Revenue neutral? Reach for your wallet.
It would be an absolute understatement to say that a lot of oxygen and even grease has been wasted this week discussing Dion's make believe carbon tax. But before you go buying into the former professors bluff of offering up a "revenue neutral" tax, I advise you to read the excerpt below from American Thinker Blog (which, IMHO, underscores the reality [and confusion] of revenue neutrality when it comes to politicians and their supposed promise):One might argue that in the current economic environment, not raising tax rates is a good idea. There are no new tax reductions of course, when you merely maintain the current rates. But the way things are scored in Washington DC, keeping rates the same is treated as a tax cut, and hence scored as a big revenue loss for the government, since the current rates are supposed to expire in two years, and go back to the levels where they were prior to the Bush tax cuts in 2001.Let's be honest here folks, aside from the rhetoric gushing out of politicians and politicos, there really is no such thing as a "revenue neutral" tax, or as we sometimes see, no such thing as a tax increase...just a tax cut that's not exactly a tax cut but is a tax cut. So are you starting to see where I'm headin' with this one?
Barack Obama supports ending the Bush tax cuts -- in other words he wants individuals' tax rates to go up. However, the way this is scored in Washington , Obama's plan to let the Bush tax cuts expire, is "revenue neutral". So if rates go up, that is not treated as a tax increase. If rates stay the same, that will be reported as a tax cut for federal revenue purposes.
Anyway, the idea of Dion and Graham offering up a "revenue neutral" tax is about as laughable as the thought of removing the corporate welfare mentality from government friendly firms and businesses in Atlantic Canada. Which is precisely why I found this bullet point in the Chronicle Herald by Ian Munroe a bit curious (confusing part in bold):
Elimination of targeted tax incentives for favoured sectors, replaced by broad-based tax relief for businesses that takes politics out of the equation.What does that mean "takes politics out of the equation"? Are they required to repay government loans (and the taxpayers who funded them)? Will corporate welfare be banned altogether? All legit questions from someone (yours truly) who wants to finally see some fairness in the market, not government interference like we've seen for decades.
10 Comments:
I find the few columns by AIMS Ian Munroe good reads. But when he complimented your finance minister when he said, "One hopes that finance ministers elsewhere in the country with visions of special tax rebates and reductions for everything from auto plants to kids’ skating lessons will take note," that's when I draw the line. As far as I'm concerned, New Brunswick under the guidance of Boudreau has been a wasteland for higher taxes. Weren't you the only province that raised them?
Yeah, I was as surprised as you, especially since he has been a close observer of this government's tax policies, not to mention, the types of reforms that have come thus far from their taxpayer funded studies, papers and reports.
Warning to the rest of the country... hide your wallets if your finance Ministers start quoting New Brunswicks...
The carbon tax really isn't a terrible idea. However there are two problems with it right now. One the free market is doing a fine job of keeping prices high so if the point of a tax is to make prices high, it's done. Adding a tax is just punishing people for living at this time. Two, if it was revenue neutral than okay. However does anyone actually believe this is anything more than a tax grab? Neither the federal or N.B. Liberals have proven to be trustworthy when it comes to tax issues so skepticism abounds.
kit: Ha! Ha! You got that right.
spinks: No doubt. But at this point, if gas prices continue to rise (as they are projected to) and we remain addicted to foreign oil, something will have to give. There just isn't enough oil in the world to sustain economies like India, China, United States, etc. for the longterm. We need to serious think of alternative solutions now (although, that doesn't mean the middle class need another regressive tax rammed down their throat).
haha, what a retarded Carbon Tax idea. What is Dion smoking? haha
a Carbon tax really is a tax on everything.
Why don't you New Brunswickers get smart and abandon the province. You are the Highest taxed and lowest paid province in the country. Most of us figured that out a long time ago when we finished Universty and found out that there is no future in the province unless you are the Irvings or getting paid from the public purse. Or if you want to be underpaid for the rest of your life. The liberals have good ideas but the problem is that we cannot afford them unless we further adopt socialist taxing on the middle class. Move to another province, that is my advice.
Been there, done that. I have lived outside the province for a decade (in Ottawa).
There's is no question, it's the easy rout to take, and many take it. I've even considered getting the heck out again. But again, that would be the easy route to take, I have decided on the tough path, mostly because I love this province and would truly like to make it a better place.
Plus, Alberta, BC and Ontario seem to be doing just fine without me. They'll survive.
fair enough.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home