Canada’s rich not contributing fair share in taxes: study
November 8, 2007
TORONTO – More than a decade’s worth of tax cuts have disproportionately lined the pockets of Canada’s most affluent families, says a new tax study by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA).
The study finds the top 1 percent of families in 2005 paid a lower total tax rate than the bottom 10 percent of families.
“Canada’s tax system now fails a basic test of fairness,” says Marc Lee, senior economist with the CCPA’s B.C. office and author of the study. “Tax cuts have contributed to a slow and steady shift to a less progressive tax system in Canada.”
The study, which is the first comprehensive review of tax changes at all levels of government in Canada within the past 15 years, finds the system is delivering larger tax savings for high income families. This reinforces the growing gap in market incomes between high income families and the rest of Canadians.
“Most Canadians will be surprised by these findings because they believe we have a progressive tax system – but looking at all taxes combined, that’s no longer the case.”
The study, Eroding Tax Fairness: Tax Incidence in Canada, 1990 to 2005, is available at http://www.growinggap.ca/ and http://www.policyalternatives.ca/. Its key findings include:
Provincial tax cuts are the key culprit for the increasingly regressive nature of Canada’s tax system but the problem has been exacerbated at the federal level with billions of dollars worth of post-2000 tax cuts.
The richest one percent of taxpayers saw their tax rate drop by four percentage points between 1990 and 2005.
Most Canadians saw their tax rate fall by two percentage points of income, but not so for the poorest 20 percent of taxpayers, who pay three to five percentage points more in taxes.Middle-income families pay about six percentage points more in total taxes than a family in the top 1 percent.
– 30 –
For more information, please contact: Trish Hennessy, 416-263-9896.
Download the Report/Study:
Eroding Tax Fairness: Tax Incidence in Canada, 1990 to 2005 - PDF File, 967 Kb
Thursday, 8 November 2007
Canada's rich not contributing fair share in taxes: study (CCPA)
The following is reproduced from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
You aren't even going to acknowledge your defeat? Strange.
David,
I don't know what you are talking about. I'm still President of the Saskatchewan Federation of Labour.
Larry,
I just loved your thinly veiled threats agaisnt the Sask party on election night and later. Shows you're a real trooper.
That being said, your tactics didn't work. You lost. Your propaganda producing union executives lost.
But guess who they lost to? Not the Saskatchewan Party. Your own membership.
Union politics was thoroughly rejected on Nov. 07th. by the people you purport to represent.
But you pal Calvert brings up the name Devine in his first post-concession speech, and you blather on about confrontation.
We aren't living in the 1930's any more Larry. You talk about fairness, but only if that fairness balances in your direction.
You, the NDP and your union executive proxies were seen exactly as you presented yourselves; totally self-serving.
This is a great new beginning for Saskatchewan. One only hopes that the SFL will understand how to work in the new framework of partnership rather than your standard "our way or the highway" mentality.
But with you at the helm, Larry, I sincerely doubt that will happen.
Good luck in the next four years. You're going to need it.
Boogeyman,
Thank you for participating in this blog.
You may have perceived my comments on election night as "thinly veiled threats" - but the Saskatchewan Chamber of Commerce didn't.
Here's the text message I received from the Vice-President of the Sask. Chamber at 10:40 p.m. election night. It's in response to my interviews and comments in the media.
"Larry, you came off awesome tonight - Great Job!".
I also had cordial and respectful discussions with the CEO of the Saskatchewan Chamber at the CTV studios.
People who know me appreciate my sincerity and commitment to working together.
People who don't - make outrageous and hateful comments and snipe from behind the protection of an alias.
Don't assume I don't know you, Larry...
And I've felt neither a sincerity nor a commitment to you working with people who don't agree with your politics.
We'll stay in touch....
Then come on out of the shadows Boogeyman. Declare your identity.
We can go for a coffee and work at resolving any differences of opinion. (I'll buy.)
I see a difference between high income salaried families and business owners with the same relative income. Businesses employ and pay salaries to the middle income people who then pay taxes. I think if you look at high income families and add up their TOTAL tax contributions, not just income tax, you will find they do pay their share. They buy bigger houses, more expensive toys and vehicles and pay the increased tax on all of them.
Larry,
Do you honestly think we could resolve anything? The chasm is too wide.
It wouldn't be a fun coffee for either of us and the Atlantis staff would probably kick us out.
Maybe next time...
Think of all those people who don't pay union dues. That's so unfair. We gotta put an end to that, too. Everyone should contribute to Larry's upkeep.
Larry, I have a question: Do Unions pay taxes?
Paul,
Yes. Unions pay taxes.
Post a Comment