Personal Finance

Trudeau going after Personal Services Corps disguised as small businesses

  • Last Updated:
  • Aug 24th, 2018 11:56 am
Deal Addict
Oct 7, 2007
3837 posts
1135 upvotes
Operatime wrote:
Oct 3rd, 2017 10:33 am
I am surprised that they didn't extend the consultation period. It has been clear from the start that they didn't think this through and there will be all sorts of unintended consequences they never thought of. People brought up legitimate concerns and they dug in their heels. Eventually they admitted that this was going to cause problems and promised to make small tweaks, but they wouldn't say what. They expect everyone to just trust them to somehow get it right when they have already demonstrated that they don't understand how these changes will affect people, and they don't seem interested in talking to people who do understand.

Funny how electoral reform, another of their big promises, got dropped as soon as they had a little opposition, but on this issue they won't even extend their pretence of consultation.
You are 100% bang on! The PM and Finance Minister seem to have really got themselves into a pickle and it is incredible that instead of them saying to everyone, "...sorry, this was a big mistake", they are being very defiant saying "there is zero chance of dropping this whole thing" and "this is what they ran on when elected so they are going to do it no matter what". Their logic and their explanations to the public on this subject are flawed in so many ways. And is this really a consultation period if they are going to slam it through no matter what? I am sure this is a no-no in the book of "How to Be a Successful Politician" or "How to Avoid Political Suicide".

It is interesting that the U.S. is currently working on their tax reform policy right now and all they seem to be talking about is lowering taxes for small business, reducing bureaucracy and putting in all kinds of incentives to help small businesses thrive, expand and flourish. Our leaders seem to be looking at the U.S. and "doing the opposite" on every possible policy including immigration, refugee admission, tax policies, etc. Hopefully, the damage to our country will cease with a change of power in 2019.
Deal Addict
Nov 9, 2013
2370 posts
1005 upvotes
Edmonton, AB
Operatime wrote:
Oct 4th, 2017 11:15 am
It sounds like his goal is still to get it done fast, not to do it right. Do you think they'll have another round of consultations to make sure the second version isn't just as sloppy as the first?
Morneau mentions they will NOT extend the consultation period. I suspect they want something in place Jan 1 2018. So as you mention get it done fast, but not necessarily right.
Deal Addict
Jul 3, 2006
1723 posts
334 upvotes
treva84 wrote:
Oct 4th, 2017 5:16 pm
Morneau mentions they will NOT extend the consultation period. I suspect they want something in place Jan 1 2018. So as you mention get it done fast, but not necessarily right.
If they don't do it before Dec 31, 2017 then they will have to wait for enforcement until 2019. The changes will prob come out late this month - early next
[OP]
Deal Addict
Jun 27, 2015
1120 posts
84 upvotes
East York, ON
J_u_n_i_o_r_3 wrote:
Oct 4th, 2017 6:48 pm
If they don't do it before Dec 31, 2017 then they will have to wait for enforcement until 2019. The changes will prob come out late this month - early next
why would they have to wait till 2019?
Deal Addict
Jul 3, 2006
1723 posts
334 upvotes
CuriousC wrote:
Oct 4th, 2017 7:46 pm
why would they have to wait till 2019?
This is not personal taxes. This is corporate taxes. If they change it mid way through peoples calendar year they cannot enforce rules as they dont know when income came in.
[OP]
Deal Addict
Jun 27, 2015
1120 posts
84 upvotes
East York, ON
J_u_n_i_o_r_3 wrote:
Oct 4th, 2017 7:58 pm
This is not personal taxes. This is corporate taxes. If they change it mid way through peoples calendar year they cannot enforce rules as they dont know when income came in.
oh so you are saying end of 2018 as opposite to beginning of 2018 if they would put the law in place this year
Deal Addict
Jul 3, 2006
1723 posts
334 upvotes
CuriousC wrote:
Oct 4th, 2017 8:21 pm
oh so you are saying end of 2018 as opposite to beginning of 2018 if they would put the law in place this year
If they make change before Dec 31, 2017 then it will be for calendar year 2018. If change is after Dec 31, 2017 - Dec 31, 2018 then its for 2019 calendar year.
Deal Addict
May 22, 2003
2819 posts
1231 upvotes
Vancouver
https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/p ... le36497362

Sorry, have to be a member to read the article, but this line pretty sums it up: "Finance Department officials admit they are "struggling" to find a way to address concerns about the intergenerational transfer of family businesses and are hoping to get inspiration from suggestions that emerged in public consultations.

Officials have also warned that one broad policy option the department has analyzed would reduce federal tax revenues by about $1-billion a year."


So basically they're clueless...maybe they should have had consultation before putting forth the proposals???!!!
Sr. Member
Apr 14, 2015
532 posts
146 upvotes
Tsuu T'Ina, AB
Jermyzy wrote:
Oct 4th, 2017 9:04 pm
https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/p ... le36497362

Sorry, have to be a member to read the article, but this line pretty sums it up: "Finance Department officials admit they are "struggling" to find a way to address concerns about the intergenerational transfer of family businesses and are hoping to get inspiration from suggestions that emerged in public consultations.

Officials have also warned that one broad policy option the department has analyzed would reduce federal tax revenues by about $1-billion a year."


So basically they're clueless...maybe they should have had consultation before putting forth the proposals???!!!
Maybe it will end up like the middle class tax cut and actually decrease tax revenue!
Deal Addict
Jan 20, 2016
1747 posts
728 upvotes
Houston, TX
After being beaten for starting social war with their "middle class fairness" they decided to go on more guaranteed way of "gender fairness"
Conduct a gender-based analysis on finalized proposals, to ensure any changes to the tax system promote gender equity.
Gender-equal tax system? WTF? The whole "western" tax system is based on ~income, NOT a social status or gender. Are we going back to feudalism or "some animals are more equal than others" ?
Make the Trudeau drama teacher again!
Member
User avatar
Jan 15, 2017
455 posts
202 upvotes
asa1973 wrote:
Oct 5th, 2017 10:41 am
After being beaten for starting social war with their "middle class fairness" they decided to go on more guaranteed way of "gender fairness"

Gender-equal tax system? WTF? The whole "western" tax system is based on ~income, NOT a social status or gender. Are we going back to feudalism or "some animals are more equal than others" ?
People tend to equate gender with quotas, understandably.

In this case, I think what they mean is that women business owners need to be able to save for maternity leave, so whatever changes are brought in need to enable this type of saving to happen, which is reasonable.
Deal Addict
Jan 20, 2016
1747 posts
728 upvotes
Houston, TX
taxrage wrote:
Oct 5th, 2017 10:45 am
People tend to equate gender with quotas, understandably.

In this case, I think what they mean is that women business owners need to be able to save for maternity leave, so whatever changes are brought in need to enable this type of saving to happen, which is reasonable.
I highly doubt they DO think about gender or social fairness. The initial idea was to get "easy" tax grab masking this under "middle-class fairness" which HAD to work good within their electoral field. However they got VERY huge negative response from very broad spectrum, including those "middle class" (not salaried but self-employed)

So now they tried to change the tune and promote it under gender sauce. However, they are not going to help self-employed women to save on maternity etc. So far they still intended to tax MORE the man who are guilty because they a) man b) make some good moneys
About 83 per cent of passive investment income is earned by Canadian-controlled private corporation owners making more than $250,000. About 70 per cent of these individuals are men.
Make the Trudeau drama teacher again!
Sr. Member
Apr 14, 2015
532 posts
146 upvotes
Tsuu T'Ina, AB
I'm not sure where the quote about gender equity came from, but it does kind of look like they made up their minds about the changes they want, and now they're searching around for a palatable description for it. First it was "tax fairness", then "encourage investment", now "gender equity". I'm sure we will see other justifications as well.

I would like to hear them talk about "integration", "certainty", "minimizing the compliance burden", or anything that makes it sound like they thought about their plan for more than ten minutes before announcing it.
Member
User avatar
Jan 15, 2017
455 posts
202 upvotes
Operatime wrote:
Oct 5th, 2017 2:32 pm
I'm not sure where the quote about gender equity came from, but it does kind of look like they made up their minds about the changes they want, and now they're searching around for a palatable description for it. First it was "tax fairness", then "encourage investment", now "gender equity". I'm sure we will see other justifications as well.

I would like to hear them talk about "integration", "certainty", "minimizing the compliance burden", or anything that makes it sound like they thought about their plan for more than ten minutes before announcing it.
See principles here.
Sr. Member
Apr 14, 2015
532 posts
146 upvotes
Tsuu T'Ina, AB
From the above article:

"The principles include:

-Support small businesses.
-Keep small business taxes low while supporting owners who invest and create jobs.
-Avoid creating unnecessary red tape for small businesses.
-Recognize the importance of family farms, and ensure tax changes do not affect the transfer of family businesses to the next generation.
-Ensure any changes to the tax system promote gender equity."

Some of these are pretty vague, while others at least sound hopeful. I think the small business community could be forgiven at this point for feeling a little hesitant about what amounts to a statement of "trust us on this one."

Top