Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

DAN ALBAS: GST holiday "ill considered, decidedly unserious policy"


It appears contradictory to promote a temporary GST exemption on candy, while opposing a policy that would make new housing more affordable.

We are just days away from December 14, 2024—the day when the Trudeau Liberals' temporary expansion of select GST-exempt items is scheduled to take effect.
I mention this because Bill C-78, which enables the temporary expansion of GST-exempt items from December 14 to February 14, still needs to pass in the Canadian Senate.
Does this mean the GST “holiday” will be delayed? While technically this is possible, despite the Prime Minister’s claims to have appointed “independent” Senators, I expect this Bill to be passed and to receive royal assent in time to meet the Liberal governments politically selected timeline.
Regarding GST exemptions, the House voted this week on the Conservative plan to permanently exempt new homes under $1 million from GST. This tax policy would save Canadians up to $50,000 on the price of a new home and is estimated to stimulate the construction of 30,000 additional homes and apartments annually across Canada.
Most surprisingly, the Trudeau Liberal government voted against this measure. As noted by many experts and stakeholders, it appears contradictory to promote a temporary GST exemption on items like junk food, candy, select alcohol, and video gaming systems while opposing a policy that would make new housing more affordable.
It is understandable why during its review of the bill, some Senators said that they found the Liberals' temporary GST exemption policy to be both "ill-considered" and "decidedly unserious."
Next week will be the final sitting week for the House of Commons before its winter break. On Tuesday, the Trudeau Liberal government will present the long-delayed Fall Economic Statement (FES), which will provide Canadians with a clearer picture of the country's current federal fiscal position.
The Fall Economic Statement will also provide an opportunity for the Liberal government to outline its future spending priorities. I am particularly interested in its projections, given the Prime Minister's promise to NATO allies to meet the 2% of GDP target by 2032. Further complicating this fiscal picture is his government's reliance on the NDP to maintain power. The recent credit downgrade of British Columbia from its triple-A rating demonstrates the risks of mismatched deficit spending and revenue.
Recent leaks to the media suggest this dynamic between deficits and revenue may explain rising tensions between the Prime Minister and his finance minister over the Liberal Government’s "Working Canadians Rebate"—a proposed $250 payment planned for early spring 2025. This rebate would be distributed to 18.7 million Canadians who worked in 2023 and earned individual net incomes up to $150,000.
The reporting indicates finance officials consider both the GST break and $250 cheque pledge "fiscally unwise," while the Prime Minister's office views these as important "politically strategic spending measures."
My question this week: Do you support the Trudeau government's proposal to send $250 cheques to 18.7 million working Canadians who earned up to $150,000 in individual net income during 2023? Why or why not?
I can be reached at Dan.Albas@parl.gc.ca or call toll-free 1-800-665-8711.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

'Very good news' that Supreme Court will hear B.C. mineral claims case, Eby says

The BC government needs clarity from the Supreme Court of Canada on a landmark mineral rights claim, Premier David Eby says. But the lawyer representing the challenger says that they would have preferred the province respect the lower court's decision. Eby said Thursday it is very good news that the court will hear its appeal of a ruling that found the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the provincial mineral claims regime are "inconsistent." The BC Court of Appeal ruled in December that the provincial Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, or DRIPA, should be "properly interpreted" to incorporate the UN declaration into the laws of B.C. with immediate legal effect. That ruling set off the appeal from the province amid concerns that it could cause economic uncertainty ... CLICK HERE for the full story 
Post a Comment
Read more

EBY OFFSIDE WITH NATIONAL INTEREST AS CARNEY AND SMITH BUILD BC'S ECONOMIC FUTURE WITHOUT HIM ~~ BC Conservatives

IMAGE CREDIT :  CBC News   Prime Minister Mark Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith announced a landmark agreement today committing Ottawa to designate a new pipeline to BC's west coast as a project of national interest by October 1, 2026, with construction approval targeted for September 1, 2027. The deal pairs the pipeline with a new industrial carbon pricing framework and a fall 2027 construction start. British Columbia, the province where the pipeline ends, where the jobs would land, and where the export terminal would be built, was nowhere at the table. "This is a nation-building deal, and the BC NDP have been locked out of the room," said Trevor Halford, Interim Leader of the Official Opposition.  "While the Prime Minister and the Premier of Alberta were doing the hard work of growing the Canadian economy, the NDP is on the sidelines calling this pipeline a 'fiction' and an 'energy vampire.'  He chose petulance over partnership, and now BC ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Kamloops - North Thompson BC Conservative MLA Ward Stamer speaks to Bill 20 — K’ómoks Treaty Act

The following is a condensed version of Kamloops – North Thompson MLA Ward Stamer’s remarks, to the BC Legislature, on the afternoon of Tuesday May 19th : I rise today to continue remarks on Bill 20, the K’ómoks treaty, and to address what I believe are some of the most important constitutional, democratic and governance concerns facing this Legislature today. At the centre of this debate are two major issues. First, unresolved overlapping territorial boundaries tied to this treaty process. And second, the growing legal and political consequences arising from the provincial government’s implementation of the Declaration of Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, more commonly known as DRIPA. Much of the government’s defence on DRIPA rests upon references to the United Nations declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, commonly known as UNDRIP. And this is where we must begin having a more honest and mature conversation in this province. UNDRIP was never originally designed to function ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Labels

Show more