[Northern Light]

Assorted policy planks, still mostly on taxation, it seems.

NDP: Raised Basic Personal Exemption (amount on which you pay 0 income tax) from $15,700 to $19,500
Phase-out said benefit with a clawback beginning at $177,000 in earnings.

***

Pause.... who decided on the clawback amount? I mean, I agree with the principle, though I'd rather achieve the effect by removing or capping assorted deductions....

But $177,000? We begin clawing back OAS in/around 80k and fully by 148k. We clawback the Age Amount after $103,000

By going so high, the tax cut benefits large numbers of people who don't need it and costs a lot more.

***

Also from the NDP removing HST off additional essential items, including more grocery items, prepared meals at grocery stores, and cell phone bills.

***

I'm fine w/the gist of the idea, even though it convolutes the tax somewhat..... but if you're removing HST from prepared meals at grocery stores, why would it remain on fast food or even resto meals ordered from Door Dash or the like?

Also, if there's no cut off........presumably you can order the high-end holiday feasts from Farm Boy for $200 for dinner for two, tax-free. Uhh

 

[Northern Light]

The Conservatives are back cutting again.......this time by saying they'll let working seniors keep up $34,000 tax free, from earned income, as well, they'll bump the age at which you have to withdraw from your RRSP to 73 from 71.

****

I'm fine w/that latter, but I take issue w/the former. Its a benefit that won't be means tested, so the first 34k for someone earning 1M would still be tax-free. Why? Meanwhile no such relief for working people under 65.

Illogical policy offering.

 

[Towered]

Jesus christ, do you hear yourself?

Sorry.

 

[Jonny5]

good point - why is Andrew Sheer still around? It's undignified. I seem to recall even Harper lingering around parliament for a while like a stale fart after he lost to Trudeau.

Am I recalling correctly that Stephane Dion not only stayed on as an MP but he made it all the way back to being a cabinet minister in the first Trudeau government?

 

[chrisw]

Meme from Reddit.

 

[adma]

Am I recalling correctly that Stephane Dion not only stayed on as an MP but he made it all the way back to being a cabinet minister in the first Trudeau government?

Also don't forget Joe Clark sticking around to be a Mulroney minister; and Stockwell Day in the Harper cabinet. (Conversely, the ultimate case of a former leader "not knowing when to quit" was Dief.)

 

[afransen]

I think there is more grace for failed leaders in opposition than in government. It's hard to go from PM to minister in someone else's cabinet.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I think there is more grace for failed leaders in opposition than in government. It's hard to go from PM to minister in someone else's cabinet.

If PP loses, can you see him staying as leader?

 

[Richard White]

If PP loses, can you see him staying as leader?

Honestly. Yes.

He's stubborn enough to try

 

[Northern Light]

Am I recalling correctly that Stephane Dion not only stayed on as an MP but he made it all the way back to being a cabinet minister in the first Trudeau government?

Yes.

He resigned from being leader in 2008; he was in cabinet, again, from 2015-2017.

He is Canada's current Ambassador to France.

 

[evandyk]

The Conservatives are back cutting again.......this time by saying they'll let working seniors keep up $34,000 tax free, from earned income, as well, they'll bump the age at which you have to withdraw from your RRSP to 73 from 71.

****

I'm fine w/that latter, but I take issue w/the former. Its a benefit that won't be means tested, so the first 34k for someone earning 1M would still be tax-free. Why? Meanwhile no such relief for working people under 65.

Illogical policy offering.

I'm not expert enough to do the math on this, but I suspect virtually all of the benefit of being able to tax shelter your RRSP for an extra two years goes to the top slice of income earners, the ones who fill their RRSP every year and don't need the cash to pay their bills by the time they're 71.

 

[afransen]

If PP loses, can you see him staying as leader?

It depends. If Carney only has a minority, perhaps. PP has a pretty strong grip on the party, and I think the party would likely be willing to cut him slack as a victim of circumstance. My point is that leaders who fail and lose the leadership are more likely to stick around than former PMs. Some, like Ignatieff, are 'just visiting'.

 

[Jonny5]

This model (and it is only a model) has the Liberals at one standard deviation a guaranteed majority, or in as best as possible simplified non-math language, almost every time time they run their simulation, which uses their own programmed random variables, the Liberals get a majority.

 

[old boy]

It depends. If Carney only has a minority, perhaps. PP has a pretty strong grip on the party, and I think the party would likely be willing to cut him slack as a victim of circumstance. My point is that leaders who fail and lose the leadership are more likely to stick around than former PMs. Some, like Ignatieff, are 'just visiting'.

Yes, and he can put the glasses on again.

 

[innsertnamehere]

I'm not expert enough to do the math on this, but I suspect virtually all of the benefit of being able to tax shelter your RRSP for an extra two years goes to the top slice of income earners, the ones who fill their RRSP every year and don't need the cash to pay their bills by the time they're 71.

It's to encourage people to keep working until they are 73 instead of 71.

The way RRSPs work is that there is no tax advantage to delay withdrawals - if anything, you want to spread withdrawals from your RRSP fund as long as possible to minimize taxable income in every tax year.

Most retirement plans today have a mix of RRSP and TFSA income, with an incentive to spread RRSP income out as much as possible in retirement as it's taxable income - the goal is to withdraw it in lower income tax brackets. You then use the tax-free TFSA to try to supplement income in higher spending years of retirement. delaying RRSP withdrawals does nothing but increase taxes due in those later years.

Remember that gains made in RRSPs are taxable - an RRSP is a tax-delay strategy where income tax paid on the money is not paid until withdrawals are made in retirement, with the goal being that you will be in a lower tax bracket in retirement than you would be when you originally earned that income.

People who delay RRSP withdrawals until 71 (or 73) are usually doing it because they are still working and saving.

TFSAs are far more powerful retirement savings tools in some ways, especially for low and moderate income people.

Now - CPP delays are a whole other animal. It is usually in your best interest to withhold taking CPP until 70 (unless you have known health issues that makes it unlikely you will live past ~82), but many low and moderate income people can't afford to delay that long and have other sources of income in the interim.