chris12345 Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Chicken. said: Only if you plan to sell north of $250k worth i believe… Yea that sucks.....$250k is unfortunately not a lot of money anymore. Don't get me wrong happy to have $250k but it doesn't get me a house. But also I am unclear how distributions are taxed from corporations? Edited April 16 by chris12345 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 Higher tobacco and vaping taxes offsets drug plan spending in federal budget https://www.timescolonist.com/national-news/higher-tobacco-and-vaping-taxes-offsets-drug-plan-spending-in-federal-budget-8609712 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 3 hours ago, chris12345 said: Yea that sucks.....$250k is unfortunately not a lot of money anymore. Don't get me wrong happy to have $250k but it doesn't get me a house. But also I am unclear how distributions are taxed from corporations? Increase in taxes on capital gains To help cover some of its multi-billion dollar commitments, the government is proposing a tax hike on capital gains — the profit individuals make when assets like stocks and second properties are sold. The government is proposing an increase in the taxable portion of capital gains, up from the current 50 per cent to two thirds for annual capital gains over $250,000. Freeland said the change would impact the wealthiest 0.1 per cent. There's still some protection for small businesses. There's been a lifetime capital gains exemption which allows Canadians to exempt up to $1,016,836 in capital gains tax-free on the sale of small business shares and farming and fishing property. This June the tax-free limit will be increased to $1.25 million and will continue to be indexed to inflation thereafter, according to the budget. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 Some of the winners and losers in the 2024 federal budget https://www.timescolonist.com/highlights/some-of-the-winners-and-losers-in-the-2024-federal-budget-8610364 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 5 hours ago, chris12345 said: Did I read that right? 2/3s inclusion rate! Fuck that hurts. yeah thats a bit worrisome.... we'll see what that does to investment here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris12345 Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 (edited) 2 hours ago, The Arrogant Worms said: Increase in taxes on capital gains To help cover some of its multi-billion dollar commitments, the government is proposing a tax hike on capital gains — the profit individuals make when assets like stocks and second properties are sold. The government is proposing an increase in the taxable portion of capital gains, up from the current 50 per cent to two thirds for annual capital gains over $250,000. Freeland said the change would impact the wealthiest 0.1 per cent. There's still some protection for small businesses. There's been a lifetime capital gains exemption which allows Canadians to exempt up to $1,016,836 in capital gains tax-free on the sale of small business shares and farming and fishing property. This June the tax-free limit will be increased to $1.25 million and will continue to be indexed to inflation thereafter, according to the budget. I get that but what happens to capital gains inside a corporation? I don't buy her math either. 0.1% of Canadians = 40,000? There are 40,000 people alone in BC with second properties they have to unload when it's time. Edited April 17 by chris12345 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattJVD Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 6 minutes ago, chris12345 said: I get that but what happens to capital gains inside a corporation? I don't buy her math either. 0.1% of Canadians = 40,000? There are 40,000 people alone in BC with second properties they have to until when it's time. I think (speculating) that it would be an annual figure. About 40,000 tax returns each year with greater than $250k in capital gains that aren't otherwise exempted. Still sounds a bit low though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 (edited) 22 minutes ago, chris12345 said: I get that but what happens to capital gains inside a corporation? I don't buy her math either. 0.1% of Canadians = 40,000? There are 40,000 people alone in BC with second properties they have to until when it's time. They are trying to link income with capital gains but that doesn’t make any sense. You can be earning a modest income but own a second property with over $1 million in capital gains. Also, a lot of capital gains in BC is unrealized and won’t be realized for many years. For some people that is their nest egg for retirement. A lot of people don’t have company pensions so they purchased a second property to be their pension. So effectively increasing capital gains is the equivalent of taking someone’s pension money away. The Liberals increased taxes without pissing off the majority of the population, so I’ll give them credit for that. At least they understand how to manipulate the voting electorate. However, their bullshit that this budget is going to help the average person live a better life and make things more affordable is quite laughable… Edited April 17 by Elias Pettersson 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris12345 Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 7 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: They are trying to link income with capital gains but that doesn’t make any sense. You can be earning a modest income but own a second property with over $1 million in capital gains. Also, a lot of capital gains in BC is unrealized and won’t be realized for many years. For some people that is their nest egg for retirement. A lot of people don’t have company pensions so they purchased a second property to be their pension. So effectively increasing capital gains is the equivalent of taking someone’s pension money away. The Liberals increased taxes without pissing off the majority of the population, so I’ll give them credit for that. At least they understand how to manipulate the voting electorate. However, their bullshit that this budget is going to help the average person live a better life and make things more affordable is quite laughable… Bingo. They want to tap into that unrealized equity. What bothers me too is when peole bought second properties for their families to enjoy for nothing and now they are worth $3M. These people have zero intention of selling and won't be able to afford the tax bill. That's just my rant. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattJVD Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 41 minutes ago, chris12345 said: Bingo. They want to tap into that unrealized equity. What bothers me too is when peole bought second properties for their families to enjoy for nothing and now they are worth $3M. These people have zero intention of selling and won't be able to afford the tax bill. That's just my rant. If they have 0 intention of selling then there won't be a tax bill? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris12345 Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 8 hours ago, MattJVD said: If they have 0 intention of selling then there won't be a tax bill? It's a deemed sale when you travel to the other side. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 10 hours ago, MattJVD said: If they have 0 intention of selling then there won't be a tax bill? If the parents pass away then the property would be transferred to the kids. That would be classified as a “deemed disposition” which triggers capital gains. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattJVD Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 (edited) 12 hours ago, chris12345 said: Bingo. They want to tap into that unrealized equity. What bothers me too is when peole bought second properties for their families to enjoy for nothing and now they are worth $3M. These people have zero intention of selling and won't be able to afford the tax bill. That's just my rant. 3 hours ago, chris12345 said: It's a deemed sale when you travel to the other side. It sure is. But the huge tax bill existing in that scenario isn't new with this change. If that vacation property that was bought for next to nothing and is now worth $3M, it would have been a ~$1.5M taxable gain anyways. Now it's ~$2M Edited April 17 by MattJVD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 11 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said: They are trying to link income with capital gains but that doesn’t make any sense. You can be earning a modest income but own a second property with over $1 million in capital gains. Also, a lot of capital gains in BC is unrealized and won’t be realized for many years. For some people that is their nest egg for retirement. A lot of people don’t have company pensions so they purchased a second property to be their pension. So effectively increasing capital gains is the equivalent of taking someone’s pension money away. The Liberals increased taxes without pissing off the majority of the population, so I’ll give them credit for that. At least they understand how to manipulate the voting electorate. However, their bullshit that this budget is going to help the average person live a better life and make things more affordable is quite laughable… So much of progressive spending is based on a growing economy. GDP growth of 2 - 3% provides a lot of spending money. The problem with this government is that GDP growth has pretty much stalled out. They continue to spend with no apparent concern as long as the cheques don't bounce. Capital continues to leave Canada. If PP forms the next government he will be faced with huge problems. Economic and separatist. The BQ are favored to win the next Quebec election. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 Just now, Boudrias said: So much of progressive spending is based on a growing economy. GDP growth of 2 - 3% provides a lot of spending money. The problem with this government is that GDP growth has pretty much stalled out. They continue to spend with no apparent concern as long as the cheques don't bounce. Capital continues to leave Canada. which explains the big bet on TMX. Trudeau needs that offshore oil export money, yesterday. Just now, Boudrias said: If PP forms the next government he will be faced with huge problems. Economic and separatist. The BQ are favored to win the next Quebec election. He's not up to the job, he really isn't. That doesn't excuse Liberal fumbles, but man, PP is not a real leader, his use of anger and fear tactics is not what we need going forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whorvat Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 23 minutes ago, Bob Long said: which explains the big bet on TMX. Trudeau needs that offshore oil export money, yesterday. He's not up to the job, he really isn't. That doesn't excuse Liberal fumbles, but man, PP is not a real leader, his use of anger and fear tactics is not what we need going forward. Pretty rich considering anger and fear tactics is Trudeau's bread and butter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 1 minute ago, Whorvat said: Pretty rich considering anger and fear tactics is Trudeau's bread and butter give me a for instance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whorvat Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 1 minute ago, Bob Long said: give me a for instance. Were you asleep during the past 4 years? His entire campaign was predicated on sewing fear and division amongst Canadians “They don’t believe in science/progress and are very often misogynistic and racist....This leads us, as a leader and as a country, to make a choice: Do we tolerate these people?" I won't be voting for PP but saying he's not fit while thinking Trudeau is, is pretty funny to me. Also love the moniker you've parroted. Stay strong comrade. 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris12345 Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 1 hour ago, MattJVD said: It sure is. But the huge tax bill existing in that scenario isn't new with this change. If that vacation property that was bought for next to nothing and is now worth $3M, it would have been a ~$1.5M taxable gain anyways. Now it's ~$2M It isn't big no just bothers me. It's a me issue.....just my rant. $500k in extra income at 40% = $200k. I'd rather have $200k then pay it for a property where no cash has moved. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 39 minutes ago, Whorvat said: Were you asleep during the past 4 years? His entire campaign was predicated on sewing fear and division amongst Canadians “They don’t believe in science/progress and are very often misogynistic and racist....This leads us, as a leader and as a country, to make a choice: Do we tolerate these people?" I won't be voting for PP but saying he's not fit while thinking Trudeau is, is pretty funny to me. Also love the moniker you've parroted. Stay strong comrade. So this is a vaccination thing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 40 minutes ago, Whorvat said: Were you asleep during the past 4 years? His entire campaign was predicated on sewing fear and division amongst Canadians “They don’t believe in science/progress and are very often misogynistic and racist....This leads us, as a leader and as a country, to make a choice: Do we tolerate these people?" I won't be voting for PP but saying he's not fit while thinking Trudeau is, is pretty funny to me. Also love the moniker you've parroted. Stay strong comrade. That's not fear tho. He's talking about whether or not we allow intolerance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
112 Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 10 minutes ago, Bob Long said: That's not fear tho. He's talking about whether or not we allow intolerance. Yep. It's called the paradox of tolerance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance Essentially we can't tolerate intolerance, which is what Trudeau is getting at. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whorvat Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 19 minutes ago, Bob Long said: That's not fear tho. He's talking about whether or not we allow intolerance. He's sewing fear of fellow Canadians, based on whether or not they succumbed to a medical procedure 23 minutes ago, Satchmo said: So this is a vaccination thing? I was asked for an example, and provided an example Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 2 minutes ago, Whorvat said: He's sewing fear of fellow Canadians, based on whether or not they succumbed to a medical procedure Glad you understand what Poilivre is doing with his transphobic rhetoric, and how harmful it is to give the bigots who make up his base any say over how this country is run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 2 minutes ago, Whorvat said: He's sewing fear of fellow Canadians, based on whether or not they succumbed to a medical procedure I was asked for an example, and provided an example Succumbed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.