Trudeau has to go?

[JRSC00LUDE]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Meh. Trucks have such huge margins the car manufacturers can eat it.

Margerine, it's prounouced mar-ger-ine.

[suntan]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'd think the opposite as benefits require more information from the individual taxpayer.

If it were me, there'd be a progressive discount (inverse to income rates - regressive discount?) based on dependents - young, old, special needs and that's it.

The benefits are the entire problem with the tax code as that's where all the populism and cronyism comes from.

You can't have a one page tax code if you're defining the multitude of things that are non-cash benefits.

[schurchill39]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Meh. Trucks have such huge margins the car manufacturers can eat it.

But they won't. We will

[suntan]

Ram tough!

[vengie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Meh. Trucks have such huge margins the car manufacturers can eat it.

Not sure if srs...

[suntan]

Then they're kicking themselves for not charging more.

[dirtsniffer]

Yea, I wouldn't absorb a 3-5% hit on my income statement. Even if they had a 50% margin they'd pass it along. And the whole industry can pass it through with transparency , I doubt 1 company will try to absorb it. Maybe some dealers will cut a promotion but even still

[davidI]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You can't have a one page tax code if you're defining the multitude of things that are non-cash benefits.

Understand you now. I thought you meant benefits like deductions.

I still think a good drafter could catch all "non-cash benefits" with a couple clauses of good wording but it's true there would likely need to be specific calculation guidance for some of the more complicated structures. Although if the intention is to simplify things you just make really complicated compensation benefits illegal.

[ExtraSlow]

You don't need a law to prevent complex tax dodges if you tax code doesn't have complex structures.

Increasing complexity of the tax code creates rather than prevents unfairness and the incentive to dodge.

[davidI]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You don't need a law to prevent complex tax dodges if you tax code doesn't have complex structures.

Increasing complexity of the tax code creates rather than prevents unfairness and the incentive to dodge.

I meant complex structures as far as compensation packages go. Options, RSUs, SARs, phantom/restricted stock plans, rabbi trusts, etc. though I do agree it should be simple to draft a few 'catch-all' clauses that determine whether the taxable benefit is immediate or deferred and what triggers it.

Everything else can be sorted by subsequent (or even historic) case law.

[killramos]

2021 income tax guide for tax accountants right new 2022 guide on left.

Ha. Ha…

[davidI]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

2021 income tax guide for tax accountants right new 2022 guide on left.

Ha. Ha…

Definitely no new loopholes for Liberal cronies in there...

[mr2mike]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

2021 income tax guide for tax accountants right new 2022 guide on left.

Ha. Ha…

Trudeau already signed your copy with a juicy rope?
I know he's EXCITED for adding more taxations but that's a bit much.

[ianmcc]

The process of paying and collecting the GST is already in place. It's just a matter of increasing it to the appropriate level (I throw out 19.5% just because).
This is all about personal income tax only since it accounts for almost half of government revenues.
Even rich people gotta eat and live in homes and buy everyday shit. And think of the underground economy-paying cash under the table to skip out on income tax is a moot point. You will get them at the till.
A straight tax is the only fair way to even the playing field. The current GST exempt items have long been determined to be fair despite my wifes concern over feminine products.

[arcticcat522]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Definitely no new loopholes for Liberal cronies in there...

First thing I thought too

[davidI]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Even rich people gotta eat and live in homes and buy everyday shit. And think of the underground economy-paying cash under the table to skip out on income tax is a moot point. You will get them at the till.

Rich people spend a far lower % of their earnings/gains on discretionary purchases so it wouldn't really help the inequality that is promoted under the current tax code.

[Misterman]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Rich people spend a far lower % of their earnings/gains on discretionary purchases so it wouldn't really help the inequality that is promoted under the current tax code.

So what? A staggered taxation rate is a crime anyway. They currently spend nothing on personal income tax, at least a consumption tax would get them paying some level of fair.

[littledan]

We dont have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

We dont have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem.

This is obvious. The harder question to get people to answer is: why do we have a spending problem

[Misterman]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This is obvious. The harder question to get people to answer is: why do we have a spending problem

We are pivoting to womens voting rights now? This thread as everything!