I think Kershaw is trolling in this op-ed, but it’s hard to tell. He’s saying that the $14 billion planned increase to OAS for seniors will subsidize many people who are already well off. So he suggests younger Canadians (who don’t get to participate in the housing market) should get a similar amount:
Millennials and Gen Z deserve a greater share of the $1.5-trillion windfall generated by rising home values since boomers were young adults.
A $1,000 annual payment to every adult aged 18 to 39 would be a start. The simplest way to deliver this compensation would be through a refundable tax credit, claimed when young people file their annual returns. Governments seeking more visible credit might directly deposit $250 every three months into young people’s bank accounts, clearly labelled as a housing wealth dividend.
I know $1,000 doesn’t stretch far in today’s housing market. It may only cover a few weeks of rent or mortgage payments. But over 21 years, that same annual payment adds up to real money that can help with costs.
Of course, there are less spendy alternatives:
Options include eliminating outdated Age and Pension Income tax shelters, which could pay for half the cost. The other half could come from beginning the Old Age Security clawback at $100,000 of household income, rather than continuing to provide the full $18,000 subsidy to retired couples with $180,000 in income.
I think Kershaw is using the $1,000 per year “you were born too young to get a house” tax rebate as an illustration of the amount of cash going to retirees. But maybe he isn’t.
Boomers will stop getting hate when they either share their wealth or retire so we can work jobs that pay a living wage.