Comments on: Another Tory Tax Cut http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/another-tory-tax-cut/ Helping you invest and prosper Sat, 11 Feb 2012 19:27:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Ranting against RRSPs | MoneySense http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/another-tory-tax-cut/#comment-404739 Ranting against RRSPs | MoneySense Wed, 02 Feb 2011 14:06:35 +0000 http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/?p=330#comment-404739 [...] Another Tory Tax Cut [...] [...] Another Tory Tax Cut [...]

]]> By: Canadian Capitalist » This and That http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/another-tory-tax-cut/#comment-12078 Canadian Capitalist » This and That Mon, 13 Nov 2006 06:46:06 +0000 http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/?p=330#comment-12078 [...] Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said today that cutting capital gains tax “is not easy to do”. If you recall, the Tories made a rash promise to eliminate capital gains tax if profits are reinvested within six months. [...] [...] Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said today that cutting capital gains tax “is not easy to do”. If you recall, the Tories made a rash promise to eliminate capital gains tax if profits are reinvested within six months. [...]

]]> By: Canadian Capitalist http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/another-tory-tax-cut/#comment-519 Canadian Capitalist Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:53:14 +0000 http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/?p=330#comment-519 The debate on RRSP vs. non-RRSP has already started in Rob Carrick's <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20060117/RCAPGAINS17/TPBusiness/TopStories" rel="nofollow">column </a> in <em>The Globe and Mail</em>. The debate on RRSP vs. non-RRSP has already started in Rob Carrick’s column in The Globe and Mail.

]]> By: K http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/another-tory-tax-cut/#comment-512 K Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:12:01 +0000 http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/?p=330#comment-512 The PC's are describing this as a deferral of taxes. However, for the wealthy, this should be a deferral of taxes until the end of time (as the word on the street is that inheritances can also be re-invested tax free). I'm interested in the impact on flow through funds and income trusts. I'd think to prevent having our cake and eating it too, there'd have to be significant changes in their taxation. Good for me? Yes. Good for the average Cdn? I don't think so. The PC’s are describing this as a deferral of taxes. However, for the wealthy, this should be a deferral of taxes until the end of time (as the word on the street is that inheritances can also be re-invested tax free).
I’m interested in the impact on flow through funds and income trusts. I’d think to prevent having our cake and eating it too, there’d have to be significant changes in their taxation.
Good for me? Yes. Good for the average Cdn? I don’t think so.

]]> By: Canadian Capitalist http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/another-tory-tax-cut/#comment-508 Canadian Capitalist Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:49:47 +0000 http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/?p=330#comment-508 Toronto Star says "<a href="http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1137193811805&call_pageid=968350072197&col=969048863851" rel="nofollow">Tax Deferral plan cheered</a>". Toronto Star says “Tax Deferral plan cheered“.

]]> By: Canadian Capitalist http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/another-tory-tax-cut/#comment-507 Canadian Capitalist Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:08:53 +0000 http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/?p=330#comment-507 Dave: The budget for the past number of years already had a surplus built in - the so called contingency fund of $3 billion. The overestimation of the surplus was over and above that. And at the end of the year, the federal government says "oops. we collected so much more" and then goes and spends a large part of it in the next budget. Drives me nuts as the surplus is nothing more than overtaxation. Dave: The budget for the past number of years already had a surplus built in – the so called contingency fund of $3 billion. The overestimation of the surplus was over and above that. And at the end of the year, the federal government says “oops. we collected so much more” and then goes and spends a large part of it in the next budget. Drives me nuts as the surplus is nothing more than overtaxation.

]]> By: Dave http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/another-tory-tax-cut/#comment-506 Dave Sat, 14 Jan 2006 08:06:15 +0000 http://www.canadiancapitalist.com/?p=330#comment-506 Well, it will still be better to invest the maximum allowable into an RRSP for the deduction it generates... I think the Gummy Stuff website has some pretty detailed equations for the RRSP vs. non-RRSP stuff; they could be modified. But I'm getting ahead of myself, the Conservatives aren't even elected... By the way, I kind of like the underestimation of the surplus. I don't know how they underestimate it, by being "sneaky," or by just making conservative estimates for government revenue and so forth. I mean isn't it better to underestimate your revenue and overestimate your spending? That would be the only way to maintain a consistently balanced budget in my mind. But if they do some "sneaky" fiddling with the numbers to create these "surprises" just for attention, then that is wrong. Well, it will still be better to invest the maximum allowable into an RRSP for the deduction it generates… I think the Gummy Stuff website has some pretty detailed equations for the RRSP vs. non-RRSP stuff; they could be modified. But I’m getting ahead of myself, the Conservatives aren’t even elected…

By the way, I kind of like the underestimation of the surplus. I don’t know how they underestimate it, by being “sneaky,” or by just making conservative estimates for government revenue and so forth. I mean isn’t it better to underestimate your revenue and overestimate your spending? That would be the only way to maintain a consistently balanced budget in my mind. But if they do some “sneaky” fiddling with the numbers to create these “surprises” just for attention, then that is wrong.

]]>