YouTube has a strict limit on the character count, and rather than stretch this over a long series of comment posts, I’ve decided to answer here.
Hi Tim,
I think you’re misunderstanding my proposal. I have responded to similar claims by Mr. Patrick Zaph, but I will summarise a few key points. Let’s compare post-tax incomes between the current system and my proposal to see that my proposal helps the poor far more than the wealthy.
Currently, the exemption is $9600. Under my proposal, the income level of 0% tax is $31 250. In fact, if you earn less than that, you end up with more money than what you get from work. After $31 250 you start paying a positive tax rate that slowly picks up and taxes the highest income earners at the near full 24% outlined. It is also important to note, that high income earners currently only pay 29% on just the taxable income above $123 184, and qualify for a lot of the exemptions that I will be eliminating to pay for the broad tax cut.
Also, your claim that my plan will force people to work longer and destroy family life is actually the opposite of what will happen. Unlike the current welfare system, my proposal actually helps people who work part time to improve their standard of living. It will allow single parents to work moderate hours, and still spend time with their kids.
Your concerns on Canadians who can’t work are very valid. In my video, I stated that my tax will replace the current welfare system. However, we currently have seperate programs for disability assistance, and other special needs. These will be kept in place. It would be cruel and unjust to eliminate these.
I thank you for your interest in my tax proposal. If you still have any questions, I’ll be glad to answer them. However, I would please ask that before future questions, you take a few seconds to compare a person’s post-tax income in the currect system vs my proposal.
Tani
I think you don’t understand what I meant. Here’s some fiction:
Say a single mom of one works forty hours a week at $11/hour, on our current tax system she is not taxed. If she works even an hour and a half of overtime she is taxed on her next pay-cheque based on working fifty two weeks at forty hours of $11/hour and one and a half hours of $16.5/hour. Taxed a total of $4.94 which she will get back at the end of the year if she stays under $23, 909.90 in the year. I’m pretty sure you don’t know how our income tax system works.
Facts:
the bigger picture of getting taxes on overtime hours back at the end of the year is usually lost on people who live pay-cheque to pay-cheque
our current system is a deterrent to putting career over personal life
I never said that your tax plan will force them to work longer hours, but that it would encourage them to
Let’s take me for another example, this year my taxable income could be around $75,769 and I have a newborn baby girl, on the current Tax system:
$14,017.48 line 34 Schedule 1
Minus $23,909.90 line 26 Schedule 1
Equals $0 Federal Tax Which means everything that has come off my pay-cheques and any CPP and EI overpayment will be coming in April.
on your Tax system:
$18,184 Net Federal Tax
Minus $7500 rebate
Equals $10,684.56 taxes paid
your system does nothing to encourage my donations to charitable organizations which currently drop my taxable income to the second tax bracket from the third.
Your graph is only inaccurate because of the personal claims in part one of Schedule one of the Federal income Tax forms, which would start the current system’s line at $13,309.90(for basic Canadians working in Canada) nearly twice as high as your line starts, and would cross your line somewhere near the $200, 000/year mark. For a parent the current line starts higher at 23,909.90 and there are higher points to start it yet. On your graph the only other starting point is for people in post secondary institutions, and that makes me even more mad being a high-school drop-out who can do simple math better than you.
I suggest you do the simple math required and file your own taxes once to figure out how our system works before thinking about how to tear it down.
woops, I knew I must have missed something… the 13,309.90 and the 23,909.90 were supposed to be multiplied by .15
I do that every year when I file my taxes too. Ok, so $3.586.49 is the starting point for the parent, and $1,996.49 for the Canadian working in Canada all year. At that rate the current line crosses yours twice. Your plan only hurts the middle class, marginally helps the lower class and greatly helps the richest of the rich.
On the current system, I’m paying $12, 020 in Federal Tax this February, so your system would almost save me $1335ish. Nice work, for those of us who make more than $75 000/year.
Your argument seems to be that this is for working single parents. Let’s go back to the $11/hour single mom and make her work 30 hours/week, she’s going to have a taxable income around $16-17000/year
$2574 tops on line 34 of Sched 1
Minus $3586.49
Equals or is less than $0
Your system has her earn $13, 041/year, to destroy her fragile pay to pay budget, and then an extra $7,500 cheque once a year, that will very unlikely be properly rationed throughout the year. Are you planning to instead give monthly cheques for $625 for some and a cheque for $7500 for others?
Let’s say a single mom found a job for $15/hour at 30 hours/week. She’s untaxed on the current system and makes $23, 400, and on yours she earns $17, 784 for a total of $25, 284 after her yearly bonus. You find an extra $1,884 for her. And let’s say a bachelor makes $125, 000 a year in Fort McMurray. On your system he takes home $102, 500/year. On the current system, he takes home $100,124.85, your system saves him $2375.17. My question to you is, how do you think your system is set up to help the poor when it is clearly more beneficial to the rich?
Middle class families actually loose with your system. $45, 000/year for a family with two children don’t pay taxes. Your system makes their total take home $34, 200. Veterans and seniors are also adversely affected.