Buy Avanafil Jalea Comprar Kamagra <a >generic levitra 40 mg no prescription</a> Cialis 20 Anwendung
By Harotheobeli on October 14, 2017
Forgot To Refrigerate Amoxicillin And Clavulanate Cialis 5 Mg Opinioni <a >cheap cialis</a> Levitra 40 Mg
By JeffRitefoow on October 11, 2017
Cheap Viagra Jelly Costo Propecia Acquisto Voveran Is It Available In The Us <a >viagra</a> Acticin Pills Amoxicillin Taste
By Harotheobeli on October 09, 2017
Prix Levitra Casablanca <a >mail order levitra</a> Cialis Kje Dobiti Tadarise Pro 20 Propecia Pharmacie Propecia Gratuit Pilules
By Harotheobeli on October 06, 2017
Acheter Levitra Ordonnance Priligy Pharmacie En Ligne Cialis Generico PreРЎРѓРЎвЂ™РЎРѓРІР‚вЂњРЎР‚РЎвЂ“Р Р†Р’В§o <a >levitra with dapoxetine reviews</a> secure ordering isotretinoin amex accepted low price
Cialis Nebenwirkung Kopfschmerzen Brand Cialis Non Prescription Needed How Long Does Cephalexin Last <a >viagra</a> Where To Order Fedex Macrobid Furadantin Minnesota Avis Site Vente Kamagra
By Harotheobeli on October 04, 2017
Kamagra Boots <a >generic cialis</a> purchase accutane online
By Harotheobeli on September 30, 2017
Even passive income is involved with extra work and risk for the business. Governments should never be entitled to take more than 49% of the profit of any business. Now you would no longer be an owner but a partner. All the work and 27% of the money.
By Siegfried Merten on August 30, 2017
Partially agree. Many small business owners do split income among spouse and children and invest through their companies to reduce taxes. And, that does give them an unfair advantage over employees, with the same income, who cannot do it. However, having said that, the government’s plan to tax at the highest personal level makes no sense, when simply using the same progressive rate as personal tax would give no incentive for the business owner to use the business as a personal investment vehicle. Therefore, to tax at the highest personal level is more another tax grab that will stifle small business than it is a deterrent.
A small business wants a return on funds which are sitting temporarily. If invested conservatively and relatively short term (e.g.GIC, short-term bank notes and bonds, income stocks) so as not to take a significant chance on losing the business’ capital, they should be taxed at the small business rate. If business funds are invested in riskier things (aggressive growth stocks, commodities, etc.), then it isn’t prudent investing of business funds, but more like a personal investment portfolio, and could be taxed accordingly. The government gives such guidance to trustees and could do the same for small business so they would know where they stand.
The government is forever spending more. If interest rates go up, the government will also have higher payments on their massive loans. They compensate by grabbing every bit of tax they can, then increase existing taxes, and finally create new taxes, such as this one.
By Martin on August 30, 2017
Let’s not forget that in addition to tax pressures at the federal level, many provinces and municipalities have also significantly increased the tax burden on small businesses, e.g. property tax increases in Calgary. Add to that the introduction of minimum wage laws and it seems like the perfect storm. what the Liberals and NDP don’t seem to understand is that you can’t milk a dry cow and that a dry cow is usually with one step in the grave. It will takes us several generations to recover from the mistakes being made. Unfortunately, the young generation who voted for these parties will now also have to pay the price. Good luck finding a job!
By Thomas on August 30, 2017
I’m writing to you to express my extreme disappointment regarding the federal tax proposals. These proposals are about as short-sighted and mean-spirited as anything I have seen from any level of government.
Your consultation period is simply a poor joke, 75 days during the summer when parliament isn’t sitting and many people are away on vacation. The briefness and timing of this consultation period tells me that your government is trying to avoid any actual consultation, and push this through with as minimal discussion as possible. These proposals are so wide-reaching and impacting all Canadians regardless of income level, that at a minimum this consultation period must be extended to give sufficient time for discussion.
The rhetoric from your government is appalling. Using the terms such as “loophole” and “crackdown” is done for no other purpose than to turn the public against people who have been honest and law-abiding taxpayers. The current rules were brought in decades ago specifically with these intentions in mind, they are not “loopholes”.
These proposals will have a crippling effect on small business owners and professionals, as the tax rates will skyrocket. Many small businesses fail, having borrowed heavily to start, and need these tax rules to allow them to survive long enough to become profitable. Professionals typically graduate with hundreds of thousands in student loans. Why would anyone take the risk of starting a business and putting their financial lives at risk if they’re just going to have it all taxed away?
In my practice I meet with many medical professionals, young and old, many of whom tell me they feel betrayed by your government. They are asking serious questions about moving to the States, working less, or retiring earlier. So while the government is telling the public that these proposals will only affect the wealthy, what happens to the staff that these professionals have or would have hired if the professional decides they’ve had enough of working in such a draconian tax regime? There will be layoffs and reduced hours for office staff, or no jobs and taxes ever created if the young professionals decide to move. These professionals are not coming to me with idle speculation, they are quite serious in wanting to know what it would be like to work just south of the border.
I would like to request a meeting, in person, to discuss these proposals. If these proposals go through as is with such minimal consultation, not only will I be actively supporting your opponent in the next federal election, but will encourage my clients, family, and friends to do so as well.
By Brad on August 30, 2017
Double taxation is Never fair. You will wipe out the small business sector which seems to be the aim. No competition equals price and wage fixing. This will put us into a forced economic slump like canadians have never experienced. It is a biased and unfair tax aimed at those who have put in tireless hours, much of their own money, put their nose to the grindstone and worked hard. Assets are these peoples retirement. My whole family has worked hard to overcome the adversities we have dealt with by even owing a business. I am not proud to be Canadian.
By Charlene Cranley on August 29, 2017
Entrepreneurs are continuously balancing the cash flow needs of the business as well as the cash flow needs of the family. When the business suffers, so does the family. When the business succeeds, so should the family. But if there is less flexibility in how to manage one’s affairs, either by income splitting with a lower income, non-active spouse or by accumulating corporate investments for a rainy day or for future expansion, then clearly the degree of risk goes up, again, for the entrepreneur. Taking all of these issues into consideration, the cost of capital is now higher, which means that the rate of return on your small business enterprise efforts are lower. This discourages innovation, entrepreneurship and risk taking. As I’ve always said, something is only as good as to what you compare it to. If the net benefits to entrepreneurs is the “same” as any other tax payer, then there is no reward for taking risk. My great fear is that these policies will crush entrepreneurship in Canada, which in turns means greater unemployment and lower overall tax revenues.
This is very, very bad policy on all fronts.
By Doug Nelson on August 28, 2017
as we know depending on the situation the rates will be even higher that top marginal tax rates.
By Janet Fish on August 24, 2017
We spend our lives trying to make a living trying to save we get sucked into all the govt. programs like RRSP’s that bite you in the butt at retirement. Try to succeed at business and try to create a little benefit for our hard work and effort to save, diversity and invest. Then the Govt. changes the rules. Kicking us when we’re down (especially here in AB) Hard workers and savers get penalized in the end. Can’t trust the Govt. can’t lick’em better to join ‘em if I could redo the past 20 years I’d seek a Fed. Govt 9-5’r and reap the benefits of a pension and health care coverage. Another Tax grab.
By Janet on August 23, 2017
The small business corporations will be forced to close. It will encourage tax evasion, as it is getting harder to manage our business, as there are no benefits to operate a business. it is forgotten that an owner of business do not work only 40 hours a week but much more. Where is the incentive?
By LISE LACROIX on August 23, 2017
This is clearly a very unpopular idea and for good reason. The very fact that someone in the government thought this was a practical way to raise a tax is short-sighted. The comments above are all excellent comments. Small business needs more breaks, not fewer. This is what keeps the Canadian economy alive, vibrant, and equitable.
By Sandra Gibbs on August 17, 2017
This out of touch Liberal Government led by the worst Prime Minister since Pierre, is set to ruin our Country. Hugh deficits will continue until they are booted out. They are on the path of increasing taxes to everyone and the subject of passive income in small corporations is no exception. While the US reduces taxes to their citizens, these stupid Liberals are going to drive our economy into the ground. Just this week the jugheads have announced a gift of our tax money in the amount of $20 million to the Clinton Foundation. This is one of the most despicable foundations in the world led by the most dangerous and corrupt criminals in the Washington swamp.
By M MacDonald on August 16, 2017
Small business owners do not get a typical pension like those working for an organization. After small business owners retire, passive investment income is their way of provide a pension to themselves. Taxing them at the highest personal tax rate is simply unconscionable.
By David on August 16, 2017
We that are in small businesses in BC see this as another tax grab by a government that is spending and spending. We do try to keep money aside in the business as replacing necessary equipment is very expensive. We are already paying every month on last years profit but this year is a bad year for businesses so that inactive income pays Revenue Canada again. The big problem here is that there are less and less tax payers and there will be more as small business close. We have fewer property tax payers as well in BC with Farm Status for 2 acres and over.
By Leanor Davidson on August 16, 2017
Seems little thought has been given to Holding Companies. Are they going to be taxed at the highest personal tax rates? After all, this is a convenient legally sheltered from creditors CCPC, of excess funds, ” parked ” until further notice. If they are going to be treated differently than active CCPC’s, this could be a tactic by the Federal government, for Lawyers and Accountants to get on the band wagon and incorporate thousands of new Holding Companies, to avoid the new, proposed tax changes on passive income. Throwing them a bone for the loss of some of their ” Personal Corporation” tax loopholes.
By Ken on August 16, 2017
There are so many reasons these proposed changes should be viewed with horror by Canadians. Small business is the central employer in our economy and this would fundamentally alter the landscape for those businesses. There are many Canadians that have built their retirement around their CCPC. It would be terribly unfair to make changes now that would permanently lower their standard of living.
By Terry on August 16, 2017
This policy change would be a money maker for bookkeepers and accountants, which in itself is not a taxpayer-friendly move, due to all the extra and new record-keeping necessary to track which funds would be subject to which tax rates. This would naturally increase the chances for errors, and essentially disable the small business person from either understanding, or being able to keep track of, their own tax position with any confidence. It seems like a way for the Trudeau Liberals to attempt to tax all the passive savings currently held by CCPCs, and thus, is a signal that this government is desperately looking for more revenue to fund their out-of-control spending. It’s not only bad policy for taxpayers, but has to potential to do untold damage to small businesses, which are the backbone of the Canadian economy.
By Lori on August 16, 2017
Just another ill-thought out tax grab by the Liberals.
By Robert Lamb on August 16, 2017
This will have a detrimental effect on the Small Business owner where many of them al already struggling. It could mean the end of some businesses.
By Doug Northrup on August 16, 2017
It’s a totally political move aimed at people who have no idea what goes on in business; the risks, the limited rewards prior to success and the need more often than not to finance expansion or even cash-flow from the proceeds of the passive investments that were placed there by the business owner(s). Another dumb Liberal move.
By Alan Caplan on August 16, 2017
We take the risk as small business owners. The benefits are few and far between. These new measures would be terrible.
By Craig McConnell on August 16, 2017
Already taxed when the funds do come out to personal hands.. with this move to get the tax money now rather than in the future does it mean more changes to come, away from integration, but to double taxation…?
By Clare on August 11, 2017
All Income earned within a corporation should be taxed at the prevailing corporate rates not at any personal rates, much less the top personal rates. Measures like that only encourage tax evasion. Simply disgraceful.
By Patrick on August 09, 2017
It depends on the details of the policy
By dilip on August 09, 2017
Small business corporations should be supported, but this measure will force some corporations to be closed.
By Irina Glazounova on August 09, 2017