National
Low and middle income Canadians hit hardest by high marginal effective tax rates
From the Fraser Institute
By Philip Bazel
A new study published by the Fraser Institute today finds that Canadian families and individuals with annual incomes between $30,000 and $60,000 face marginal effective tax rates near or above 50%.
Among the provinces, BC has the lowest tax rates of 38%.
Ontario has a rate of 50% – and high-income families at $300,000+ are taxed lower at 44%.
Families with modest income brackets consistently face disproportionately high marginal effect tax rates, raising questions of fairness and efficiency in the tax and transfer system.
Dig into the numbers and see how your province placed here.
Canadian families and individuals with annual incomes between $30,000 and $60,000 face marginal effective tax rates near or above 50 per cent, finds a new study published by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.
“Canadian families with modest incomes face high marginal effective tax rates, often higher rates than Canadians in top income tax brackets,” said Jake Fuss, director of fiscal studies at the Fraser Institute, which published Marginal Effective Tax Rates for Working Families in Canada by Philip Bazel, an associate at the School of Public Policy at the University of Calgary.
The marginal effective tax rate (METR) measures the personal income taxes paid (federal and provincial) and the reductions in government benefits, resulting from earning an extra dollar. For example, the Canada Child Benefit, a monthly payment, is reduced as family income increases. In other words, the effective tax rate is the combination of taxes you pay and benefits you lose as you make more money.
Crucially, across the provinces, individuals and families with relatively modest incomes face the highest rates. This unfortunately creates a disincentive for earning additional income, as the financial benefits are significantly offset by increased taxes and/or reduced government benefits.
Canadian families with modest incomes, particularly those earning between $30,000 and $60,000, face the highest marginal effective tax rates. For example, families earning a household income of $60,000 are subject to an effective tax rate of 50 per cent or higher in every province. In Quebec, the METR is as high as 67 per cent at this income level.
Among provinces, BC has the lowest rate (38 per cent) averaging across the $30,000 to $60,000 bracket. Ontario’s rate for the $30,000 to $60,000 bracket is 6 percentage points higher (50 per cent) than high-income families at $300,000 or higher (44 per cent).
“Families with modest income brackets consistently face disproportionately high METRs, raising questions of fairness and efficiency in the tax and transfer system,” Bazel said.
“These findings highlight the need to prioritize METR reductions for low-income families.”
Author:
Alberta
Judge reverses suspension against Alberta police officer for speaking at Freedom Convoy rally
From LifeSiteNews
The suspension without pay for Staff Sergeant Richard Abbott of the Edmonton Police Service was out of line and not at all ‘justifiable,’ Justice James Nelson of Alberta Court of King’s Bench ruled.
A policeman from Alberta won a decisive court victory after a judge overturned a ruling against him by his superiors that suspended him without pay because he spoke at a Freedom Convoy rally in 2022.
Justice James Nelson of Alberta Court of King’s Bench recently ruled that the punishment for Staff Sergeant Richard Abbott of the Edmonton Police Service (EPS) was out of line and not at all “justifiable.”
“While taking into account the higher standards placed by law on a police officer that can limit the officer’s freedom of expression compared to the freedom enjoyed by other citizens, we are left in my view with factual distinctions that could be drawn from the evidence,” Nelson wrote in his ruling.
The judge also noted that the “facts and evidence” in the case were not clear in justifying the suspension.
Abbott was a 26-year police veteran with a clean record and “no prior disciplinary misconduct.”
His suspension came in 2022 after he gave a videotaped speech at a local Freedom Convoy rally, of which many were being held at the time in solidarity with the truckers who descended upon Ottawa in protest of COVID dictates of all kinds.
Abbott opposed COVID jab mandates and was sympathetic to the peaceful Freedom Convoy movement.
Judge Nelson agreed with Abbott’s statements and overturned his suspension.
The now former EPS Chief Dale McFee cited Abbott with breach of Police Service Regulations, saying his actions for speaking in favor of the protests were “conduct of engaging in the political activity of the Freedom Convoy, which “interferes with and adversely influence decisions you are required to make in the performance of your duties.”
McFee claimed that Abbott’s actions undermined the EPS as well as his “colleagues” to ensure “proportionate and correct decisions are being made when dealing with protesters so our community is safe and secure.”
“Your actions also created a conflict of interest by using your status as a police officer in an attempt to further the cause of the Freedom Convoy. By publicly supporting a cause where the activities of this group involve illegal activities, this undermines public confidence that police will behave impartially,” McFee wrote.
The reality is the EPS had mistakenly claimed Abbott had attended a large border protest in Coutts, Alberta.
In court, Abbott was successful in arguing that the videotape of him was from a protest nowhere near Coutts and was instead in Milk River and that he never spoke in favor of the border blockade protests.
In early 2022, thousands of Canadians from coast to coast came to Ottawa to demand an end to COVID mandates in all forms. Despite the peaceful nature of the protest, Trudeau’s government invoked the Emergencies Act (EA) on February 14. Trudeau revoked the order on February 23.
The EA controversially allowed the government to freeze the bank accounts of protesters, conscript tow truck drivers, and arrest people for participating in assemblies the government deemed illegal.
Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, the main leaders of the Freedom Convoy, as reported by LifeSiteNews, will receive their verdict on March 12.
They both face a possible 10-year prison sentence. LifeSiteNews has reported extensively on their trial.
Economy
Fixing the Trudeau – Guilbeault Policy Mess May Take Longer Than We’d Like – Here’s Why
From EnergyNow.ca
By Jim Warren
By spring 2024 it was pretty clear the Liberal government was headed for palliative care. A Leger poll on May 25 and an Abacus poll June 10 showed the Conservatives with a 20 point lead over the Liberals.
As the likelihood of their imminent defeat increased, the Trudeau Liberals stepped up the implementation of legislation and regulations inimical to the gas and petroleum industries. Their efforts in 2024 included legislation limiting freedom of speech for companies and individuals who publicize environmental progress in the oil and gas sector (aka Bill C-59). The speech-muzzling measure became law on June 21.
Around the same time, Environment and Climate Change Minister, Steven Guilbeault was busy shepherding two particularly ominous regulatory packages through to finalization. One set of regulations supported Canada’s Clean Electricity Regulations—intended to eliminate the use of coal and natural gas in the production of electricity with staged decommissioning deadlines between 2035 and 2050. The second package finalized the rules for the natural gas and oil industries emissions cap intended to restrict production and growth in those industries, to take effect in 2026.
The regulations weren’t finalized until the month before the House shut down for the holidays, just weeks before Justin Trudeau’s political career was put on life support.
The green policy stampede extended to the international stage. Never mind deficits and debt, the Liberals found plenty of cash to enhance their status as world class environmental luminaries.
At November’s COP29* conference at Baku, Azerbaijan, Guilbeault and Canada’s Ambassador for Climate Change (who knew we had one?), Catherine Stewart signed us on to 15 pledges to take action on fighting climate change. Around half of the promises were merely motherhood and apple pie statements, concessions to the environmentally woke who attend these sorts of international conferences.
But several of the commitments made on our behalf came with price tags. I’m still unclear on exactly which line item in a federal budget, legislative authority or policy statement authorized the spending.
Canada’s COP29 delegation launched the $2 billion GAIA project. Apparently we are cost sharing the project with Mitsubishi. The official government report on the conference doesn’t indicate how much of the $2 billion Canada is kicking in.
Canada also showcased its green bona fides by contributing to the effort to finance the green transition and climate change adaptation in poor countries—a task expected to require developed countries to collectively spend $110 billion to $300 billion per year by 2035. Our delegation announced Canada would lead by example, making a $1billion donation to the effort.
Guilbeault and Stewart gave $10 million to Conservation International’s “Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area” project. They “invested” another $2.5 million in the World Wildlife Fund’s “Building Resilient Communities through Marine Conservation in Madagascar” project.
Guilbeault may indeed be angling for that UN job I mentioned in my last EnergyNow column. Read it Here Canada made a $1.25 million payment directly to the office of UN Secretary General, António Guterres. The donation is supposed to assist Guterres in his efforts to encourage countries to get their “Nationally Determined Contributions” handed in on time.
In a podcast conversation with Jordan Peterson several months ago, Danielle Smith noted the accelerated pace of the Liberal government’s announcement and implementation of new environmental policies detrimental to Alberta’s oil and gas sectors and the economies of both Alberta and Canada.
Smith said one of the effects of enacting so many new environmental measures would be to make it extremely difficult for the next government to reverse them all in its first term. This probably was one of the reasons behind the rush to get so much done this past year.
Peterson added a psychological dimension to the discussion. He suggested Guilbeault and Trudeau were behaving like wounded narcissists. They were acting like egomaniacs who recognized their time in office was coming to an end and wanted to do as much as possible in the time they had left to pad their reputations as “do or die” climate warriors. They were striving to guarantee their legacies as planet-saving heroes.
They are probably both right. But Smith’s assessment speaks more directly to the practical challenges a new Conservative government will confront while trying to unwind the morass of legislation and regulations needlessly hampering the growth of environmentally responsible resource development in the west. It is an effort by the outgoing government to make their anti-oil legacy tamper proof.
Simply wading through the legislative quagmire and assessing where reform is most urgent and readily achievable will take time and effort. The wheels of parliament can turn slowly. No doubt some of the bureaucrats employed by the Liberals are true believers—frightened of the “impending climate apocalypse” and unlikely to expedite changes to environmental legislation and regulations. And, there could be multi-year contracts with consultants and other suppliers and long-term funding arrangements with companies and NGOs that will be difficult to unwind.
Let’s not forget the inevitable legal challenges that will threaten to hold up the reform process. Environmental groups and other special interests can be expected to use the courts to block efforts to reverse Liberal government policy. Ideally, the new government will cut off funding support for anti-oil environmental groups. Then at least supporters of the gas and petroleum sectors won’t be sued by activists funded with our tax dollars.
Then there are all the other important things governments are required to do and a limited amount of time to do them—drafting fiscally responsible budgets and dealing with the possibility of US tariffs on our exports come to mind as things near the top of the to-do list.
The highly anticipated Poilievre government may not be able to move as far and fast in reversing the Trudeau-Guilbeault legacy as we might like. They will face immense challenges and should be given a fair bit of slack if they can’t fix everything early in their first term.
*COP stands for Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The framework was adopted by the countries attending the UN sponsored Rio Earth Summit held at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992. The number in COP29 indicates it is the 29th annual post-Rio conference of the parties.
-
Health1 day ago
Ivermectin & Fenbendazole Cancer Secrets Revealed
-
International2 days ago
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni: ‘Soros, not Musk is the real threat to democracy’
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
Like Administrative Arson, California’s Bad Ideas Spread Like Wildfires
-
Brownstone Institute1 day ago
Big Pharma Continues to Hide the Truth
-
Addictions2 days ago
New lawsuit challenges Ontario’s decision to prohibit safe consumption services
-
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith visits Trump at Mar-a-Lago
-
Business9 hours ago
Biden goes after Facebook for eliminating ‘fact-checkers’: ‘Really shameful’
-
Business2 days ago
ESG Is Collapsing And Net Zero Is Going With It