Tuesday, 24 April 2012

Taxing the Rich

The recent Ontario budget provisions and the introduction of legislation in the US congress to tax the rich (the so-called Buffet tax) begs the question.  If one has an income of $500,000 or more the extra $3,000 in tax won't break the bank.  A minimum tax of $30% on $1 million in income is more serious.  But not much more.  Recent report from the US indicate that, on average, those who make more than $1 million or more pay an average tax of 26%.  So the Buffet tax is much like the Ontario surtax--about 4% increase.  The same report indicates that the tax would affect .3% of the taxpaying public.  A recent report from Ottawa indicates that the ontario tax would affect about .1% of the taxpaying public.  The amount that this tax would raise in Ontario is estimated by the Liberal government to be about $400 million.  The best estimate by outside economists is that the tax would raise somewhat half of that estimate.  The Ontario provisions were hastily made in order to gain the support (or the "abstain" vote) from the New Democrats in a bid to avoid yet another dreary election. Good politics.  Bad policy.

Most of those who read this blog know that I am in favour of a VAT or HST tax as a primary tool in tax reform.  Corporate taxes are, properly, coming down.  Personal taxes are not.  The devil in the tax system is not the rates but the definition of the tax base.  Just what is "income".  For those who are lucky enough to have investments much of their "income" is in the form of capital gains that are taxed at half the personal rate.  Since one can assume that those who have investments are more economically better off than the average working joe the benefit given to the "rich" adds to the economic disparity between the rich and the poor.  For example if one taxpayer has income from employment and one has "income" from capital gains, the latter will pay, on average, half the tax than the wage earner.  If one is lucky enough to have dividend income the tax on dividends from taxable Canadian corporation on about $50,000 is nil.  Yes, nil.  So, if I have a family corporation through which I do business I will pay the corporate tax of about 15% and pay no tax on about $60,000 of income earned by me and my wife (the dividend tax credit for small business corporations are less than on corporations who are basically investment corporations).  If my wife and I have 4 children and I have established a family trust I can "distribute" $180,000 (6x30,000) at a rate of about 15%.  The tax savings is significant.  On $180,000 of income I would pay about $65,000 in tax if I lived in Ontario.  By using the dividend tax credit I pay corporation tax at $27,000, a savings of $38,000 by my arithmetic. If I am engaged in research and development the government pays me (through a SRED program).

You get the picture now.  Capital gains were introduced to reward those who take risk.  Dividend tax credits were introduced to refund the tax paid by a corporation to its shareholders.  The theory is that there should not be double taxation:  one at the corporate level and one at the personal level.  It's called integration.  However, the dividend tax credit and the capital gains rate have had unintended negative consequences.  And no one is in a rush to change the rules.  Good for the rich and self employed and very bad for the working joe.

Those of my age recall the upheaval that occurred in 1971.  We started again. At the direction of PE Trudeau we threw out the old income tax legislation and brought in a new piece of legislation.  There was considerable turmoil for a number of years but when the dust settled much of the inequities of the old legislation were remedied. Nothing less is needed now.  What I propose is a simplified definition of income, no capital gains tax, a resolution of the dividend tax credit anomaly, reduction of the vast number of allowances and inducements in the tax legislation that are no longer needed, a resolution of the tax inequity between the self employed and the wage earner, and, lastly a tax at the top rate of about 15%.  The balance of the revenue would be made up by a harmonized sales tax.  Unfortunately there is no political will, either in Canada or the US to do so.

Bernie.

No comments:

Post a Comment