Connect with us

Business

It’s time to supersize charitable tax credits, not political ones

Published

5 minute read

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

By Jay Goldberg

Are political parties more valuable than charities?

You’d be hard pressed to find a single Canadian that thinks so, but that’s how they’re treated under today’s tax system.

The way tax credits are handed out in Canada needs to be revamped. The system is broken, both federally and provincially. It’s time to stop giving big tax credits for political donations. Instead, let’s give tax breaks to folks when they donate to charity.

Consider this present-day scenario.

Last year, Sally donated $250 to the Conservative Party of Canada and another $250 to Save the Children. Jim donated $250 to the Ontario Liberals and another $250 to the Make a Wish Foundation.

When tax time came, the federal government let Sally use both her donations to lower her tax bill.

But one donation counted a lot more against Sally’s tax bill than the other. And it’s not the one that you might think.

For the Save the Children donation, Sally’s $250 donation netted a $44.50 credit towards her tax bill. The province added in another $15.90. That means she will get $60.40 back at tax time.

How about her political contribution?

Because it was a federal political party donation, Sally only received a federal tax credit. But the feds will give her back $187.50 when she files her taxes.

In other words, the amount Sally gets back from donating to a political party is three times as much as her donation to charity.

For those paying income tax, the tax credit situation for a $250 donation, both to charities and political parties, is identical at the provincial level.

Jim gets $60.40 back at tax time from his charitable donation and $187.50 from Queen’s Park for his provincial political donation.

That means the money Jim gets back from his provincial political donation, like Sally’s at the federal level, is three times larger than what he gets back for donating to charity.

On what sane planet should both the feds and Queen’s Park be giving out tax credits for political donations so much more generous than tax credits for making donations to charity?

Making a terminally ill child’s wishes come true should be valued more than helping politicians pay for political attack ads.

Canada’s provincial and federal governments should take funds that go toward tax credits for political donations and reallocate them to tax credits for charitable donations. Credits for political donations should be scrapped.

Tax credits exist to try to encourage behaviour. The whole idea behind it is that if you give folks a bit of a financial incentive to make a donation, they’ll be more likely to do so.

That makes sense when it comes to charities. It’s a worthy policy goal to have a tax credit in place to encourage Canadians to make donations to organizations that work to make a meaningful difference in people’s lives.

But why should taxpayers be incentivizing donations to political parties? Why encourage Canadians to shell out money that will end up paying for leaflets, lawn signs and attack ads?

Some try to justify the tax credit regime by arguing that because political parties can’t take corporate or union donations, they need help encouraging individuals to make donations.

But ask anyone on the street, and they’ll tell you it’s charitable donations, not political ones, that should be encouraged.

If political parties can’t raise as much money without the tax credit, they should just spend less money. No one is going to shed tears over seeing fewer attack ads on television.

The sole goal of a political party is to get themselves elected. Why should they get credits of up to 75 per cent while charitable donations get trivial treatment?

It’s time to stop treating political parties like charities on steroids. That means putting political donation tax credits on the chopping block. Instead, the same money can and should be used to supersize tax credits for charitable donations.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Automotive

Michigan could be a winner as companies pull back from EVs

Published on

From The Center Square

By 

Federal deregulation and tax credit cuts are reshaping the auto industry, as Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Co. scale back electric vehicle production and redirect billions into hybrids and traditional gas-powered cars.

Yet, the Michigan automotive industry could see increased investments from those same companies as they reallocate that funding.

While both Ford and GM previously announced ambitious targets to expand electric vehicle fleets over the next decade, they are now cutting back on electric vehicle production.

That comes in response to federal deregulation of gas-powered vehicles, tax credit cuts, and the prospect of slowing consumer demand.

In August, Ford stated it was canceling plans to build a new electric three-row SUV. Instead, it is turning its focus to hybrid vehicles, including a massive $5 billon investment into a new “affordable” hybrid truck.

GM announced similar plans earlier this month. It will be cutting back electric vehicle production at Kansas and Tennessee plants, anticipating a decline in demand once federal tax credits end Sept. 30.

This all could have a real impact on the electric vehicle industry across the nation and experts are already anticipating that.

A new forecast by Ernst & Young Global Limited now predicts a five-year delay in electric vehicles making up 50% of the new car marketshare. While previous forecasts predicted America would reach that mark by 2034, the new forecast pushed that back to 2039.

“The U.S. faces policy uncertainty, high costs, and infrastructure gaps,” said Constantin M. Gall, the company’s global aerospace defense and mobility leader.

Clean energy advocacy groups are decrying this move away from electric vehicle initiatives, largely blaming the Trump administration.

“The transition to electric vehicles now faces significant roadblocks,” said Ecology Center in an April report. “The Trump administration has rolled back key policies supporting clean transportation.”

It also pointed to a nationwide deregulation of the gas-powered vehicle industry for allowing those to remain “dominant” over electric vehicles.

“These actions prioritize fossil fuels over clean energy, threatening progress toward a sustainable transportation future,” the report stated.

While bad news for electric vehicle supporters, the Michigan automotive industry could be a winner as companies re-shift focus back to gas-powered and hybrid vehicles.

With billions of dollars previously allocated to federal pollution fines and electric vehicle costs now available for investment, GM now plans to increase production at a Detroit-area plant by 2027.

The Michigan-based company also recently announced plans to invest billions into another Michigan plant in Lake Orion Township.

For similar reasons, Ford’s CEO Jim Farley told analysts that the company anticipates monetary savings “has the potential to unlock a multibillion-dollar opportunity over the next two years.”

While Gov. Gretchen Whitmer has long been a proponent for the electric vehicle industry, she did recently emphasize her support for all Michigan-based manufacturing, no matter the type.

“We don’t care what you drive – gas, diesel, hybrid, or electric – as long as it’s made in Michigan,” she said following the GM Orion announcement. “Together, let’s keep bringing manufacturing home, growing the middle class, and making more stuff in Michigan.”

Elyse Apel is a reporter for The Center Square covering Colorado and Michigan. A graduate of Hillsdale College, Elyse’s writing has been published in a wide variety of national publications from the Washington Examiner to The American Spectator and The Daily Wire.

Continue Reading

Business

Deportations causing delays in US construction industry

Published on

From The Center Square

By 

The Trump administration’s immigration policies are leading to worker shortages and delayed projects across the construction industry, according to a new report.

A survey conducted in July and August by the Associated Contractors of America and the National Center for Construction Education and Research found more than one in four respondents said their firms were affected by increased immigration enforcement in the past six months.

Respondents said increased immigration enforcement is making it more difficult for firms to recruit workers. Ten percent of firms reported using the H-2B visa program, which is used for recruiting nonagricultural foreign workers, to recruit salaried and hourly workers.

Congress set the cap for H-2B visa allowances at 66,000 in fiscal year 2026. The program offers temporary work for the first and second halves of the year to foreign employees.

Jordan Fischetti, an immigration policy fellow with Americans for Prosperity, said government allowances for visa programs do not meet the demand of the current workforce.

“Immigration for a long time has been centrally planned, so there’s just not a very strong appetite for letting the market do its work,” Fischetti said.

The report found 83% of firms with craft worker openings reported that positions are hard to fill or harder to fill than one year ago. Eighty-four percent of firms with openings for salaried workers also reported it was hard or harder to fill positions than one year ago.

Five percent of respondents reported their jobsites or work sites were visited by immigration agents and 10% said workers did not report or quit due to rumored immigration enforcement allegations.

Contractors in Georgia, Virginia, Alabama, Nebraska and South Carolina were more likely to be impacted by immigration enforcement, according to the report.

The report found worker shortages were the most commonly listed reason for project delays. Two-thirds of firms reported at least one project in the last six months was postponed, canceled or scaled back. The survey took into account more than 1,300 individuals across various contracting and construction firms.

Michele Waslin, assistant director of the University of Minnesota’s immigration history research center, said the construction and agricultural industries have been deeply affected by the Trump administration’s immigration policies.

“Some businesses really do have a labor shortage, and they’re unable to hire American workers, and they want to hire foreign workers and it’s not that easy to do in many cases,” Waslin said.

A separate poll commissioned by The Center Square found 85% of registered voters think it is either somewhat or very important to create legal pathways for construction workers to live and work in the United States.

The poll, conducted by RMG Research in conjunction with Neapolitan News Service, surveyed 1,000 registered voters in August and found vast agreement across partisan lines, age and race in its support for legal pathways in construction.

Fischetti said both employers and the American public have expressed interest in allowing more flexibility in the immigration system and he wants to see Congress modernize in response.

“We really need to work on providing pathways,” Fischetti said. “I don’t just mean pathways to legalization, pathways to certainty.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X