Canadian Election - Financial Impact

[nereo]

? I get $60/mo for childcare...

I would also like to know where to sign up for the child goldmine of government handouts.  Mine isn't paying out as much as I thought he would . . .      :P

Isn't it even cheaper (at least in the short term) to pay couples to not have children in the first place?  If so, I'd like to sign up for benefits for the half-a-dozen children my spouse and I haven't had :-P

[GuitarStv]

? I get $60/mo for childcare...

I would also like to know where to sign up for the child goldmine of government handouts.  Mine isn't paying out as much as I thought he would . . .      :P

Isn't it even cheaper (at least in the short term) to pay couples to not have children in the first place?  If so, I'd like to sign up for benefits for the half-a-dozen children my spouse and I haven't had :-P

The people who I'd least like to have children tend to also be the ones I'd least like the government to give money too . . . hmm.  Tough choices there.

[daverobev]

I think allowing the super rich to split their income with their children to avoid tax might encourage them to breed

When I'm PM, it's only split between any *two* members of a family :)

...childcare benefit...3 kids, $12k income, get another $1200 *a month*.

? I get $60/mo for childcare (and it was $0 until Harper's recent UCCB expansion).

Sorry, *child* benefit, not childcare.

CCTB + UCCB. And whatever it gets replaced with (CTB?) will probably be a little more generous.

[ioweu0]

While I didn't vote Conservative, the thing that scares me most about the Liberal agenda --> "Hey, let's spend on infrastructure in exactly the same way Greece did!  That's a good idea!"  :(

$60 billion?!  Who the fuck is going to pay that back?  Your kids?  You think in 10 years when government has to cut spending to pay back a giant loan people are going to embrace it then?  Fuck no.  10 years of deficits plus interest.  ...Man alive.  People who spend more than they earn over a decade always end up in the shit.

I am not really sure why you seem to be raging against the liberals on this one. The conservative government has racked up what $130 billion to the debt and provided no infrastructure, no jobs, no higher wages to show for it. Liberals want to invest in Canada and investments in infrastructure tend to pay off. The issues in Greece are not because of infrastructure spending.

[Kaspian]

While I didn't vote Conservative, the thing that scares me most about the Liberal agenda --> "Hey, let's spend on infrastructure in exactly the same way Greece did!  That's a good idea!"  :(

$60 billion?!  Who the fuck is going to pay that back?  Your kids?  You think in 10 years when government has to cut spending to pay back a giant loan people are going to embrace it then?  Fuck no.  10 years of deficits plus interest.  ...Man alive.  People who spend more than they earn over a decade always end up in the shit.

I am not really sure why you seem to be raging against the liberals on this one. The conservative government has racked up what $130 billion to the debt and provided no infrastructure, no jobs, no higher wages to show for it. Liberals want to invest in Canada and investments in infrastructure tend to pay off. The issues in Greece are not because of infrastructure spending.

I raged against that spending too!  Bailouts for Canadian banks which hadn't suffered the Financial Crisis?  Pure insanity.

And yes, the majority of the original Greek debt was from infrastructure spending.  Ironically, stuff they bought from Germany.  It began with the over-the-top complete country overhaul for the 2004 Summer Olympics.  (I've been there, I've seen their subway train infrastructure, airports, etc., and they are BEAUTIFUL!)  http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2012-08-02/how-the-2004-olympics-triggered-greeces-decline

One of the things I'm raging about it that the infrastructure spending is also being billed primarily as "job creation".  The biggest job creation program ever--Canada's equivalent of the USA's "New Deal" to end the Great Depression.  First of all, we're not in a depression.  Second of all, our unemployment rate is at a historical norm.  So, why do emergency measures?

[CanuckStache]

All I know is I've been to every province, multiple times - driven coast to coast (including the labrador 'highway') and our infrastructure is brutal. Especially in the larger cities (thinking of Vancouver for example). We definitely need some spending on getting people and goods moving. And with interest rates so incredibly low, now would be the best time.

And you can't really compare with Greece - the have tons of other problems. I just spent most of September there and learned quite a bit about it. They didn't just spend on infrastructure - their monetary problems go back many decades.

[ioweu0]

While I didn't vote Conservative, the thing that scares me most about the Liberal agenda --> "Hey, let's spend on infrastructure in exactly the same way Greece did!  That's a good idea!"  :(

$60 billion?!  Who the fuck is going to pay that back?  Your kids?  You think in 10 years when government has to cut spending to pay back a giant loan people are going to embrace it then?  Fuck no.  10 years of deficits plus interest.  ...Man alive.  People who spend more than they earn over a decade always end up in the shit.

I am not really sure why you seem to be raging against the liberals on this one. The conservative government has racked up what $130 billion to the debt and provided no infrastructure, no jobs, no higher wages to show for it. Liberals want to invest in Canada and investments in infrastructure tend to pay off. The issues in Greece are not because of infrastructure spending.

I raged against that spending too!  Bailouts for Canadian banks which hadn't suffered the Financial Crisis?  Pure insanity.

And yes, the majority of the original Greek debt was from infrastructure spending.  Ironically, stuff they bought from Germany.  It began with the over-the-top complete country overhaul for the 2004 Summer Olympics.  (I've been there, I've seen their subway train infrastructure, airports, etc., and they are BEAUTIFUL!)  http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2012-08-02/how-the-2004-olympics-triggered-greeces-decline

One of the things I'm raging about it that the infrastructure spending is also being billed primarily as "job creation".  The biggest job creation program ever--Canada's equivalent of the USA's "New Deal" to end the Great Depression.  First of all, we're not in a depression.  Second of all, our unemployment rate is at a historical norm.  So, why do emergency measures?

True, I suppose I should have said their problems are not entirely based on infrastructure. Its a pretty well known fact that the Olympics for pretty much any host country is a horrible idea. Smart investments in infrastructure is a very good idea. Forget the stadiums which no one uses any more in Greece, the new highways and airport helps Greece out. Especially considering something like 25% or more of their GDP is based on tourism, it makes it easier for people to visit and get around.

I believe a lot of issues with Greece was poor spending choices. Not spending on things which will give a decent return (like stadiums) while also not having a revenue plan to pay back the debt. If your investment in infrastructure does not pay off in more jobs and more taxes then  you are a little bit screwed, and that's ignoring the fact Greece was having issues collecting due taxes.

I think Canada is a lot different than Greece, and we are unlikely to fall into the same traps they did.

[Fodder]

As a family with two high-income earners and two kids, we will not benefit financially from a Liberal government.  And I'm okay with that.

Right now, I get $220/month to help with childcare, and assuming they follow through on their promises, that will go down to about $30.  I have maxed out my TFSAs and plan to park the $$ there for as long as possible.

But it doesn't make sense to give a family like mine the same benefit that's given to a low-income or single-parent family.  It just doesn't.

I'm so freaking happy we are in a new era, and I am interested to see what happens.  Given that I work for the feds, I expect to have a first-hand view of the potential changes and I am stoked.  I think the entire PS is pretty stoked.  The last ten years have been rough.

[nereo]

my biggest hope with the current government is that they restore funding to research funding in higher education.  A selfish desire to be sure, as this is my field, but in the past ~5 years we've gone from global leader to cringe-worthy in many fields. 

[nobodyspecial]

my biggest hope with the current government is that they restore funding to research funding in higher education.  A selfish desire to be sure, as this is my field, but in the past ~5 years we've gone from global leader to cringe-worthy in many fields.

It will be nice if they just left research alone instead of actively 'policing' its findings

[nereo]

my biggest hope with the current government is that they restore funding to research funding in higher education.  A selfish desire to be sure, as this is my field, but in the past ~5 years we've gone from global leader to cringe-worthy in many fields.

It will be nice if they just left research alone instead of actively 'policing' its findings

agreed.  We had to stop actively collaborating with our US colleagues because they couldn't accept the restrictions on the science placed upon our research.  Bloody shame - everyone lost.

[Retire-Canada]

But it doesn't make sense to give a family like mine the same benefit that's given to a low-income or single-parent family.  It just doesn't.

The last ten years have been rough.

Yes and yes.

[daverobev]

Oh, man. Canada Post ceasing the transition to community mailboxes sucks.

Financially it made so much sense. Logistically too.

[Heckler]

Oh, man. Canada Post ceasing the transition to community mailboxes sucks.

Financially it made so much sense. Logistically too.

Financial impacts?  You get dividend cheques in the mail??

[GuitarStv]

Oh, man. Canada Post ceasing the transition to community mailboxes sucks.

Financially it made so much sense. Logistically too.

Financial impacts?  You get dividend cheques in the mail??

75% of Canada has been told that financially it's not OK to deliver mail to homes.  It's odd that the remaining 25% can't join the rest of the country on this, or that home delivery isn't implemented for the whole country.  Either outcome makes sense to me.  Having first and second class mail services though, is unfair.

[nobodyspecial]

Community mail boxes make a lot of sense.
The alternative is to put up the price of postage to cover costs,  and so fewer people will use it, so the price goes up again .etc.etc
Or the taxpayer ends up subsidizing the delivery of junk mail.

The community mail boxes here are great, they have extra lockers for packages - which is all anyone uses the mail for these days anyway.

[scrubbyfish]

I'm unaffected by the mailbox issue any which way. I haven't had service to my door for quite a few years except, ironically, in an apartment building in Vancouver! There, the carrier actually came to each floor and delivered it through every individual door! I don't know why we got that.

Basement suite: Despite a distinct address and mailbox, all went through landlord's front door slot, and didn't reach me.
Village: Mail went to post office, which we all walked to.
Townhouse complex: Mailboxes at front of building, a full block from my door.
etc

I've paid for private post box service for many years. Way better than Canada Post's on many counts. It's not frugal, but worth it to me.

Boy would I be mad if I were that dude that "owned" a house and that concrete block got stuck onto the front yard... I get that a strip doesn't come with, but if the front yard I'd purchased, was paying debt on, bought for view, etc, suddenly turned into a cement patch and point of daily visits by many neighbours, boy oh boy...  http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/abbotsford-man-angry-at-canada-post-over-giant-hole-in-front-yard-1.3286234  Surely mailboxes there decreases home value, too??

[Le Barbu]

Usualy, they use side-yard where I live (Quebec) this mean you got to be on a corner, wich I dont like anyway. Unpleasant for sure, as much as the extra cost for a fence/hedge or extra snow plowed in winter.

[daverobev]

Oh, man. Canada Post ceasing the transition to community mailboxes sucks.

Financially it made so much sense. Logistically too.

Financial impacts?  You get dividend cheques in the mail??

CP is a crown corp. It costs ~ $270 a year to deliver to my door. If they can't raise the price of stamps, who pays for it? The government will have to subsidise it. And where does the government get money? Tax!

I'd rather have the option of paying the $270 directly for the service should I want it, than everyone's tax burden going up to make sure everyone (that currently gets it! Far from everyone in the country!) keeps getting door delivery.

Problem is people bitching and moaning. Things change. Times change. In the UK, there is still Saturday delivery! When I was young, there were *two* postal deliveries a day! So what?

[Shinplaster]

We haven't had home delivery for 25 years.  I didn't see any of the people who retained theirs protesting on our behalf.  All of a sudden it's a crisis when they are going to lose their delivery.

I rather like the community boxes.  Ours is tucked up a side street, and has lots of trees around so you barely see it.  I don't think it's impacting anyone's property negatively.  It helps that we are all considerate, and don't strew junk mail on the ground, etc.  When we go away for a few days, I never worry about having someone pick up our mail, and we don't have to be home for small or medium parcel delivery.   If the weather is really nasty, we just don't pick up our mail that day.  It really is not a big deal.

[Retire-Canada]

Home delivery is irrelevant to me, but I can ride a bike 200kms in a day without dying.

My mom is ~87 and for her walking a block or two to get her mail is a big deal.

[scrubbyfish]

My mom is ~87 and for her walking a block or two to get her mail is a big deal.

Yep, I think this is the challenge. How do we meet the needs of people who require home delivery of any goods (food, medicine, mail, etc) for mobility reasons? Some areas have library delivery services for people who are housebound, but not daily. Many grocery stores and pharmacies provide delivery, but many for a fee; community volunteers fill in some of the gaps. Home support for people who need help with bathing, cooking, shopping, etc, has been dramatically reduced over the last 20 years.

If people aren't able to meet their needs independently, should the government provide at-home services? Should the family? Should the person be required to go without? Or move?

If mail delivery is a "social service", it faces the same questions that all other social services do.

This summer, I was on bed rest for a month and for the first time since (a terrible, long) illness in my 20s, I got to live this question. Being that stuck was weird, scary, and very isolating, for sure. I relied primarily on my 10 year old.

[daverobev]

Home delivery is irrelevant to me, but I can ride a bike 200kms in a day without dying.

My mom is ~87 and for her walking a block or two to get her mail is a big deal.

How does she get food? Does she cook? Do you ever visit? Does anyone visit her regularly?

I mean, I'm sure there will be exemptions and what not for the really old and infirm. If she's living in an old age home, then no problem, mail to right outside her bedroom - at least in the one I've been to. If she's living in her own house, and managing to live, then I'm sure someone picking up her mail a couple of times a week for her in the cold will work just fine - when they drop the groceries off, for example.

It really doesn't seem to make sense to keep what, 5 million homes going with door to door, because a few thousand old people can't walk a couple of blocks. Especially when there are numerous ways of getting those people their mail anyway.

[daverobev]

My mom is ~87 and for her walking a block or two to get her mail is a big deal.

Yep, I think this is the challenge. How do we meet the needs of people who require home delivery of any goods (food, medicine, mail, etc) for mobility reasons? Some areas have library delivery services for people who are housebound, but not daily. Many grocery stores and pharmacies provide delivery, but many for a fee; community volunteers fill in some of the gaps. Home support for people who need help with bathing, cooking, shopping, etc, has been dramatically reduced over the last 20 years.

If people aren't able to meet their needs independently, should the government provide at-home services? Should the family? Should the person be required to go without? Or move?

If mail delivery is a "social service", it faces the same questions that all other social services do.

This summer, I was on bed rest for a month and for the first time since (a terrible, long) illness in my 20s, I got to live this question. Being that stuck was weird, scary, and very isolating, for sure. I relied primarily on my 10 year old.

It's simple, as I see it: The health system should ensure people not of retirement age are looked after, if necessary. Just like the health system should deal with dental and optical. That is its purpose.

For people older than retirement, government provided old age homes. This should be means tested, meaning that if you get enough money you pay for it, taken out from CPP and OAS and whatnot. If you're decrepit enough to need to live in a home, and cannot afford to pay for it with your own money, you should be taken care of just the same as someone that can; but all bar a small amount of money should go back. Like a couple of hundred dollars a month. And the means testing should include primary residence and TFSA.

[GuitarStv]

Remember that by far the majority of people in this country do not get door to door delivery of mail.  What do the many decrepit 87 year olds who already have community mail boxes do?

[Le Barbu]

My mom is ~87 and for her walking a block or two to get her mail is a big deal.

Yep, I think this is the challenge. How do we meet the needs of people who require home delivery of any goods (food, medicine, mail, etc) for mobility reasons? Some areas have library delivery services for people who are housebound, but not daily. Many grocery stores and pharmacies provide delivery, but many for a fee; community volunteers fill in some of the gaps. Home support for people who need help with bathing, cooking, shopping, etc, has been dramatically reduced over the last 20 years.

If people aren't able to meet their needs independently, should the government provide at-home services? Should the family? Should the person be required to go without? Or move?

If mail delivery is a "social service", it faces the same questions that all other social services do.

This summer, I was on bed rest for a month and for the first time since (a terrible, long) illness in my 20s, I got to live this question. Being that stuck was weird, scary, and very isolating, for sure. I relied primarily on my 10 year old.

It's simple, as I see it: The health system should ensure people not of retirement age are looked after, if necessary. Just like the health system should deal with dental and optical. That is its purpose.

For people older than retirement, government provided old age homes. This should be means tested, meaning that if you get enough money you pay for it, taken out from CPP and OAS and whatnot. If you're decrepit enough to need to live in a home, and cannot afford to pay for it with your own money, you should be taken care of just the same as someone that can; but all bar a small amount of money should go back. Like a couple of hundred dollars a month. And the means testing should include primary residence and TFSA.

At this stage, I would be more scarry to get food and other staples than getting all the junk laying in my mailbox.

[Shinplaster]

Home delivery is irrelevant to me, but I can ride a bike 200kms in a day without dying.

My mom is ~87 and for her walking a block or two to get her mail is a big deal.

I can't speak to the distances involved for new installations, but for existing ones here in our city, no one walks even a block for their mail.  Ours is maybe 150 feet at the most, and the longest walk might be 10 houses.   It can be a bit of a pain in the winter, having to put boots and parkas on to get the mail, but if it's nasty weather, it may be our only outing for the day!  I can see the boxes could be a problem in areas in Toronto though - many older neighbourhoods have no boulevards, just very narrow sidewalks.  The boxes would obstruct the sidewalks, and no one wants them on their front lawn.

I understand about mobility problems with the elderly - my Mom is 85, with issues.  She still manages to get from the ninth floor of her building to the lobby to collect her mail every day.  When she can't, a neighbour does it for her.   If we couldn't, our neighbours would do it for us.   Maybe this is an opportunity to get to know your neighbours?   

I think Canada Post was talking about offering home delivery for shut-ins, etc.  It just wouldn't be every day.  If we needed it, we would be fine with that.  We would be fine having our taxes pay for that service for others in need.

[Retire-Canada]

It really doesn't seem to make sense to keep what, 5 million homes going with door to door, because a few thousand old people can't walk a couple of blocks. Especially when there are numerous ways of getting those people their mail anyway.

I never suggested there were only two options.

She has no relatives close by. She gets by living alone and takes very little from the system to date. The more incidental support she gets the longer she can live at home.

My point is that home mail delivery is of varying importance to different groups of people. It's not a few thousand either. 3.8M people in Canada are over 70 and that proportion of the population is growing.

The longer they can live on their own the cheaper it is for the system.

[GuitarStv]

I'd suggest that if someone is incapable of walking a few hundred feet to a mail box once every week or two, they are no longer really capable of living on their own.

[Cathy]

Canada Post is a corporation created by an Act of Parliament, namely the Canada Post Corporation Act, RSC 1985, c C-10 ("CPC Act"). Although Canada Post is structured as a corporation, it is required to "maintain a corporate identity program ... that reflects the role of the Corporation as an institution of the Government of Canada". CPC Act § 5(2)(e). This seemingly suggests that the legislature intends for Canada Post to be thought of as part of the government. The corporation fulfills a role specifically assigned to the federal government in the constitution, namely the provision of "Postal Service". Constitution Act, 1867, 30 & 31 Vict, c 3, § 91(5). The corporation also enjoys a number of privileges not normally accorded to private corporations, such as a monopoly on certain services (CPC Act § 14) and a general immunity from civil liability (CPC Act § 40(1)).

I think it is likely that Canada Post is part of the "government" within the meaning of § 32(1)(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights of Freedoms (Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11) ("Charter"). This means that it is unlawful for Canada Post's operations to constitute substantive discrimination on the basis of, among other things, age or disability. Charter § 15(1). When making discretionary decisions, government agencies must explicitly "balance[] the Charter values with the statutory objectives". Doré v. Barreau du Québec, 2012 SCC 12 at ¶ 55. Failure to do so in a reasonable manner will result in the actions of the agency being set aside on judicial review. Id at ¶ 7.

Based on the above principles, anybody who is adversely affected by the phasing out of door-to-door delivery is free to file an application in a "court of competent jurisdiction" to obtain "such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just". Charter § 24(1). I do not know whether anybody is yet challenging this phase out, but based on the arguments above in the thread, it sounds like it would be an interesting case to litigate.

[scrubbyfish]

According to CBC (which is often incorrect, but...) "To qualify for home delivery as Canada Post phases it out, an applicant needs to submit a doctor's assessment." If it doesn't need to give medical details (violating confidentiality) and is just another one of those simple forms with doc check-marking that yep, this person requires home delivery for medical reasons, this sounds okay to me. In this, we're burdening our too-few doctors will yet more forms, and the government will be paying out for that too, but on the whole that seems good to me.

But for anyone who doesn't want to do this, and is able to get around (or have a friend get around) at least once a week, I'd encourage a UPS mailbox vs the potential of Canada Post home delivery at $270/yr. The UPS mailbox service is really awesome, offering so many perks that Canada Post (including via its rented mailboxes) doesn't.

[Retire-Canada]

I'd suggest that if someone is incapable of walking a few hundred feet to a mail box once every week or two, they are no longer really capable of living on their own.

My GF is a manager with the local health authority. One of their top priorities is to find ways to keep people in their own homes as long as possible because it is so much cheaper and people are happier.

Supporting people at home only makes sense. Getting mail delivered there is one part of that. Canada Post can do that or you can have home support care workers do that for them. Either way you'll pay for it.

Accessing your mail once every 2 weeks is not a reasonable proposition for people that are older and not as good with internet technology. Getting test results or medical appointment info late is just going to lead to expensive negative health outcomes.

[Carless]

If you want to keep the 10k TFSA limit, here's a petition you can sign;
https://www.change.org/p/justin-trudeau-keep-the-annual-tfsa-contribution-limit-at-10-000

Also Garth Turner has some interesting things to say about that change;

http://www.greaterfool.ca/2015/10/26/losing-it-4/

[BrandonP]

As others have said, it's not just about the money.

I'm single without kids, so I think the tax cut and tfsa reduction will roughly be a wash for me. Better infrastructure will most likely be a net positive for me. Overall, I think I'll end up richer thanks to this election.

I just don't understand why people are against deficits when you can borrow money at extremely low rates and boost your infrastructure.

I'm really glad about this election, and quite excited to see how it goes.

Look at what happened in Greece.

Gutted the TFSA is being reduced. Really am. The usual, oh its only for rich people crap is coming out. It really isn't. People who are rich do not care about an extra $4500. But someone who is not wealthy or just middle class sure does!

It feels like people who use TFSAs correctly are being punished, because most people are terrible with money, and don't know how to use their TFSA correctly.

[BrandonP]

I'd suggest that if someone is incapable of walking a few hundred feet to a mail box once every week or two, they are no longer really capable of living on their own.

My GF is a manager with the local health authority. One of their top priorities is to find ways to keep people in their own homes as long as possible because it is so much cheaper and people are happier.

Supporting people at home only makes sense. Getting mail delivered there is one part of that. Canada Post can do that or you can have home support care workers do that for them. Either way you'll pay for it.

Accessing your mail once every 2 weeks is not a reasonable proposition for people that are older and not as good with internet technology. Getting test results or medical appointment info late is just going to lead to expensive negative health outcomes.

I agree with this.

I get my post delivered, and have since I lived in Canada. I didn't realise people don't get their post delivered and have to collect it! Sounds ridiculous to me. 

[BrandonP]

I'm unaffected by the mailbox issue any which way. I haven't had service to my door for quite a few years except, ironically, in an apartment building in Vancouver! There, the carrier actually came to each floor and delivered it through every individual door! I don't know why we got that.

Basement suite: Despite a distinct address and mailbox, all went through landlord's front door slot, and didn't reach me.
Village: Mail went to post office, which we all walked to.
Townhouse complex: Mailboxes at front of building, a full block from my door.
etc

I've paid for private post box service for many years. Way better than Canada Post's on many counts. It's not frugal, but worth it to me.

Boy would I be mad if I were that dude that "owned" a house and that concrete block got stuck onto the front yard... I get that a strip doesn't come with, but if the front yard I'd purchased, was paying debt on, bought for view, etc, suddenly turned into a cement patch and point of daily visits by many neighbours, boy oh boy...  http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/abbotsford-man-angry-at-canada-post-over-giant-hole-in-front-yard-1.3286234  Surely mailboxes there decreases home value, too??

I would not be happy if my post went to the landlord instead of me!

[Retire-Canada]

TFSA is officially going back to $5500 and is now indexed again in 2016.

I had hoped they'd let it slide for 2016 at $10K and adjust it for 2017, but no such luck.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/morneau-liberal-taxes-for-middle-class-1.3353939

[Cookie78]

TFSA is officially going back to $5500 and is now indexed again in 2016.

I had hoped they'd let it slide for 2016 at $10K and adjust it for 2017, but no such luck.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/morneau-liberal-taxes-for-middle-class-1.3353939

Thanks for posting. I've been wondering about this lately.

[Retire-Canada]

TFSA is officially going back to $5500 and is now indexed again in 2016.

I had hoped they'd let it slide for 2016 at $10K and adjust it for 2017, but no such luck.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/morneau-liberal-taxes-for-middle-class-1.3353939

Thanks for posting. I've been wondering about this lately.

NP. There is a tax cut that a lot of us will benefit from in the new budget so that should take some of the sting out of the TFSA change. Since it's indexed again hopefully we'll see it bumped to $6K in the couple years.

[scrubbyfish]

Darn. Was hoping for my sake that the TFSA continued at 10k/yr. TFSA doesn't change my taxes any which way, but it gives me an option to invest in the lowest-free ETFs. Oh well.

[Retire-Canada]

Darn. Was hoping for my sake that the TFSA continued at 10k/yr. TFSA doesn't change my taxes any which way, but it gives me an option to invest in the lowest-free ETFs. Oh well.

Why can't you invest in ETFs in a Non-Registered account?

[lostamonkey]

Darn. Was hoping for my sake that the TFSA continued at 10k/yr. TFSA doesn't change my taxes any which way, but it gives me an option to invest in the lowest-free ETFs. Oh well.

Why can't you invest in ETFs in a Non-Registered account?

I was about to post the same thing but you beat me to it.

[okits]

TFSA is officially going back to $5500 and is now indexed again in 2016.

I had hoped they'd let it slide for 2016 at $10K and adjust it for 2017, but no such luck.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/morneau-liberal-taxes-for-middle-class-1.3353939

Thanks for posting. I've been wondering about this lately.

NP. There is a tax cut that a lot of us will benefit from in the new budget so that should take some of the sting out of the TFSA change. Since it's indexed again hopefully we'll see it bumped to $6K in the couple years.

Thanks for pointing out that while one hand is taking, the other is giving.  Not in a balanced way, but it's not all bad.

[Heckler]

Well, shit.  Maxing out my TFSA wont be the slightest Gauntlet challenge anymore.  Bummed, but it does make my TFSA maxed vs RRSP maxed problem go away, even after opening up the wifes first TFSA soon. 

[scrubbyfish]

Why can't you invest in ETFs in a Non-Registered account?

Most people can, just some people can't per rules governing access to some subsidies. Whether I receive them at a given point in time or not, I keep my finances set up so that I can if ever needed. However, subsidies are more valuable than the loss resulting in higher investment fees, so it's okay.

[powersuitrecall]

TFSA is officially going back to $5500 and is now indexed again in 2016.

I had hoped they'd let it slide for 2016 at $10K and adjust it for 2017, but no such luck.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/morneau-liberal-taxes-for-middle-class-1.3353939

Thanks for posting. I've been wondering about this lately.

NP. There is a tax cut that a lot of us will benefit from in the new budget so that should take some of the sting out of the TFSA change. Since it's indexed again hopefully we'll see it bumped to $6K in the couple years.

Any idea when the next indexation increase is due? Is 2017 too early?  Does it depend on actual observed interest rates?

[Retire-Canada]

Any idea when the next indexation increase is due? Is 2017 too early?  Does it depend on actual observed interest rates?

I think it depends on observed inflation/CPI and Gov't will. Inflation adjustments have been in chunks of $500.

http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/tfsa-celi/cntrbtn-eng.html

Adding $500 to the current limit of $5500 is ~9% increase. The last inflation increase was in 2013.

I don't think that means we need to see cumulative inflation of 9% to get a bump.

The TFSA contribution limit is a Gov't policy tool. They can move it whenever they feel like as we saw with the Cons in 2015.

The Liberal move was to differentiate themselves from the Cons....I wouldn't take that to mean anything with regards the TFSA or high savers in general. If the Libs bumped up the TFSA a couple times during their 4yr term they'd generate a bunch of goodwill from the folks who didn't like the TFSA roll back and still have made their political point.

[powersuitrecall]

Any idea when the next indexation increase is due? Is 2017 too early?  Does it depend on actual observed interest rates?

Garth says about 7 years: http://www.greaterfool.ca/2015/12/08/tuesday/

... the limit will be indexed to inflation, starting in 2017. Given the current cost-of-living rate (about 2%), it would take seven long years for the limit to be increased from $5,500 to six thousand. Big deal.

[Heckler]

If you want to keep the 10k TFSA limit, here's a petition you can sign;
https://www.change.org/p/justin-trudeau-keep-the-annual-tfsa-contribution-limit-at-10-000

Also Garth Turner has some interesting things to say about that change;

http://www.greaterfool.ca/2015/10/26/losing-it-4/

Here's a better petition to sign, as it's sponsored by an MP and in the governments system.


https://petitions.parl.gc.ca/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-3

[Cookie78]

If you want to keep the 10k TFSA limit, here's a petition you can sign;
https://www.change.org/p/justin-trudeau-keep-the-annual-tfsa-contribution-limit-at-10-000

Also Garth Turner has some interesting things to say about that change;

http://www.greaterfool.ca/2015/10/26/losing-it-4/

Here's a better petition to sign, as it's sponsored by an MP and in the governments system.


https://petitions.parl.gc.ca/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-3

Signed