A tax grab makes for a Conservative opportunity
Stephen Harper's Conservatives have an opportunity here:
The GST cut is not coming to City of Toronto facilities, programs, parking lots or cabs.
Everything from golf courses to dance classes, recycling boxes to museum admissions will not be cheaper when the GST falls to 6% from 7% on July 1.
Instead, the city will pocket the extra cash.
That's because city staffers are recommending that reducing the GST isn't worth the change.
"Unbelievable," John Williamson of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation said yesterday. "This is meant to be a tax cut that benefits all taxpayers across the country, not go into the pockets of governments."
To reduce the GST, the city would have to change billing systems, websites and printed publications to reflect the new, slightly lower fees, staff reported.
It might also force an amendment to the municipal code or other bylaws.
OK, so even though the Conservative government in Ottawa will charge only 6% for the GST, Toronto will continue to levy a 7% surcharge, send 6% to Ottawa, and keep the 1% for itself.
Now this brings up some interesting questions.
Will the receipts be changed to show this breakdown? I doubt it. The complaint seems to be that it would be too difficult to change things. So I suppose when the City of Toronto bills you for a service, it will still show 7% GST.
Is that a case of fraudulent billing? In principle, I could charge 20% GST, blaming Ottawa, and secretly keep 14% for myself. Of course, no one would fall for that, but then Mayor David Miller expects us to fall for exactly this sort of chicanery.
Doesn't the principle of transparency in government require the City of Toronto to explain exactly how the taxes are being charged? Shouldn't they be honest about which taxes are which, and even more important, report them accurately on paperwork? Such as on receipts printed by billing systems, on websites, and on printed publications?
Is this even legal? The City cannot levy a general sales tax -- it is not within the taxation power. The City can set property taxes, and charge municipal taxes on alcohol served restaurants and bars, and on movie and entertainment tickets. Those powers are granted by the provincial government. A general sales tax can only be levied by the federal and provincial governments. But by not changing the tax collected, the City has essentially created a 1% goods and services tax for itself.
That's just wrong.
Can 1% have an effect? This from the Canadian Restaurant and Foodservices Association on the issue of the alcohol tax:
In the City of Toronto alone, it is estimated that licensee sales will decrease by $2.95 million for every 1% of municipal sales tax applied to liquor.
Of course, the CRFA has a particular point of view, but it seems pretty obvious that not lowering the tax on city goods and services eliminates a major area for city-wide savings for businesses and residents. Those businesses, of course, will not be able to pass on the full force of the GST cut to consumers as long as they are shouldering the old tax rate on anything they get from the City.
I think the City of Toronto has no choice but to recalculate the taxes being charged. If it wants to increase the base price of all goods and services it provides by 1%, it certainly can do that, but then it must explain to the voters why it is doing that. And that to me seems no less difficult than lowering the tax charged by 1%.
How can this be stopped? A business can try to take on City Hall in court, but then that business would shoulder the cost of fighting for a benefit everyone, including competitors, would enjoy. So I don't think any would be quick to volunteer.
But I know who can take on City Hall on behalf of all Toronto residents. The federal government. If the City continues to print materials and hand out receipts claiming that Ottawa is charging 7% GST, and is pocketing the 1% difference, the federal government certainly has an interest in correcting the situation, for three good reasons.
First, the City is attributing a higher tax rate to Ottawa than Ottawa is actually charging, and that can be construed as libel.
Second, the City is effectively levying a goods and services tax, which is not in its power to do. Other levels of government have an interest in making an example of Mayor David Miller and his administration. It sends a message to other municipalities to play by the rules and to be honest.
Third, and perhaps most important, the Conservatives have a wonderful opportunity to show voters in Toronto, who elected no Conservatives in the last election, that the Conservatives care about them. What better way than to fight for lower taxes on their behalf. Might result in a few seats the next time around.
Skew my story on Skewz.com
Rate political news for their bias, read related stories, and leave your own skewed commentary
Search for more opinions from Canadian bloggers on these related keywords
Sphere presents related news articles and blog posts
Sphere It!
Comments
Great post! I am certainly going to check out how they structure their billing on July 1st. If they are still charging a 7% GST, that must be against the law, and if they are not, their arguament - that they don't want to waste the time changing their systems - is obviously a fraud.
Posted by: Andrew Smith at June 17, 2006 12:43 PM
that is highly ellegal that is like me not paying my incometax at the end of the year except in bigger portions. they can solve this problem bye raising there provincial tax and keeping the gst at 1 percent then there putting more into the province. but if I were to avoid paying my taxes on something I am buying I would go to jail.
Posted by: Roy Elsworth at June 17, 2006 01:00 PM
Is anyone surprised by this? Each and every place that includes GST in the price, government or private business, will not lower their prices.
For example, I guarantee you that movie theatre pricess will remain unchanged.
Gov't, business. It doesn't matter. They want as much money as they can get their hands on. Screw the consumer.
I'm a pro-business Tory but even I'm starting to get sick of getting screwed around.
Posted by: sean at June 17, 2006 01:09 PM
Steve, I will be getting my 1% back either in payment or in legal fees. I intent to visit a museum this summer and if the City of Toronto policy does not change, I will be suing them in small claims court. It's cheap and easy for me to do and the city has to defend itself or pay up. I urge anyone who wants to stop Miller and his idiots at Toronto City Hall to join me. Let's Officially Screw them back!!!! Visit my site to join the fight!
Posted by: TrustOnlyMulder at June 17, 2006 02:57 PM
You know there are many people who do busness with small mom and pop operations. GST and PST Tax is often optional at those places depending on whether or not you pay cash.
I think it's time to do as much of your business as possible with those places to offset some of the government tax gouge that we have endured for too long.
Go Underground Economy Go!
Try it ... it's small revenge and I am told it really feels good.
Posted by: Duke at June 17, 2006 03:43 PM
"that a case of fraudulent billing?"
I believe it is and if it is then is it not also a criminal offense for a group of people to be planning to keep out an act of fraud?
I do not believe City Hall is above the criminal code so when they vote to keep the extra 1% then should they not all be charged by the police - not OPP (they appear unable to lay criminal charges)?
By the way, it cost $75 for anyone to file small claims against the City for the 1%. Yes it is more than what you will receive back but is it not important for governments to learn that people will not accept these things anymore?
You could also sue for $500 to recover 1% GST and lost wages due to time in court. You will never win the lost wages but I am sure the City will not paid $10,000+ to argue in court that they own only $1.20 - they will settle out of court for a few hundred (less than one hour of lawyers' fees to the city).
No court will uphold the City's right to charge the wrong GST rate.
Posted by: Gary McHale at June 17, 2006 03:53 PM
Duke states we all should get involved in the Underground Economy.
Although I understand the reason for it, to suggest to people to take part in criminal activities as a way to get back at the government appears to me to be immoral - the very thing people like Duke say they are against when government do these types of things.
And if Duke believes it is okay for people to be involved in criminal activities because of whatever reason then why a government employee cannot be justified in lying and stealing from us because he has a reason that sound correct to him?
Posted by: Gary McHale at June 17, 2006 03:59 PM
I'm a little hazy on the details, but some people are telling me that the "City of Toronto Act" that McGuinty passed (without notice or consent of course) somehow gives the city the right to levy a sales tax. Can anyone comment on that?
If that's true, my thoughts would be that the Province of Ontario has no legal standing to bestow that right upon any city; the Federal government may have delegated the right to levy a sales tax to Provincial governments, but I don't think that right would be transferrable.
Anyway, maybe I'm wrong about the CoT act in which case it's a moot point. But if not, then Harper will be the *only* person who can put a stop to this, because municipal and provincial courts will follow the letter of provincial law.
Also, people are saying that businesses aren't going to lower the prices, but that doesn't really make sense. The list prices of goods don't include GST - that's added on later. Unless those people are suggesting that businesses all intend to RAISE the list prices of their goods and services by 1%, you *will* pay less as a customer. And I doubt that every business will raise their prices, because unlike with governments, consumers have the option to take their business elsewhere.
Posted by: Aaron G at June 17, 2006 05:14 PM
I look forward to the sound of silence emanating from Toronto city hall when the topic of a "deal for cities" is discussed.
The room has been created, they kept it, now some of the excuses are gone. It is now up to the citizens of Toronto to find a responsible council and mayor
Posted by: Stephen at June 17, 2006 06:17 PM
More Whining From Bigots
Much pantspissing and whining in blogosphere this week about the failure to indict.
I speak, of course, of More Whining From Bigots
Much pantspissing and whining in blogosphere this week about the failure to indict.
I speak, of course, of "Captain" Ed Morrisey, who, blogging from his hospital bed, applies his double-digit i.q. to the case of Representative Cynthia McKinney.
First, the story:
A grand jury has declined to indict Rep. Cynthia McKinney of Georgia for allegedly striking a Capitol police officer in March, the federal prosecutor announced Friday.
The decision ends a case against the DeKalb County Democrat that has been rife with political and racial tensions.
"It is right, just and appropriate," McKinney's attorney, William Moffitt, said of the decision, which he learned about from reporters. "I'm ecstatic."
McKinney, arriving Friday night for the Boost Mobile Rock Corps concert at Atlanta's Fox Theatre, entered without responding to reporters's [sic] questions.
The decision comes more than two months after the Washington Superior Court grand jury was first given the case. U.S. Attorney Ken Wainstein called the investigation by his office and Capitol police "extensive and thorough."
"We respect the decision of the grand jury in this difficult matter," Wainstein said in a statement.
Now, the bloated blogger (warning -- link to an idiot):
In the meantime, someone should get a copy of the dictionary to the grand jury and a Toastmasters club membershio [sic] for the US attorney. If someone hits a police officer with a cell phone while he is performing his duties, and witnesses and even the suspect confirms it, how can that not rise to the level of "probable cause"?
How? Let me count the ways: Accident, lack of intent, self-defense, reasonable self-defense.
Poor, stupid dumbfuck. He simply can't understand that the unverified crap he reads on NewsMax and Instacracker and the drivellings of his commenters isn't a substitute for actual evidence. Of course, Special Ed wasn't present at the incident, doesn't know what evidence was presented and doesn't know what the grand jury knew or thought. But that doesn't stop the dumbfuck from suggesting the grand jury was too Negroid to understand the law and the facts: "Race baiting was the only defense McKinney could offer," says the dishonest seaman stain.
Of course, Ed's commenters take the hint and join in the hate parade:
I think James Joyner at OTB hit the nail on the head, reminding us that, "[t]his is the same jury pool that acquitted Marion Berry on two sets of felony charges and then reelected him twice."
----------------------
And they wonder why we don't treat them with respect.
I doubt "they" wonder that at all.
p.s. to doubleplus dumbfuck James Joyner: Marion Berry is a U.S. Representative from Arkansas, not the former Mayor of D.C. And I won't even bother to point out all the other inaccuracies in the single sentence, "This is the same jury pool that acquitted Marion Berry on two sets of felony charges and then reelected him twice. "Captain" Ed Morrisey, who, blogging from his hospital bed, applies his double-digit i.q. to the case of Representative Cynthia McKinney.
First, the story:
A grand jury has declined to indict Rep. Cynthia McKinney of Georgia for allegedly striking a Capitol police officer in March, the federal prosecutor announced Friday.
The decision ends a case against the DeKalb County Democrat that has been rife with political and racial tensions.
"It is right, just and appropriate," McKinney's attorney, William Moffitt, said of the decision, which he learned about from reporters. "I'm ecstatic."
McKinney, arriving Friday night for the Boost Mobile Rock Corps concert at Atlanta's Fox Theatre, entered without responding to reporters's [sic] questions.
The decision comes more than two months after the Washington Superior Court grand jury was first given the case. U.S. Attorney Ken Wainstein called the investigation by his office and Capitol police "extensive and thorough."
"We respect the decision of the grand jury in this difficult matter," Wainstein said in a statement.
Now, the bloated blogger (warning -- link to an idiot):
In the meantime, someone should get a copy of the dictionary to the grand jury and a Toastmasters club membershio [sic] for the US attorney. If someone hits a police officer with a cell phone while he is performing his duties, and witnesses and even the suspect confirms it, how can that not rise to the level of "probable cause"?
How? Let me count the ways: Accident, lack of intent, self-defense, reasonable self-defense.
Poor, stupid dumbfuck. He simply can't understand that the unverified crap he reads on NewsMax and Instacracker and the drivellings of his commenters isn't a substitute for actual evidence. Of course, Special Ed wasn't present at the incident, doesn't know what evidence was presented and doesn't know what the grand jury knew or thought. But that doesn't stop the dumbfuck from suggesting the grand jury was too Negroid to understand the law and the facts: "Race baiting was the only defense McKinney could offer," says the dishonest seaman stain.
Of course, Ed's commenters take the hint and join in the hate parade:
I think James Joyner at OTB hit the nail on the head, reminding us that, "[t]his is the same jury pool that acquitted Marion Berry on two sets of felony charges and then reelected him twice."
----------------------
And they wonder why we don't treat them with respect.
I doubt "they" wonder that at all.
p.s. to doubleplus dumbfuck James Joyner: Marion Berry is a U.S. Representative from Arkansas, not the former Mayor of D.C. And I won't even bother to point out all the other inaccuracies in the single sentence, "This is the same jury pool that acquitted Marion Berry on two sets of felony charges and then reelected him twice."
Posted by: at June 17, 2006 06:25 PM
Calgary is doing the same thing, ass boys.
http://bigcitylib.blogspot.com/2006/06/toronto-and-calgary-will-keep-proceeds.html
Probably alot of other municipalities will follow their lead.
Posted by: bigcitylib at June 17, 2006 07:17 PM
Bronconnier, the mayor of Calgary, is a Liberal--so he probably feels he is helping the Liberal cause along--of course--I didn't know the Liberals had a cause other than filling their own pockets.
This is the Liberals in action pure and simple--I can hardly wait for someone with the smarts to take the respective cities on--this should be illegal in any decent world--when will we say enough is enough? This is a tax break for everyone, albeit a small one--it is a federal tax, not a provincial or municipal one so by rights the cities should have no say in continuing it.
Posted by: George at June 17, 2006 08:05 PM
BigCityLib, you are such a fucking homophobe.
Posted by: Joe Schmoe at June 17, 2006 09:56 PM
A 1% money grab is nothing. Municipal government services are probably at least 80% waste and corruption, with the remaining 20% or so of actual services inevitably delivered late, of low quality or not even needed.
The salaries and benefits are too high. The contracts are padded and the selection process is corrupt. The services are designed to win special-interest votes and secure political donations and campaign workers, and not to do anything that the average taxpayer wants. The results that are achieved are usually the opposite to the intended results, partly because of sheer, collective and unanswerable stupidity, but also because when a government program makes things worse, this opens the door to raising taxes, raising spending, raising salaries, and getting even more of one's friends onto the municipal payroll.
Dithering about a 1% tax grab is like complaining that the elephant sitting on your chest has bad breath. The issue is not "how much GST are they charging on their services", it is "how did we get sucked in so badly to this disgraceful and corrupt socialist miasma, and how can we possibly get out again?"
Posted by: at June 17, 2006 10:29 PM
This only applies to the remainder of 2006. In 2007 the city will make the adjustments.
Miller added the refund is only a problem this year because the cut in the GST comes halfway through the fiscal year.
Next year, he said, city fees will be recalculated to reflect the new rate.
http://www.insidetoronto.ca/to/scarborough/story/3552353p-4104012c.html?loc=scarborough
Posted by: Robert McClelland at June 17, 2006 10:30 PM
cheat cheat and cheat this what i doing and elet them find ....and they never do so cheat every time ...buy cigs an reserve, buy beer in us and cheat always but if you stupid.....pay
Posted by: george at June 18, 2006 01:01 AM
It's a small point but since the GST is charged at point of sale, reducing the actual GST to 6% but charging 7% is also defrauding the Federal Government. The value of the goods has in effect gone up 1%, so the amount of GST should be ((x) + (x*.01))*.06, not ((x)*.07)-((x)*.01).
We also need to keep in mind that this is just the first installment of the Conservative plan. So the municipalities and other institutions are going to follow this "lazy" route from now on?
Talk about equilization by another name.
Posted by: john at June 18, 2006 05:50 AM
My point is that the 1% not remitted to the Federal Government is itself subject to GST, thereby increasing taxes. A tax cut that raises taxes. Only a Liberal could be that devious!
The Toronto Parking Commission has stated that by not changing the GST it charges, they will pick up $80000. They will now owe an additional $480 to the Feds.
Posted by: john at June 18, 2006 06:00 AM
I do have some sympathy for places like Tim Horton's. Many of their prices are calculated to make life at the drive-thru simpler so that the price with tax ends up being say, $1.25. What are they to do? Charge $1.24 and have pennies flying all over the place?
Posted by: Tom at June 18, 2006 06:47 AM
I have no problem with the City keeping the extra, just as I dont have trouble with the federal government reducing taxes to create room and the provinces taking the "tax room".
That is a more honest way of taxing the citizenry rather than the sheel game of equalization, then you know who is taxing you and you can figure out if they really are delivering.
Now the debate over the right levels of taxation are a different matter. So once again, Mr Miller and his band of merry mayors can stop going cap in hand to the federal government. Along with the lack of accountability that brings it is also jumping the cue, municipalities are creatures of the provinces and arent even recognized constitutionally....of course sir john a referred to the provinces as glorified municipalities....but that is another story.
Posted by: Stephen at June 18, 2006 07:17 AM
quote:
to suggest to people to take part in criminal activities as a way to get back at the government appears to me to be immoral
Gary
Paying cash for services is NOT criminal activity.
Stop being such a sheep with your life.
Don't believe what government tells you.
Income tax and others taxes is a BIG FRAUD A LIE
put upon our country to pay for their unions and fat cat politicians and to have control over your 100 year existance on earth.
( less if they manage to kill you before you reach 100!)
There is no income tax act in canada.
If there is then show it to me !
Gary is symptomatic of our brainwashed propagandized mind set here in Canada.
Getting screwed by all levels of government will not end today or tomorrow BUT if people wake up and fight back a bit instead of rolling over like pansies then just maybe there is hope. I tend to think we've already lost the fight when you have close to 50% of voters ready to toss their life and money away by voting for more taxation and more union power.
We basically pay taxes so all these chumps can get their 2,5% whatever increase yearly like clock work and everyone else has suck muck.
Wake up Gary
Posted by: banjotom at June 18, 2006 07:54 AM
If the Fed. Gov. were to raise the tax from 7% to 8% you could be sure the cities would have it raised overnight. They have had some time allready to have some staffer make the change notice (affective July 1...). It is disrespect of the citizen that they feel it is to dificult and time consuming to do. Civil servants will only do as little as the have to do, extra is to "stressful".
Posted by: Cal at June 18, 2006 09:24 AM
It's never 'too difficult to change things' when they're RAISING the taxes, though...is it?
Having said that...it's better that the Torontonians have to suffer for Toronto than trying to leech it from the rest of us, so suffer on ya begs :)
D
Posted by: David Lockwood at June 18, 2006 10:22 AM
Seems to me this is a simple case of graft. The municipal government of Toronto is illegitimately realizing financial gain from monies which are rightfully the consumers'.
Toronto must be a great place to be these days. A racist provincial government tacitly recognizing a native version of sharia law on its reserves and a municipal government stealing its citizens' money.
People used to hate Toronto because they were jealous. Now it's just pathetic. What happened to you guys?
Posted by: potato at June 18, 2006 09:23 PM
Edmonton announced this morning that they too will be keeping the extra 1% 'cause the amount is so small-$300,000- that they can't be bothered. If i, as a business owner kept the gst i charged you can bet that the government would not consider it too small to bother with even if it was only $300.
Posted by: lynda at June 19, 2006 12:35 PM
Ahem....pardon me.....Had your beloved CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENT not introduced the GST in the first place (after raising many other taxes just to justify introducing the GST)this discussion would not be taking place.Or do you folks simply wish to stick your heads in the sand and scream Liberal inaction? WAKE UP !!
Posted by: at June 20, 2006 09:11 PM
 
|
|
