill Morneau, P.C. M.P., Minister of Finance

Re: Physicians, Politicians, and Pensions

Dear Mr. Morneau,

I sent you an open letter last week regarding your proposed renovation of the mechanism by which private corporations, used by many physicians to organize their affairs, will be taxed.

I’ve heard nothing back, as yet. I get it – given the intense controversy around this issue, I expect my little missive is completely buried under the mountain of feedback you’ve received.

Nonetheless: much of the blowback you are experiencing stems from the fact that - in contrast to most public employees - doctors in general do not enjoy government-supplied benefits such as pension plans, paid sick leave or maternity leave, or health and dental benefits.

The feedback for you has not been all negative. In addition to having the head of the Canadian Nurses Association behind you, as I alluded to in my earlier letter, Canadian media reported today that there is another “open letter” coming your way, currently circulating for signature by medical professionals, in broad support of your plans – with several caveats, among them a request that along with these changes, the aforementioned benefit packages be made available to Canadian physicians.

So I thought it might be useful to engage in a little math exercise with you, as a first step to finding a solution that will mollify doctors, while still allowing you to “dis-incorporate” them as a matter of “fairness.”

I propose that, beginning at age 65, you endow all doctors who have worked for twenty-five years or longer with a pension of $60,000 per year. This is on par with the average pension that an ex-politician enjoys, for life, after service of only six (!) years.

Of course, government funds will need be invested to generate this pension income for physicians.

Assuming a conservative investment rate of return of four percent per annum, $1.5 million will need to be immediately placed in an investment account for each aging doctor. Of Canada’s physician work force of roughly 77,000, approximately twelve percent (9,240) are older than 65.

So let’s complete the math: 9,240 x 1,500,000 equals 13,860,000,000. That’s right – in the interests of tax fairness, but to do right by doctors on this one benefit issue alone, the Government of Canada need only come up with roughly 14 billion dollars to supply them with the same pension income it affords its retired politicians.

Only 14 billion bucks.

Don’t get me started on paid sick leave, maternity leave, vacation pay, and health and dental benefits – that’ll have to wait, perhaps another letter. My brain hurts.

And my trusty old calculator emitted an alarming puff of smoke after generating all those zeroes.



#118 rjag

rjag
  • Member
  • 6,363 posts
  • LocationSi vis pacem para bellum

Posted 26 September 2017 - 07:43 AM

https://www.linkedin...omplete-elliott

 

A comparison between a federal civil servant and a Doctor showing the money earned and saved throughout their career.

 

The big tell is the indexed pension that the Civil Servant receives.....guess who pays for that?



#119 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 21,019 posts

Posted 26 September 2017 - 08:37 AM

I would say the big difference is that no matter how badly you screw up or perform, a unionized job in the Government is there for you for life. Doctors nor any othe business owner or professional gets that.

#120 rjag

rjag
  • Member
  • 6,363 posts
  • LocationSi vis pacem para bellum

Posted 26 September 2017 - 08:55 AM

I would say the big difference is that no matter how badly you screw up or perform, a unionized job in the Government is there for you for life. Doctors nor any othe business owner or professional gets that.

 

Yup and it used to be people would accept the job security and defined pension in exchange for a lower wage compared to an equivalent private sector position.

 

The tables have turned, does anyone have any idea what % of tax collected goes directly to government payroll?

http://www.huffingto..._n_2275037.html



You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users