none
2014-02-28 21:41:09 UTC
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/jason-kenney-says-income-splitting-is-
for-stable-family-units-1.2555515
Jason Kenney says income splitting is for 'stable family units'
Government swings back to tax-cutting promise for couples with children
By Leslie MacKinnon, CBC News Posted: Feb 28, 2014
Employment Minister Jason Kenney praised income splitting as a benefit
for what he called "stable family units," all but cementing the notion
the government is once again committed to allowing two-parent families
with children to shield some of their income from taxes.
"All of the social research indicates that folks that come from stable
families tend to do better in terms of their economic prospects,"
Kenney said.
The minister of employment and social development was speaking to
reporters at the Manning Network Conference, a gathering to discuss
social and political issues.
Kenney said his government believes in supporting "families and the
choices they make" by eliminating what he called unfairness in the tax
code. He didn't explain how single-parent families would be helped by
the policy.
His views are often watched closely because he's rumoured to be
interested in contending for the leadership of the Conservative Party
whenever that position becomes available
Harper seems to agree with Kenney
Kenney's remarks back up what Prime Minister Stephen Harper said on
Wednesday in the House of Commons: that the government has recommitted
itself to its income-splitting promise after indicating just a few
weeks ago it might be rethinking the policy.
On Wednesday Harper said, "As I said during the election campaign, we
think income splitting would be an excellent policy for Canadian
families just as it has been an excellent policy for Canadian seniors."
During the last election campaign, the Conservatives made income
splitting a central plank in their platform, promising that as soon as
the budget was balanced couples with children under 18 could split up
to $50,000 a year of their incomes.
The policy particularly appealed to social conservatives because it
would reward families where one parent stays at home.
However, the C.D. Howe Institute pointed out income splitting would do
nothing for 85 per cent of families, while the Canadian Centre for
Policy Alternatives said the policy would benefit only the wealthiest
of families.
Would eat into future budget surplus
Income splitting, which the CCPA calculated would cost $5 billion a
year and the C.D. Howe Institute judged would cost $2.7 billion, would
eat up a large portion of the future budget surplus.
It might have been for those reasons that Finance Minister Jim Flaherty
backed away from the policy in mid-February shortly after he delivered
his spring budget. He said income splitting needed a "long, hard
analytical look," adding, "I'm just one voice. It benefits some parts
of the Canadian population a lot. And other parts of the Canadian
population virtually not at all."
Flaherty seemed to be deviating from his own government's pledge, and
Harper signalled at the time he might agree with his finance minister.
The prime minister wouldn't even say the phrase "income splitting,"
only allowing that his government would be "reducing taxes for Canadian
families."
That week was followed by a parliamentary break where MPs went back to
their ridings and likely heard an earful from some constituents who
were banking on the income-splitting bonanza.
These concerns were brought back to Harper and his cabinet when
Parliament resumed this week. Income splitting, it would seem, is back
as an election promise the Conservatives don't intend to break.
A look at income splitting and its alternatives
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/a-look-at-income-splitting-and-its-
alternatives-1.2537264
for-stable-family-units-1.2555515
Jason Kenney says income splitting is for 'stable family units'
Government swings back to tax-cutting promise for couples with children
By Leslie MacKinnon, CBC News Posted: Feb 28, 2014
Employment Minister Jason Kenney praised income splitting as a benefit
for what he called "stable family units," all but cementing the notion
the government is once again committed to allowing two-parent families
with children to shield some of their income from taxes.
"All of the social research indicates that folks that come from stable
families tend to do better in terms of their economic prospects,"
Kenney said.
The minister of employment and social development was speaking to
reporters at the Manning Network Conference, a gathering to discuss
social and political issues.
Kenney said his government believes in supporting "families and the
choices they make" by eliminating what he called unfairness in the tax
code. He didn't explain how single-parent families would be helped by
the policy.
His views are often watched closely because he's rumoured to be
interested in contending for the leadership of the Conservative Party
whenever that position becomes available
Harper seems to agree with Kenney
Kenney's remarks back up what Prime Minister Stephen Harper said on
Wednesday in the House of Commons: that the government has recommitted
itself to its income-splitting promise after indicating just a few
weeks ago it might be rethinking the policy.
On Wednesday Harper said, "As I said during the election campaign, we
think income splitting would be an excellent policy for Canadian
families just as it has been an excellent policy for Canadian seniors."
During the last election campaign, the Conservatives made income
splitting a central plank in their platform, promising that as soon as
the budget was balanced couples with children under 18 could split up
to $50,000 a year of their incomes.
The policy particularly appealed to social conservatives because it
would reward families where one parent stays at home.
However, the C.D. Howe Institute pointed out income splitting would do
nothing for 85 per cent of families, while the Canadian Centre for
Policy Alternatives said the policy would benefit only the wealthiest
of families.
Would eat into future budget surplus
Income splitting, which the CCPA calculated would cost $5 billion a
year and the C.D. Howe Institute judged would cost $2.7 billion, would
eat up a large portion of the future budget surplus.
It might have been for those reasons that Finance Minister Jim Flaherty
backed away from the policy in mid-February shortly after he delivered
his spring budget. He said income splitting needed a "long, hard
analytical look," adding, "I'm just one voice. It benefits some parts
of the Canadian population a lot. And other parts of the Canadian
population virtually not at all."
Flaherty seemed to be deviating from his own government's pledge, and
Harper signalled at the time he might agree with his finance minister.
The prime minister wouldn't even say the phrase "income splitting,"
only allowing that his government would be "reducing taxes for Canadian
families."
That week was followed by a parliamentary break where MPs went back to
their ridings and likely heard an earful from some constituents who
were banking on the income-splitting bonanza.
These concerns were brought back to Harper and his cabinet when
Parliament resumed this week. Income splitting, it would seem, is back
as an election promise the Conservatives don't intend to break.
A look at income splitting and its alternatives
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/a-look-at-income-splitting-and-its-
alternatives-1.2537264