Author Topic: Has B.C. crossed the Rubicon ?  (Read 1478 times)

deadspace

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 105
Has B.C. crossed the Rubicon ?
« on: June 10, 2018, 02:57:54 PM »
It was once the widespread belief of citizens in this country that the taxation of assets was off limits
This may no longer be the case

THis should be on everyones radar  -- its a relatively benign way to start off a process that could lead to a class war
After all - is that cash in your bank account off limits ?   Not many have the savings you do -- why cant you give a little bit more to help out ?


http://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/elizabeth-murphy-b-c-taxes-need-a-second-look


EliG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 411
Re: Has B.C. crossed the Rubicon ?
« Reply #1 on: June 10, 2018, 03:53:38 PM »
It was once the widespread belief of citizens in this country that the taxation of assets was off limits

I have two words for you.

property taxes

netnet

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 919
Re: Has B.C. crossed the Rubicon ?
« Reply #2 on: June 10, 2018, 03:57:25 PM »
two more words:

estate taxes

rb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
Re: Has B.C. crossed the Rubicon ?
« Reply #3 on: June 10, 2018, 05:54:33 PM »
There is no estate tax in Canada. But yes, property taxes are a form of capital taxes. Also not until long ago we had corporate capital taxes. So I don't think there's really a rubicon there to be crossed.

RichardGibbons

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 633
Re: Has B.C. crossed the Rubicon ?
« Reply #4 on: June 10, 2018, 08:10:29 PM »
I'm not a fan of wealth taxes, but there are few alternatives. In BC, because of foreign capital, we've ended up in a situation where the people who own the most expensive houses are declaring the lowest income.

So, if you want to maintain your tax base, you have several options:
  • Increase the taxes the asset-poor Canadians pay in order to pay for the infrastructure used by wealthy foreigners who declare little or no income
  • Ban foreign investment & audit the heck out of people who buy expensive houses while declaring no income
  • Add an asset tax that will hit people even if they don't declare an income

I think #2 is the most reasonable option, but #3 is far easier to do (and I think the NDP government would already be predisposed to doing #3.)

DooDiligence

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1332
  • ♪ 🎶 ♫ ♪ 🎶 ♫
Re: Has B.C. crossed the Rubicon ?
« Reply #5 on: June 12, 2018, 07:37:54 AM »
We had an intangible property tax here in Florida which was legislated in 1999.
It was calculated using a crazy formula involving investments, interests in LP's & receivables, among other things.

I would receive a form every year, which I promptly threw in the trash.
Nobody ever came to dun me & it was finally repealed in 2007.
abc 2.6 | abev 1.6 | aapl 0.9 | bbh 3.3 | brk.b 10.0 | chtr 4.2 | cvs 5.7 | dva 5.5 | dis 4.1 | ew 2.1 | gpc 2.8 | mo 6.1 | nvo 5.1 | sftby 2.3 | vde 4.2

(%'s held @ cost, PV allos are slightly 2 significantly higher. includes a slowly dwindling cash pile.)

-----

https://twitter.com/tunawish

netnet

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 919
Re: Has B.C. crossed the Rubicon ?
« Reply #6 on: June 12, 2018, 09:40:05 AM »
There is no estate tax in Canada. But yes, property taxes are a form of capital taxes. Also not until long ago we had corporate capital taxes. So I don't think there's really a rubicon there to be crossed.
More properly, estate tax the capital gains due on death.

rb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
Re: Has B.C. crossed the Rubicon ?
« Reply #7 on: June 12, 2018, 10:33:22 AM »
There is no estate tax in Canada. But yes, property taxes are a form of capital taxes. Also not until long ago we had corporate capital taxes. So I don't think there's really a rubicon there to be crossed.
More properly, estate tax the capital gains due on death.
I don't understand what you are trying to say? Should one not have to pay taxes on capital gains?

Also specifically tax arising from terminal returns there are ways to mitigate or avoid them all together. If one is looking at a large tax bill, then one has the resources to engage engage the services of competent estate planners.

gokou3

  • Lifetime Member
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 428
Re: Has B.C. crossed the Rubicon ?
« Reply #8 on: June 12, 2018, 12:05:47 PM »
I read sometime ago that Richmond is one of the poorest communities in BC - ranked by income, of course.  Go figure.

There are people who live in $5+ million dollar homes and receive childcare benefits due to their "low incomes".  Their income may not even pay off their property tax.

Why would one support a system where people could bring their wealth to Canada, not work for a single day here and hence not pay any income tax, and be eligible automatically for all benefits (healthcare, infrastructure, etc), is beyond me.

SharperDingaan

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
Re: Has B.C. crossed the Rubicon ?
« Reply #9 on: June 12, 2018, 12:44:52 PM »
I'm not a fan of wealth taxes, but there are few alternatives. In BC, because of foreign capital, we've ended up in a situation where the people who own the most expensive houses are declaring the lowest income.

So, if you want to maintain your tax base, you have several options:
  • Increase the taxes the asset-poor Canadians pay in order to pay for the infrastructure used by wealthy foreigners who declare little or no income
  • Ban foreign investment & audit the heck out of people who buy expensive houses while declaring no income
  • Add an asset tax that will hit people even if they don't declare an income

I think #2 is the most reasonable option, but #3 is far easier to do (and I think the NDP government would already be predisposed to doing #3.)

All they need do is raise utility rates by neighborhood. Charge 2-3x the going rate to deliver utilities to the 'magic kingdoms' (water in, sewage out). Charge 4-5x the rate for septic tank 'approval', and 3-4x for truck delivery of water (road/wear, polution tax, etc). Publicly prosecute the first few trying to bribe their way out.

SD