42

Harper promises tax cut for families

Income splitting would allow parents to pay lower taxes


 

Stephen Harper unveiled plans for a new tax break while campaigning in the Victoria-area riding of Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca on Monday that would allow parents with children under 18 to split their income. Letting married couples with children to split their income would allow a spouse in a higher tax bracket to shift income to their partner with lower earnings to reduce the rate of taxation. The catch is the cut won’t take effect until the deficit has been eliminated, which the Conservatives say won’t happen until 2015-2016. Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff dismissed the pledge, saying it lacked credibility: “It’s like you come to a family and say, ‘I’ve got good news. First, I’m going to cut taxes for the biggest and most profitable corporations in the country and then maybe in five years, if you take a ticket and you’re patient and you vote for us a couple of times, [then] we’ll do something for you’.”

The Globe and Mail


 
Filed under:

Harper promises tax cut for families

  1. I have a family and I want part of the 6 billion break to business, 9 Billion for prisons and the 30 Billion for fighter jets. His nickles and dimes are worthless! Gimme some BUCKS!!!!

  2. I have a family and I want part of the 6 billion break to business, 9 Billion for prisons and the 30 Billion for fighter jets. His nickles and dimes are worthless! Gimme some BUCKS!!!!

    • I can’t agree more. I’m in a position to benefit from such a tax cut — WERE IT EVER TO HAPPEN — but I am only annoyed by this flurry of “boutique” tax cuts that are only there to flood the news and keep the opposition busy, responding to them. Harper is a consummate, intelligent liar, in a completely different league from past politicians. I’d even take a tax hike for the good of this country … but not while corporations are being showered with tax cuts, which the last six years have shown do NOTHING to increase investment or jobs. (sorry for all the caps).

  3. That's the spirit. Make those single-parent families PAY!

    It would make more sense if single parents were allowed to double their personal deductions — so that the tax rate on their families would be the same as on a two-parent family with the same income.

  4. That's the spirit. Make those single-parent families PAY!

    It would make more sense if single parents were allowed to double their personal deductions — so that the tax rate on their families would be the same as on a two-parent family with the same income.

    • Unless one of the parents is dead, there are stil two parents and therefore two sets of tax deductions, whether together or not. But I do see where you're going, and it leaves room for consideration; there should be something there for parents who would not be eligible for income-splitting.

      Of course, if your children are older than 13 and you don't plan to have more, it's a useless proposition anyway.

      • The current tax structure punishes families with one bread winner. Income splitting puts families with one bread winner on par with single parent families.

        • You've lost me there. Two familes with the same gross income, one a '50s-traditional family with one working and one stay-at-home spouse; one a single parent/breadwinner. First family gets to split income to reduce the tax bracket and pay less taxes; the single parent doesn't.

          If this puts them on an equal footing, I'm darned if I can see it. But then, I readily admit I don't know that much about the various tax structures, loopholes, etc – I just punch the numbers into my software and it spits out the refund value. So please, expand on your premise…

          • Alright. There are two families with one child both earning $50, 000. One is a single parent family the other is a family with two parents, one is the breadwinner.

            The single parent supports one adult and one child with their various expenses. The current structure allows the single parent to claim their child as a spouse.

            The household with one breadwinner supports two adults and a child with their various expenses. The current structure allows the breadwinner to claim his/her partner as a spouse.

            The present structure allows both families the same tax break even though the two parent one breadwinner has to stretch their income farther than the single parent.

            Income splitting for the family with one breadwinner acknowledges that the $50, 000 is being split between the expenses of two individuals and a child. In reality this family is bringing home less than a family with two working parents who earn $25, 000 each, which would be classified as low-income.

            What I'd be interested to know is if the single parent who claims their child as a spouse will be able to split their income with the child.

          • Interesting – I had no idea a single parent could claim a child as a "spouse". But I still can't see how this gives a real advantage to the single-parent family over a single-income family with a stay-at-home spouse; both get to claim for the spouse / "spouse", correct?

            If you're referring to the total aggregate # of people, then shouldn't you compare the traditional family with one child to a single parent with two children (one claimed as "spouse")? Three people apiece.

  5. Unless one of the parents is dead, there are stil two parents and therefore two sets of tax deductions, whether together or not. But I do see where you're going, and it leaves room for consideration; there should be something there for parents who would not be eligible for income-splitting.

    Of course, if your children are older than 13 and you don't plan to have more, it's a useless proposition anyway.

  6. Yeah right, 5 years down the road… DUH !!

  7. Yeah right, 5 years down the road… DUH !!

  8. The current tax structure punishes families with one bread winner. Income splitting puts families with one bread winner on par with single parent families.

  9. Income splitting is good news for my family. I look forward to its implementation.

  10. Income splitting is good news for my family. I look forward to its implementation.

    • Will you still be able to take advantage five years from now? I'm just curious, and not trying to be snarky.

      • My son is 13 months. I'll be able to take advantage of it for at least a decade.

        • I'm sorry. I'm trying to keep up without having the time to keep up. So I gathered (without looking at the links) that this income splitting lasts for six years, although the start and end date can be of your choosing. I'd appreciate knowing if that is not the case.

  11. You've lost me there. Two familes with the same gross income, one a '50s-traditional family with one working and one stay-at-home spouse; one a single parent/breadwinner. First family gets to split income to reduce the tax bracket and pay less taxes; the single parent doesn't.

    If this puts them on an equal footing, I'm darned if I can see it. But then, I readily admit I don't know that much about the various tax structures, loopholes, etc – I just punch the numbers into my software and it spits out the refund value. So please, expand on your premise…

  12. I can’t agree more. I’m in a position to benefit from such a tax cut — WERE IT EVER TO HAPPEN — but I am only annoyed by this flurry of “boutique” tax cuts that are only there to flood the news and keep the opposition busy, responding to them. Harper is a consummate, intelligent liar, in a completely different league from past politicians. I’d even take a tax hike for the good of this country … but not while corporations are being showered with tax cuts, which the last six years have shown do NOTHING to increase investment or jobs. (sorry for all the caps).

  13. Good idea, reasonably implemented.

  14. Good idea, reasonably implemented.

  15. What about couples that are not married? Will they get the same benefit?

  16. What about couples that are not married? Will they get the same benefit?

    • common law parents are taxed the same as married parents…. single parents are allowed to use a child as a spouse on the income tax

  17. common law parents are taxed the same as married parents…. single parents are allowed to use a child as a spouse on the income tax

  18. Alright. There are two families with one child both earning $50, 000. One is a single parent family the other is a family with two parents, one is the breadwinner.

    The single parent supports one adult and one child with their various expenses. The current structure allows the single parent to claim their child as a spouse.

    The household with one breadwinner supports two adults and a child with their various expenses. The current structure allows the breadwinner to claim his/her partner as a spouse.

    The present structure allows both families the same tax break even though the two parent one breadwinner has to stretch their income farther than the single parent.

    Income splitting for the family with one breadwinner acknowledges that the $50, 000 is being split between the expenses of two individuals and a child. In reality this family is bringing home less than a family with two working parents who earn $25, 000 each, which would be classified as low-income.

    What I'd be interested to know is if the single parent who claims their child as a spouse will be able to split their income with the child.

  19. It's an interesting idea but tax cuts should always come with an estimate of lost government revenues.

  20. It's an interesting idea but tax cuts should always come with an estimate of lost government revenues.

    • CBC Radio One said something like a cost of about $2 billion and that income splitting would apply to roughly 1.5 million Canadians.

  21. CBC Radio One said something like a cost of about $2 billion and that income splitting would apply to roughly 1.5 million Canadians.

  22. Will you still be able to take advantage five years from now? I'm just curious, and not trying to be snarky.

  23. Interesting – I had no idea a single parent could claim a child as a "spouse". But I still can't see how this gives a real advantage to the single-parent family over a single-income family with a stay-at-home spouse; both get to claim for the spouse / "spouse", correct?

    If you're referring to the total aggregate # of people, then shouldn't you compare the traditional family with one child to a single parent with two children (one claimed as "spouse")? Three people apiece.

  24. When the deficit is eliminated!? You mean when he 11 freezes over.

    Does anyone remember the whopper told by Flaherty when he was finance minister for Harris. You know – the multi-billion $ surprise. He may as well be promising rainbows and unicorns….

  25. When the deficit is eliminated!? You mean when he 11 freezes over.

    Does anyone remember the whopper told by Flaherty when he was finance minister for Harris. You know – the multi-billion $ surprise. He may as well be promising rainbows and unicorns….

  26. My son is 13 months. I'll be able to take advantage of it for at least a decade.

  27. I'm sorry. I'm trying to keep up without having the time to keep up. So I gathered (without looking at the links) that this income splitting lasts for six years, although the start and end date can be of your choosing. I'd appreciate knowing if that is not the case.

  28. The Guardian had it right in their 2008 article entitled "THE CANADIAN NIXON"
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/apr/

    And this was written BEFORE the Liar was found in CONTEMPT OF PARLIAMENT (Nixon was found in Contempt of Congress under Article 3)

  29. The Guardian had it right in their 2008 article entitled "THE CANADIAN NIXON"
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/apr/

    And this was written BEFORE the Liar was found in CONTEMPT OF PARLIAMENT (Nixon was found in Contempt of Congress under Article 3)

  30. Austerity plan has not reached Canada yet eh?

  31. Austerity plan has not reached Canada yet eh?

Sign in to comment.