• naturalgasbadOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Usually I’m supportive of tax hikes on the rich, but I think it’s important to note that the top tax bracket in Canada is $246752. Canada needs more granular tax brackets at the top end.

    • Hacksaw
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      That income is high enough to be taxed more, but I agree more granularity would be better. I hope that they increase taxes on the rich mostly by closing loopholes that favour the 1% at our expense. A billionaire that pays no taxes now isn’t going to owe more if we increase the tax rate. 3 times 0 is still 0. It’s the loopholes we have to close.

      It’s not usually the doctors making 250-400k that are shirking their fair share of taxes, but the use of loopholes certainly starts in that range and accelerates exponentially with higher wealth and income.

      • corsicanguppy
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s the loopholes we have to close.

        We can actually do both, instead of one OR the other.

        And we can do them both at once, or one at a time.

        I bet that’s what’s happening here.

      • naturalgasbadOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        A large part of this is also the monopolies that large companies hold on essentials: groceries, telecoms, banks, etc. These are industries where competition does not spur innovation: rather, competition only harms the consumer.

          • HubertManne@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            true. I hope those rich folks can have enough kids to run everything. No slaves coming from my loins.

              • HubertManne@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 months ago

                damn straight. my genes or anyone elses are nothing all that special. this wierd idea of immortalizing ones genes is just stupid. I have had my space time and thats enough.

                • capem@startrek.website
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  You’re only here because people have been immortalizing themselves through genes for generations.

                  If you’re not strong enough to continue on that trend, then you don’t get to continue past this point.

                  Other people will, though, and influence the world accordingly.

    • honc
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      While I agree that top tax brackets could use more granularity, it’s also important to note that it’s only income above that amount that gets taxed more. I’m personally okay with anything above that being taxed a lot and at the same (high) rate.

      • blindsight@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I think it’s fair to add more levels. It’s fair that someone earning $400K should be paying less marginal tax than someone earning $10MM. The first person is still likely spending a significant portion of their income each year on living expenses, while the second person is earning more than can be reasonably spent, so it’s just “NumBeRs gO Up!” at that point.

        idk, something like 60% tax above 400K, 70% tax above 1MM, 80% tax above $3MM, 85% tax above $10MM.

        What are the downsides?

        That might make Canadian sports teams fail since nobody will want to take the income hit to work here? Even then, they could just restructure their compensation to be paid over a lifetime, so they get $3MM/yr for 50 years instead of $12MM/yr for 10 years (or whatever).

        • honc
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I think that kind of system is fine too.

    • Pyr_Pressure
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      And not just liquid wealth.

      Own stocks? Pay a tax on their value at time of purchase, updating every year from that day.

  • undercrust
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s a start. Its a modest increase in capital gains inclusion (66% instead of 50%) for all capital gains over $250,000 per year

    So, good, normal people won’t be affected at all, but only super wealthy folks triggering a quarter million in gains every single year are going to feel any effect. And unfortunately, there’s more than a few ways to just avoid triggering gains anyways.

    Eh, at least it’s a start.

      • undercrust
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        You’re right, and this is an excellent idea. If you’re turning an asset into a cashflow, it should be taxable under all circumstances.

  • kandoh@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    The Shopify president whose worth 3.5 billion is whining like a bitch on twitter about it

  • kingthrillgore@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    How can one country be so fucking based.

    Its as if the great Tommy Douglas himself looks upon Canada and smiles