BRIEFING NOTE FOR THE FINANCE MINISTER
INCREASING THE CAPITAL GAINS TAX FROM 50% TO 100%
Purpose: The purpose of this briefing note is to provide the finance minister, Bill Morneau, with insight on the merits of an increase, from 50% to 100%, in the tax on capital gains.
Statement of the Issue:
The federal government is currently running a large budget deficit. “By the end of the current fiscal year, the country will be almost $31 billion in the red…$1.3 billion beyond the $29.4 billion deficit [] forecasted in the March 2016 budget” (Minsky, 2016).
Prime Minister Trudeau has, instead, expressed the government's intentions to decrease the debt-to-GDP ratio, a reflection of the government's ability to pay back its debt:“we will continue to
…show more content…
Conclusion/Recommendations
A higher tax rate on capital gains will likely generate the extra revenue required by the government. This action will, however, adversely affect the Canadian economy by discouraging innovation and investment in new technologies. “At a time when both the rate of business start-ups and the expectations for long-term economic growth are declining in Canada, increasing the capital gains tax is exactly the opposite of what the government should be contemplating” (Clemens & Veldhuis, 2017).
An alternative course of action involves decreasing the capital gains tax to encourage investment and stimulate the economy. Higher levels of economic growth will, eventually, generate the increased revenue required by the government. Needless-to-say, this method work is more of a long-run solution and may be undesirable for a government that requires immediate revenue.
In summary, an increase in the capital gains tax is unadvisable. It is important to recognize that “a lower, more competitive capital gains tax rate [is] is essential to attracting and retaining both investment and entrepreneurs” (Clemens & Veldhuis,
…show more content…
(2016, October 13). This year's deficit could be as high as $34 billion, or $16 billion higher than expected: TD Bank. Retrieved March 12, 2017, from http://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/td-banks-expects-canada-to-run-larger-deficits-than-trudeau-budgeted
Lammam , C., & Eisen, B. (2016, March 28). Don't blame the economy for Trudeau's deep deficits. Retrieved March 12, 2017, from http://business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/dont-blame-the-economy-for-trudeaus-deep-deficits
Minsky, A. (2016, November 14). Deeper deficits, no sign of balanced budgets in economic forecast. Retrieved March 15, 2017, from http://globalnews.ca/news/3038932/finance-minister-bill-morneau-releases-economic-outlook/
Mitchell, D. J. (2014, November 07). The Overwhelming Case Against Capital Gains Taxation. Retrieved March 12, 2017, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielmitchell/2014/11/07/the-overwhelming-case-against-capital-gains-taxation/#7f71ff3c3b0a
Tencer, D. (2016, October 13). Deficits To Be Larger Than What Liberals Advertised: TD Bank. Retrieved March 12, 2017, from
Under Canadian Tax Law, there is an election for companies to defer recaptures and capital gains of property that was involuntarily or voluntarily disposed of. In this research paper, we attempt to prove that the election is a useful taxation strategy for businesses so that they are not subject to pay taxes on capital gains or recaptures until such a time where they may acquire an eligible replacement property that will help them earn business income. We will provide facts, definitions, and examples to illustrate the use of this election throughout the paper by explaining the capital cost allowance system, the offset available to business for capital gains and recaptures, the election process, the rules regarding replacing former business
However, there are also some drawbacks associated with raising taxes. Tax is a form of leakage from the circular flow of income leading to negative multiplier effect. If the government increases income tax rates, it might create disincentives to work. It is because when income tax increases, the opportunity cost for leisure time decreases; and people will have to work longer
The growing national deficit is a looming problem in the United States now more than ever. The national debt is constantly increasing and government spending is out of control. If these issues are not solved then they could spell disaster for the nation’s economy when the infamous debt ceiling is finally reached. Currently the national policy on the debt is to continue raising the debt limit until a solution is found that is agreeable between both parties in Congress. The two main issues of over spending and the constant raising of the debts ceiling by Congress can both be resolved by government spending reform, balancing the federal budget and initiating pro-growth policies in order to increase the government’s tax revenue.
Deficit spending refers to the extent at which the government expenditure exceeds revenue over the financial period. This is the opposite of budget surplus. We may apply the term to an individual, private company or government budget (Brux, 2011).
Another idea would be to avoid increasing the tax rates as this will help “minimize economic distortions that shrink the level of production” (Baker III, 2009, p. 1). To promote economic growth, our team recommends that we take the approach of increasing the corporate tax base and decreasing the corporate tax rates. Other suggestion is to reduce the deductibility of state and local taxes. Other reforms that could be looked
Many contend that deficit reduction is imperative to our prosperity and economic recovery. The deficit is blamed for a variety of economic ills including high interest rates, unemployment, the trade deficit, the low rate of national saving and low productivity growth (Shaviro, 1997).
Over the four years from 2009-10 to 2012-2013, Labor had met its fiscal rule of keeping the average spending growth rate to less than 2% a year (Musgrave, R. A. n.d). This was the lowest period of spending growth in 23 years, meaning that not enough money was being injected into the circular flow of income. This reduced aggregate demand as consumer spending was low. In order to ensure that key spending was sustainable, structural improvements were required for the 2014-15 Budget. Overall, the Labor government has left a disastrous legacy of high debt for the Liberal government to try and overcome.
However, raising taxes on the rich and corporations is not as helpful to our economy as most people think. Although raising taxes on the top percent of people and companies appears to create more income for the government, the result will make it harder for middle class and lower class citizens to grow. Some argue that by combining several key changes, including the simplification of the tax code to avoid loopholes and the decrease of taxes on the rich and corporations, there will be an improvement in the national economy. Although this may seem a bit counterintuitive, it makes more sense when looked at closely. By lower taxes and remove all loopholes, smaller businesses are given further opportunities to grow instead of facing financial roadblocks and government
In my opinion, I think he is right. If we reduce spending on Medicare, Medicaid, and social security and look into the defense expenses and reduced some of the spendings in some of the programs such as unnecessary equipment, submarines from the total spending of 4.4 trillion. These are the programs that make up the largest percentage compared to the other programs such as education, international aid, and foreign aid when the government cuts some of the programs mentioned above, it will help balance the budget.
“No one has been hurt more under the Obama economy than young people, than Hispanics, than African Americans, than single moms,”
America has not seen deficits of this nature since World War II with spending levels reaching 25% of the GDP and deficits reaching 10% of the GDP. And, even when this recession comes to an end, estimates show that annual deficits will continue to surpass
The U.S. national debt is very large at more than three-quarters the size of the economy—and growing federal spending, especially on entitlements, is quickly driving the debt to damaging levels. Federal spending was about 23 percent of the GDP in 2012—far above the historical average of 20.2 percent. It is projected to surge to nearly 36 percent in less than one generation. The government debt must be limited in some way or else our economy will face devastating consequences. The government debt has had its highs and lows throughout history in comparison to the GDP, and to reduce it, we must minimize spending on entitlements such as Social Security and Medicare.
"A revolutionary change in our tax system is fundamental to re-energizing the American economy and restoring the American dream" (Moore 1). Currently, there are two major plans being considered to try and fix the tax system in the United States. These two plans are the Flat Tax and the National Retail Sales Tax. "Both the Flat Tax and a National Sales Tax would replace today's discriminatory tax structure with a single low rate. Either plan would promote the kind of capital formation that America needs to boost workers' incomes and raise long-term economic growth" (Mitchell 1). This means that the flat tax would take away the savings from the government and pass them on to the citizens and businesses. By doing this, there would be a rise in long-term economic growth.
For as long as Americans can remember there has always been a federal deficit. In fact, the only time in American history when there was no federal debt was under president Andrew Jackson, and it only lasted a single year(Wall Street Journal). The federal government never managed to pay off the debt again, although some administrations, like Coolidge’s and Clinton’s, have managed to run brief surpluses(Wall Street Journal). Yet today there seems to be no limit on the debt and deficit spending, and a key question has been pressed into the forefront of politics and fiscal policy, “is
The deficit was expected to increase another 20 per cent in 2004, to US $150 billion. http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-3700728_ITM