The issue is distribution of tax burden

Posted on in Debates

Source: — Authors: – opinion/letters – Re: Opposition lashes out at ‘reckless’ tax cuts, Feb. 9
Published On Sun Feb 13 2011.    Roman Haluszka

Much more needs to be said with regard to the Harper/Flaherty plan to reduce corporate taxes. They are already low, sitting at 16.5 per cent this year and moving to 15 per cent in 2012. What nobody seems to have studied and identified is the actual percentage paid by corporations, which appears to be considerably less than the published rates. In fact, thanks to a variety of perks like accelerated depreciation rates, hiring incentives, etc., some corporations even end up paying $0.

One source of confusion in the debate seems to be the lack of distinction made between small businesses that are incorporated and what I and many other people refer to as “the corporatocracy.”

I do not object to lower taxes on small businesses providing that they meet certain conditions, including wages and working conditions that are in-line with the overall norms in Canada: evidence of reinvestment in business improvement vs. the owners pocketing these funds or expensing personal items as business purchases.

The reality is that tax revenue must come from somewhere or there will be no money to operate necessary social programs, to spend on infrastructure, and to carry out the reasonable business of governance. The issue is one of distribution of the tax burden. The wealthy and the corporatocracy seem to have derived the most benefit since the 1980s, and this has happened at the expense of the middle classes and the poor. That is neither right nor fair, and this trend must not be allowed to continue.

Roman Haluszka, Newmarket

<–the-issue-is-distribution-of-tax-burden >

Tags: , , , ,

This entry was posted on Sunday, February 13th, 2011 at 10:03 am and is filed under Debates. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Leave a Reply