Business
Does Income Inequality Matter?
Super-high income taxes don’t increase government revenues. But can taxes be “smart”?
Reducing poverty and its harms is among the most urgent responsibilities of any modern government. But despite the claims of some activists, this particular problem has no obvious and easy solution. I’m going to suggest that targeting income inequality in particular is a waste of time.
First of all, income in Canada is actually not all that unequal. Income inequality is often measured by the Gini Coefficient. A Gini score of zero would represent total income equality, where everyone earns exactly the same amount. A score of one (or, sometimes, 100) represents perfect inequality, meaning one person has all the income, and everyone else has none.
The Audit is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Statistics Canada data shows changes to the Gini Coefficient in Canada between 1976 and 2022:
Relatively speaking, those numbers are quite low and – when you ignore the weird COVID years – they also haven’t changed much since 1976. For comparison, the U.S. Gini coefficient in 2023 was 0.47, while (Communist!) China’s was 0.465 – both significantly higher than ours. The worst and best scores are, respectively, claimed by South Africa (.63) and Norway (.23).
But the real reason that talking about income inequality is an unnecessary distraction, is because there’s nothing you can do about it.
As I pointed out in a recent article, the 2 percent of Canadians whose assessed taxable incomes are above $250,000 contribute nearly 30 percent of all personal income tax revenue. They’re already clearly – and for the most part willingly – carrying far more than their share.
Ok. But why not slap the super-rich with a 90 percent marginal income tax? Well that’s been tried. The Beatles even recorded an angry song about it. But as far as I can tell, such taxes have always led to decreasing tax revenues. That’s because the people you’re targeting will either decide to earn less or simply move their businesses and assets to more tax-friendly countries – that often come with the added bonus of good weather.
If you’d ask me for my opinion, I’d say that the federal government could easily free up billions of dollars to address poverty by cutting waste. And a good first step in that direction would involve sharply decreasing the size of our bloated civil service.
How those extra funds could be better spent in a way that actually helps the poor isn’t a simple question. And it’s something you’d definitely want to get right on the first shot. Not to mention that some problems just can be solved with more money.
But in the unlikely event that you did find an expensive solution AND money freed up by new government efficiencies wasn’t enough, one might consider an intelligently designed wealth tax. Wealth taxes – which can take the form of property and estate taxes – have been used for centuries. The catch is that, if they’re poorly designed, they can be destructive. Just imagine a tax on real estate worth more than a million dollars that ends up wiping out seniors counting on the value of their homes to fund their retirements.
An OECD report from a few years back identifies a long list of developed countries whose wealth taxes largely failed to deliver significant revenue boosts. Those included Spain, Austria, Denmark, and Germany.
Norway, with a wealth tax worth as much as 1.5 percent of net wealth, was one of the report’s few success stories. But even they now seem to be having serious problems with compliance. Apparently, rich and industrious Norwegians are leaving the country in such high numbers that the government has imposed a punitive exit tax. I’m sure that’ll work out just great. (The Free Press recently published a piece on Norway’s problem.)
Nevertheless, if there is a universe where the words “smart” and “tax” can happily co-exist in a single sentence, then it’s more likely to work when you also find a way to include “wealth”, “balanced”, and “focused”.
The Audit is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Invite your friends and earn rewards
If you enjoy The Audit, share it with your friends and earn rewards when they subscribe.
From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
By Ryan Thorpe
Records obtained by the CTF show Clark’s lavish condo is just the tip of the iceberg, with the department dropping taxpayer cash on other luxury properties around the world.
Official residences in other countries: $38 million.
Properties in Afghanistan abandoned to the Taliban: $41 million.
Vacant land in Senegal: $12.5 million.
A chancery in Ukraine: $10.2 million.
Those are some of the holdings in Global Affairs Canada’s real estate portfolio, which has cost taxpayers $186 million in the past 10 years alone.
All told, Global Affairs Canada owns more than 400 properties in more than 70 countries, according to access-to-information records obtained by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.
“Do we really need the government dropping tens of millions of dollars on official residences half-way around the world?” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “Better question, does Senegal not have vacant land available for less than eight figures?
“With the government more than $1 trillion in debt, taxpayers need to know why the government is spending so much of our money overseas.”
Global Affairs Canada is embroiled in controversy after it purchased a $9-million luxury condo for New York Consul General Tom Clark amid a housing and cost-of-living crisis.
The records obtained by the CTF show Clark’s lavish condo is just the tip of the iceberg, with the department dropping taxpayer cash on other luxury properties around the world.
Global Affairs Canada has spent $38.4 million on official residences since 2014, including New Zealand ($2.4 million), Barbados ($3.8 million) and Trinidad and Tobago ($2.5 million), among others.
In London, U.K., Global Affairs Canada spent $58 million on 23 properties since 2015, all of which serve as “staff quarters,” according to the records. All told, Global Affairs Canada owns 65 properties in London purchased for $208 million.
In Kabul, Afghanistan, Global Affairs Canada spent $41 million on three properties in late 2018 and 2019, which have since been abandoned to the Taliban.
Prior to the first property in Kabul being purchased, the U.S. had already begun negotiations with the Taliban for an end to the Afghanistan War.
Seven months after Global Affairs Canada purchased the last property in Kabul, the U.S. struck a deal with the Taliban for the withdrawal of American troops from the country.
On Aug. 15, 2021, Canada pulled its presence from Afghanistan.
“We have … been unable to inspect the state of these properties since that date,” Global Affairs Canada told the CTF in a written statement.
In October 2021, the Globe and Mail reported that “Islamist militants now guard the former headquarters of Canada’s diplomatic mission in the Afghan capital.”
“This is a lot of taxpayers’ money to spend on new property in Afghanistan when our ally had already been clear it was preparing to leave,” Terrazzano said. “Canadian taxpayers are out $41 million and the Taliban now has new digs, so is anyone in government going to answer for the decision to purchase these properties?”
In Kyiv, Ukraine, Global Affairs Canada purchased a chancery for $10.2 million in 2017.
In Senegal, a country in West Africa, Global Affairs Canada bought $12.5 million worth of “vacant land” in 2022.
“Global Affairs Canada’s real estate portfolio is bloated and the taxpayer tab is ludicrous,” Terrazzano said. “Someone in government must explain what value taxpayers are supposedly getting for the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on all these lavish properties in far flung countries.
“And if Canadians aren’t getting real value, then it’s time to sell off properties so taxpayers can recoup some of this money.”
A GST holiday sounded like it might be a good thing, but it turned out to be a gimmick to distract us from more serious issues, writes Marco Navarro-Genie. Courtesy Ivanoh Demers/Radio-Canada
One more racket from a government that rules by racket
The Prime Minister’s proposed GST holiday and $250 rebate scheme, initially estimated at $6.2 billion, is yet another calculated ploy to distract Canadians from the ethical failures of his government. Though the rebate portion was abandoned in Parliament, the GST holiday remains a superficial gesture in a government-induced affordability crisis.
This tactic highlights the government’s willingness to appear generous (with our money) while burdening taxpayers with increased debt to mask corruption and maintain power.
At the heart of this deflection lies the Sustainable Development Technology Canada (SDTC) program, dubbed by critics as the “Green Slush Fund.”
The Auditor General recently revealed shocking improprieties within the program. The findings include that the federal ethics office reported at least 90 violations of ethics rules and nearly $400 million handed out to companies linked to SDTC board members. This gross misuse of public funds undermines the program’s goals of fostering green innovation, instead solidifying public skepticism about Ottawa’s ethical compass.
Efforts to hold the government accountable for its mismanagement have faced significant obstruction. Parliament has requested unredacted documents related to the scandal but has been met with resistance from the government. Trudeau’s administration has provided vague justifications for its refusal to comply, citing reasons such as protecting commercial confidentiality and national security.
The Speaker of the House, a Liberal MP, ruled that Parliament has the constitutional right to demand these documents. He ordered the government to release them unredacted. However, weeks have now passed, and the government continues its obstructionist tactics. Parliament has been stalled for weeks, effectively freezing legislative proceedings.
Under parliamentary rules, the House can halt all proceedings until the government complies with the Speaker’s ruling. However, the Speaker lacks direct enforcement power, leaving the opposition parties to hold the line. Last week, the government attempted to submit documents but presented them in a heavily redacted form, further eroding trust.
The standoff highlights the lengths the federal government will go to avoid transparency. By refusing to release the documents, the Liberals undermine Parliament’s authority and delay critical legislative work to protect themselves from scrutiny.
The two-month GST holiday passed with NDP support, removes the GST/HST from:
- Prepared foods: Items like pre-made meals and restaurant dining.
- Children’s essentials: Clothing, footwear, and diapers.
- Select gift items: Categories remain vaguely defined.
However, basic groceries are already GST-exempt. According to food policy expert Sylvain Charlebois, the average Canadian household will save only a few dollars. This gesture is hardly a windfall in the context of surging inflation and housing costs — driven mainly by the government’s policies.
The fundamental aim of the GST holiday is not economic relief but political manipulation. By framing the Conservatives’ refusal to pass the broader $6.2 billion package as heartless, the government seeks to paint the Official Opposition as the Grinch who stole Christmas.
Liberal MPs have already taken to social media to attack the Conservatives for “denying Canadians a tax break.”
The government seems silent about the fact that the Bloc Quebecois also voted against the tax gimmick. Meanwhile, the NDP has shown a willingness to facilitate this naked vote-buying bid, further eroding its credibility as an opposition party.
The Conservatives have remained steadfast, demanding full transparency on the SDTC scandal before regular proceedings in the House can resume. This stance, however, has allowed the Liberals to weaponize affordability relief as a wedge issue.
The GST holiday’s costs, like most federal spending under this government, will disproportionately fall on Alberta, Saskatchewan, and British Columbia. These three provinces already bear the brunt of federal revenue extraction through resource wealth, only to see their contributions funnelled into vote-rich areas of central Canada to prop up an increasingly unpopular government. The move further stokes resentment in the West, damaging national unity.
How this standoff will resolve is anyone’s guess. The government appears content to drag its feet, betting that public fatigue will weaken opposition resolve. Yet it remains clear that Liberals are willing to misspend billions in borrowed money to hide how they’ve misused hundreds of millions on partisan rewards and cronies. This cynical strategy prioritizes the political survival of their arrangement with the NDP over fiscal responsibility and democratic accountability.
For democracy to function, Parliament must assert its supremacy, hold this minority government to account, and ensure transparency in the face of systemic corruption and mismanagement. The NDP’s collaboration with the offenders may make it impossible, however. Allowing the government to defy Parliament and the Speaker’s ruling sets a dangerous precedent, weakening the foundations of Canadian democracy.
Marco Navarro-Genie is VP Policy and Research at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. He is co-author, with Barry Cooper, of COVID-19: The Politics of a Pandemic Moral Panic (2020).
What did Canada Ever Do to Draw Trump Tariff on Immigration, You Ask? Plenty
Andy McCarthy Says Hunter Biden Was Pardoned On Charges That ‘No American’ Would Catch A Break On
Congressional Committee Condemns (Nearly) Every Feature of the Covid Response
Restoring balance between renewable energy, agricultural land and Alberta’s iconic viewscapes
-
Alberta2 days agoProvince “rewiring” Alberta’s electricity grid for growth
-
COVID-192 days agoIs FDA ‘covering for Pfizer’? Court orders agency to release a million more pages of COVID vaccines documents
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days agoWill Trump’s Second Chance Bring Justice for Edward Snowden?
-
National2 days agoCanadian mayor has bank account garnished after standing up to LGBT activists
-
Brownstone Institute2 days agoFreedumb, You Say?
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days agoMeta’s Re-Education Era Begins
-
Daily Caller1 day agoDaniel Penny Stands By His Actions, Says He’d Face Court ‘Million’ Times To Save Others
-
International1 day agoTalk of ‘pre-emptive pardons’ sets the stage for Trump to drain the Washington swamp