Business
Trudeau hiking taxes again in 2024
From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
Author: Franco Terrazzano
Brace for impact, taxpayers.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will be reaching deeper into your pockets in the new year with payroll tax hikes, a carbon tax hike and alcohol tax hikes.
Canadians will be paying higher payroll taxes because of the mandatory rising Canada Pension Plan and Employment Insurance contributions.
If you make $73,200 or more, you’ll be paying an extra $347 in payroll taxes in 2024, for a total tax bill of $5,104.
Your employer will also be forced to fork over $5,524 in the new year.
The federal government is imposing a new tax, which it calls “CPP2.” The original CPP taxes your income at six per cent up to $68,500. The new CPP2 expands that threshold and taxes additional income at four per cent up to $73,200.
Trudeau likes to claim he’s “working to make life more affordable.” But he’s also hiking a tax that directly makes life more expensive: the carbon tax.
The carbon tax increases the price of gasoline, diesel and home heating fuels, which is a big deal in our vast, cold country. The carbon tax also makes groceries more expensive, as it increases costs for the farmers who grow our food and the truckers who deliver it.
The carbon tax will cost the average family up to $911 in 2024 even after the rebates, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer.
The feds are also scheming up a digital services tax. This new tax targets social media platforms, companies operating digital marketplaces, and businesses earning revenue from online advertising, such as Amazon, Google, Facebook, Uber and Airbnb.
Consumers should expect to pay higher prices because of the tax. When faced with the three per cent DST in France, Amazon increased its commission charge to French vendors by the same amount.
You could be forgiven if all these tax hikes drive you to drink.
But when you pick up that case of Blue, a bottle of pinot or a mickey of rum, Trudeau will be taking an extra 4.7 per cent from you through his alcohol tax hikes.
Next year’s federal alcohol tax hike is expected to cost taxpayers almost $100 million.
Taxes in Canada already account for about half of the price of beer, 65 per cent of the price of wine and more than three quarters of the price of spirits.
While Trudeau hikes taxes, many other countries are providing relief.
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation identified 51 national governments that provided tax relief during the pandemic or to ease the burdens of inflation. Those governments include more than half of the G7 and G20 countries and two-thirds of the countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Provincial governments – of all political stripes – are also providing relief.
Manitoba’s NDP government is suspending its fuel tax in the new year. Gas tax relief from Ontario’s Progressive Conservatives will save a family with a minivan and pick-up truck about $185 through June 2024. And the Liberals in Newfoundland and Labrador cut their gas tax by eight cents per litre.
The Alberta government promised to cut personal income taxes and passed legislation requiring a vote before a government can increase income or business taxes. Manitoba’s income tax cuts could save an individual taxpayer more than $2,000. Quebec lowered its income tax rate on the first two brackets. New Brunswick implemented significant income tax relief in 2023. And Prince Edward Island’s income tax cut will save middle-class taxpayers up to $200.
The fastest, simplest and easiest way for Trudeau to make all areas of life more affordable is to ditch his high-tax policies and allow Canadians to keep more of our money.
Business
Canadians should understand costs of Ottawa’s Emissions Reduction Plan
From the Fraser Institute
By Julio Mejía and Elmira Aliakbari
On its first day in office, the Trump administration withdrew from the Paris climate agreement and began a regulation effort aimed largely at the energy sector. Meanwhile, the Trudeau government wants to reduce Canada’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by at least 40 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 to satisfy its commitment to the Paris agreement that Trudeau signed back in 2016.
But far from “building a strong economy” and making Canada “more competitive,” as the government claims, its Emissions Reduction Plan (ERP) will hurt Canada’s already struggling economy while failing to meet its own emission reduction targets.
In essence, the ERP has two components. The first one, and probably the most well-known to Canadians, is the carbon tax, which places a cost on fossil fuel use based on the amount of GHG emissions produced. The tax increased to $80 per tonne on April 1, 2024 and is scheduled to reach $170 per tonne by 2030.
The second—and least discussed—ERP component is the Trudeau government’s cascade of regulatory measures and mandates including requirements for fuel producers and importers to reduce the carbon content of their fuels, and electric vehicle mandates that require all new (light-duty) vehicles sold to be zero-emission by 2035 (with interim targets of 20 per cent by 2026 and 60 per cent by 2030). Additional measures include restrictions on fertilizer use in agriculture, emissions caps in the oil and gas industry, energy efficiency mandates for buildings, and more. With more regulations come increased costs to producers, and these costs are largely passed to consumers in the form of higher prices.
But aside from vague and unsupported claims that the ERP will strengthen the economy, the government hasn’t provided a detailed assessment of the plan’s costs and benefits. In other words, while the government has outlined how it plans to reduce emissions—carbon taxes, regulations, mandates—we still don’t know how much these policies will cost or how they will benefit Canadians.
But a recent study published by the Fraser Institute evaluate the economic and environmental impacts of the ERP.
According to the study’s projections, the carbon tax alone will cost $1,302 per worker annually by 2030, reduce employment by an estimated 57,000 jobs, and shrink the Canadian economy by 1.5 per cent compared to a scenario without the ERP. Considering that the economy grew just by 1.3 per cent in 2023, this cost is significant.
After you account for the ERP’s additional regulatory measures and mandates, the economic cost rises. By 2030, the full implementation of the ERP—which includes the carbon tax, regulatory measures and mandates—will shrink the economy by 6.2 per cent, cost Canadian workers $6,700 annually, and reduce employment by 164,000 jobs. Alberta, of course, will bear a large portion of these costs.
To make matters worse, the ERP will still fall short of the Trudeau government’s 2030 emission-reduction target. According to the study, the ERP will reduce Canada’s GHG emissions by about 26.5 per cent between 2019 and 2030, achieving only approximately 57 per cent of the government’s target. In short, Trudeau’s climate plan won’t deliver the economic growth or environmental impact the government anticipates.
Canadians should understand the costs of the Trudeau government’s Emissions Reduction Plan (ERP), which won’t achieve its targets while making Canadians worse-off. Any government should reject climate targets and policies where Canadians are merely an afterthought.
Business
Oil may be exempt from Trump Tariffs as Trump says oil “has nothing to do with it”
From LifeSiteNews
Trump to impose 25% tariffs on Canada, Mexico this Saturday
U.S. President Donald Trump has confirmed that he will implement 25% tariffs on all imports from Canada and Mexico this Saturday.
During a January 30 interview, Trump announced that, beginning February 1, he will impose 25% tariffs on all imports from Canada and Mexico while Canada’s Parliament remains suspended thanks to an order by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
“Number one is the people that have poured into our country so horribly and so much,” Trump told media. “Number two are the drugs, fentanyl, and everything else that have come into the country; and, number three are the massive subsidies that we’re giving to Canada and to Mexico in the form of deficits.”
It’s unclear if Canada’s oil will be exempt from the tariff as Trump told reporters that oil “has nothing to do with it.”
Trump’s tariffs aim to force Canada and Mexico to take serious action against illegal drug smuggling and immigration which occurs at their borders.
Initially, the tariff was to take effect on his first day of office, January 20, but was postponed until February 1, leaving Canadians under two weeks to respond to his demands.
However, because Trudeau prorogued Parliament until March 24, little action has been taken by Canadian politicians to respond to Trump’s threats.
Trudeau, who is slated to resign once a new Liberal leader is selected, has told Canadians that Liberals are considering all options, including retaliatory tariffs.
“We will not hesitate to act,” Trudeau said at a meeting of the Council on Canada-U.S. Relations on January 17. “We will respond and, I will say it again, everything is on the table.”
Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre has demanded that Trudeau immediately reconvene Parliament on an “emergency” basis so Canada can deal with the looming tariffs.
“Canada is facing a critical challenge. On February 1st we are facing the risk of unjustified 25% tariffs by our largest trading partner that would have damaging consequences across our country,” wrote Poilievre in a news release Tuesday.
Meanwhile, polls have revealed that 77 percent of Canadians want an immediate election to deal with the tariff threat.
Ontario Premier Doug Ford has done just that, calling a snap election to take place on February 27. The election, according to Ford, allows him to secure a new “four-year” mandate from Ontario voters to respond to Trump’s tariffs.
News that the tariffs are to take effect also come after Trump has repeatedly suggested that he would like to annex Canada and make the country the “51st state” of America.
While Trump’s comments were initially passed over as a joke or trolling, Trump has persistently referred to Canada as the “51st state” and even threatened to use “economic force” to overtake Canada.
Trump claimed that there is a $200 billion trade deficit between Canada and the U.S. regarding spending on “subsidies” and the fact that the U.S. military is there to also “protect Canada.”
Just last week, Trump told the World Economic Forum (WEF), “We love Canada, but they might be better off as part of the United States.” He made the comments to suggest that Canada, as a way of avoiding the tariffs he is threatening, should just up and join the United States.
Trump’s repeated threats have drawn the ire of many Canadians, who boldly tell the president that Canada will remain its own country. Others have warned that the move to annex Canada would bring about the beginning of a one-world government.
Conservative Party of Canada leader Pierre Poilievre, who is likely to become prime minister in the next election, has had choice words for Trump. He has said Canada will “never” become a U.S. “state.”
“We are a great and independent country,” he continued. “We are the best friend to the U.S. We spent billions of dollars and hundreds of lives helping Americans retaliate against Al-Qaeda’s 9/11 attacks. We supply the U.S. with billions of dollars of high-quality and totally reliable energy well below market prices. We buy hundreds of billions of dollars of American goods.”
-
Brownstone Institute2 days ago
Information Disorder Syndrome
-
Business2 days ago
No matter who’s in charge, Canadians want to ‘Axe the Tax’ immediately
-
Business2 days ago
Long Ignored Criminal Infiltration of Canadian Ports Lead Straight to Trump Tariffs
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
Pipelines and Energy Top Priorities for Trump’s Interior Secretary
-
Alberta2 days ago
CBC watchdog accuses outlet of biased coverage of Catholic school trustee opposing LGBT agenda
-
National1 day ago
BC high school scraps gender-neutral bathroom plan after parental outrage
-
Business1 day ago
Canada holds valuable bargaining chip in trade negotiations with Trump
-
Alberta2 days ago
With $15 a day flat rate, Alberta transitions to publicly funded child care