Personal Finance

Trudeau going after Personal Services Corps disguised as small businesses

  • Last Updated:
  • Dec 12th, 2017 12:30 pm
Member
User avatar
Jan 15, 2017
375 posts
174 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
1433 posts
554 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!
Member
Apr 14, 2015
494 posts
111 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
375 posts
174 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.
Member
Apr 14, 2015
494 posts
111 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."
Deal Addict
May 22, 2003
2327 posts
1054 upvotes
Vancouver
http://business.financialpost.com/opini ... -swim-free

"The government claims that owners of private corporations — small entrepreneurs, doctors, farmers, lawyers, famous novelists, filmmakers — are using their corporate structures to gain a tax advantage. Money is being tucked into private corporations where it produces “passive” returns at low tax rates that are unfair to the rest of us.

Exactly how much money is slithering around private corporations is unclear. Some $27 billion in “passive income” is said to exist within private corporations that are taxed at lower rates. We know for certain, however, that when it comes to tax neutrality, owners of private corporations are mere tiny fish swimming among the tax-avoiding whales. Millions of Canadians use equivalent passive-investment vehicles to duck billions in taxes on personal and investment income every year. They’re called pension plans.

Finance Canada estimates the annual tax loss from the tax-free operation of registered government and corporate pension plans will cost Ottawa $37 billion this year. When Canadians put money into the plans, they pay no tax on the contribution ($16 billion annual lost revenue) and the earnings in the plans accumulate tax-free ($21 billion in lost revenue). The pension benefits paid out are taxable ($11 billion revenue gain), totalling a net tax loss of $26 billion."
Deal Addict
Nov 9, 2013
1921 posts
679 upvotes
Edmonton, AB
Jermyzy wrote:
Oct 5th, 2017 11:30 pm
http://business.financialpost.com/opini ... -swim-free

"The government claims that owners of private corporations — small entrepreneurs, doctors, farmers, lawyers, famous novelists, filmmakers — are using their corporate structures to gain a tax advantage. Money is being tucked into private corporations where it produces “passive” returns at low tax rates that are unfair to the rest of us.

Exactly how much money is slithering around private corporations is unclear. Some $27 billion in “passive income” is said to exist within private corporations that are taxed at lower rates. We know for certain, however, that when it comes to tax neutrality, owners of private corporations are mere tiny fish swimming among the tax-avoiding whales. Millions of Canadians use equivalent passive-investment vehicles to duck billions in taxes on personal and investment income every year. They’re called pension plans.

Finance Canada estimates the annual tax loss from the tax-free operation of registered government and corporate pension plans will cost Ottawa $37 billion this year. When Canadians put money into the plans, they pay no tax on the contribution ($16 billion annual lost revenue) and the earnings in the plans accumulate tax-free ($21 billion in lost revenue). The pension benefits paid out are taxable ($11 billion revenue gain), totalling a net tax loss of $26 billion."
Well I guess Trudeau better do away with the RRSPs! I always thought they were sexist anyways. It's 2017!
Deal Addict
Feb 9, 2009
4633 posts
2327 upvotes
Cant wait for Libs to be out in 2019... people are already sick of Trudeau... bring back the cons to save the day!!!

Singh and Trudeau will eat at each other's voters... cons will take it.

need them back immediately! anyone who advocates more tax is plain and simple a brainwashed STUPID ***** IDIOT!
Sr. Member
Nov 13, 2013
753 posts
253 upvotes
OTTAWA
Sanyo wrote:
Oct 6th, 2017 12:18 am
Cant wait for Libs to be out in 2019... people are already sick of Trudeau... bring back the cons to save the day!!!

Singh and Trudeau will eat at each other's voters... cons will take it.

need them back immediately! anyone who advocates more tax is plain and simple a brainwashed STUPID ***** IDIOT!
A bit of a simplistic argument no? So the ideal tax rate is zero?

Polls are tightening but you really think Scheer can pull off even limiting Libs to a minority in 2019?
Newbie
Mar 5, 2017
2 posts
1 upvote
Once these tax changes go through let see what Mr. Selfie boy and Offshore Morneau are going to do to prevent the brain drain or unemployment!

People who are able to leave will leave, the others who can't will file bankruptcy.

Keep your envy and hate towards the small business owner off the the forum and watch the video:

http://www.bnn.ca/billionaire-seymour-s ... e-1.869864
Deal Addict
Oct 7, 2007
3135 posts
724 upvotes
This government is writing cheques so fast that they will slowly tax all the money out of everyone to pay for their parties (Canada 150 cost half a billion dollars) and other things. Every decision they make costs taxpayers at least a billion dollars. There won't be anything left by 2019.
Sr. Member
Jan 27, 2015
921 posts
350 upvotes
Edmonton, AB
Sanyo wrote:
Oct 6th, 2017 12:18 am
Cant wait for Libs to be out in 2019... people are already sick of Trudeau... bring back the cons to save the day!!!

Singh and Trudeau will eat at each other's voters... cons will take it.

need them back immediately! anyone who advocates more tax is plain and simple a brainwashed STUPID ***** IDIOT!
As much as I dislike most of Trudeau's policy, Jaggy Singh is a really bad news for the economy. Have you seen his platform?! It's socialism on fire.

NDP at the Federal level has never won in the past, but they have a slight chance; Jaggy Singh will take a few votes but I still maintain that T2 will still be in power for another term. Why? Andy Scheer. Trudeau will mop the floor with Scheer.
Sr. Member
Jan 27, 2015
921 posts
350 upvotes
Edmonton, AB
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" ?
This is a simple vote garnering gesture: by being more "progressive", the Liberals are trying to gain votes for those that would've otherwise voted NDP. Simply brilliant strategy by Liberals (not that I agree with it).
Deal Addict
May 22, 2003
2327 posts
1054 upvotes
Vancouver
So theoretically, could small business owners not create a trust as a shareholder of the business and transfer shares from business owner to the trust and have passive investments grow in the trust fund? The investments would then be protected from the new passive income tax rules like Trudeau's/Morneau's trust funds. Only downside is the added expense to create/administer the trust fund which may not be worthwhile for smaller businesses.

Top