Tag Archives: Jack Mintz

Why Canada Capital Gains Tax Increase Is Bad Idea

January , 2025 – One of the most consequential policy changes in this year’s federal budget – an increase in the capital gains inclusion rate – would have far-reaching consequences for Canadians, many of which are underestimated by the government, according to a new study from the C.D. Howe Institute. Leading economist and former President and CEO of the C.D. Howe Institute, Jack Mintz, examines the extensive economic repercussions of this proposed change in his latest report available in full at the end of this article.

Fiscal and Tax Policy

With Parliament prorogued on January 6, the future of the proposed capital gains tax increase remains uncertain. Canadians face the possibility of the measure being passed, amended, or withdrawn entirely under a new government.

Meanwhile, tax planners and the affected individuals and corporations must await the outcome, even though the Canada Revenue Agency began administering the tax on June 25, 2024, after it was announced in the spring budget. At this time, taxpayers could be assessed interest and penalties if they do not comply with the proposed law. If the law is never passed, taxpayers will have to claim refunds. The provincial budgets reliant on the new revenues will be affected if the planned measure is ultimately withdrawn, adding to the confusion and disruption.

“The planned measure to increase the capital gains inclusion rate should never see the light of day when Parliament resumes after March 24, nor be revived thereafter by a new government,” says Mintz. “The hike would create a triple threat: harming Canadian businesses, discouraging investment, and penalizing middle-income Canadians.”

While the government estimated this change would only impact 40,000 individual tax filers and 307,000 corporations, Mintz’s analysis, using longitudinal data, reveals the true impact would be significantly broader. Over 1.26 million Canadians would be affected over their lifetimes – representing 4.3 percent of taxpayers or some 22,000 Canadians per year – with many middle-income earners among those hardest hit.

The report projects significant economic harm caused by the proposed increase – Canada’s capital stock would decline by $127 billion, GDP would fall by nearly $90 billion, and real per-capita GDP would drop by 3 percent. Further, employment would decline by 414,000 jobs, which would raise unemployment from 1.5 million to 1.9 million workers. Importantly, half of the affected individuals would be earning otherwise less than $117,000 annually, with 10 percent earning as little as $18,000, excluding capital gains income.

“This would not just be a tax on the wealthy,” says Mintz. “Many middle-income Canadians would bear the brunt of this increase, and the economic costs would ripple across the entire economy.”

Mintz also highlights the broader implications for Canadian businesses. The planned measure would likely deter equity financing, discourage investment, and exacerbate inefficiencies in financial and corporate structures. Contrary to government claims of “neutrality,” he argues the tax would disproportionately harm domestic companies. These companies will pay corporate capital gains taxes that will increase investment costs. Moreover, they are dependent on Canadian investors due to “home bias” in equity markets. The changes would risk weakening Canada’s productivity and competitiveness at a critical time.

The report further critiques the lack of mechanisms to mitigate the effects of “lumpy” capital gains. Significant asset disposals, such as selling real estate, farmland, business assets, secondary homes or during events like death or emigration, may occur only once or twice in a person’s lifetime. Without provisions to average or defer taxes, individuals would face disproportionately higher burdens. Additionally, the planned tax hike would exacerbate the “lock-in effect,” which discourages the efficient reallocation of capital.

“If the proposed law does not proceed, it would be worthwhile for a government to review capital gains taxation as part of a general tax review that would improve opportunities for economic growth rather than hurt it,” says Mintz.

Read the full report here.

Canada Debt Becoming Unmanageable Economists Warn

With the Canadian government’s high debt-to-GDP ratios, such as a ratio of debt to nominal GDP sitting at 68 percent in March 2023, economists warn that government debt could become unsustainably high if Ottawa fails to reduce spending, increase productivity, and re-establish business confidence.

“We’re not growing our income per capita, which means that we’re not going to get the tax revenues that we need, plus we’re getting a lot of people retiring. So the situation could end up becoming quite unmanageable if we keep our pace that we’re going,” said Jack Mintz, president’s fellow at the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy.

The federal government has run back-to-back budget deficits since the 2008 financial recession, with government spending spiking during the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, Canada’s debt as a percentage of nominal GDP rose from around 51 percent in 2009 to 74 percent by 2021, for example. Nominal refers to the current value for the particular year without taking inflation into account.

The two previous federal budgets have attempted to lower government spending, but the federal government will still post a $40 billion deficit in 2023–24, which they project will shrink to a $20 billion deficit by 2028–29.

The Liberal government’s response to criticism by the opposition that Canada’s debt could lead the country into a financial crisis has been that Canada has among the best debt-to-GDP ratios in the G7.

According to Mr. Mintz, while Canada’s debt situation is not as bad as it once was, it doesn’t mean that it may not impact Canada’s prosperity prospects.

Conrad Black: Budget 2024 Is an Assault on Canadian Investment

ANALYSIS: Higher Income Taxes Not Only for Wealthy in Budget 2024

Mr. Mintz points out that Canada’s debt situation is not nearly as bad as in 1996. The government’s ratio of debt to nominal GDP ratio reached 83 percent that year.

Mr. Mintz also noted that Canada continues to have a triple-A credit rating according to the world’s leading credit agencies, meaning the country’s debt is not yet seen as problematic.

“We’re still viewed as having a much better credit line compared to a number of other countries. … But at some point, the credit agencies might look at that gross debt number and start asking the question, ‘Is it starting to become unsustainable?’” he said.

Lower Productivity Hampering Debt Payments

The federal government’s ability to pay off its debt could be hampered by low productivity, according to Steve Ambler, professor emeritus of economics at Université du Québec à Montréal.

“The thing that worries me in terms of federal government debt is we are currently in a period of extremely low productivity growth and low overall growth,” he said.

In March, the Bank of Canada’s senior deputy governor Carolyn Rogers warned that Canada’s poor productivity had reached emergency levels.

Although Statistics Canada said the country’s labour productivity showed a small gain at the end of 2023, that came after six consecutive quarters of productivity decline.

The right honourable Jean Chrétien.

Mr. Ambler said an appropriate way to lower the debt-to-GDP ratio is to keep government spending from increasing while also raising productivity to increase tax revenues. He said this was the strategy of Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, whose Liberal government established a budget surplus in three years by growing the economy and keeping government spending stagnant.

To lower Canada’s debt-to-GDP ratio, Mr. Ambler said the government should focus on increasing worker productivity, allowing its resource sector to grow, and easing back on discretionary spending.

He also cited a November 2023 C.D. Howe paper showing that business investment per worker in Canada has shrunk relative to the United States since 2015. Investments such as better tools for workers would increase productivity, while productivity growth would in turn create opportunities and competitive threats that spur businesses to invest, the paper said.

“Re-establishing business confidence would be almost the number one priority, especially in the resource sector,” Mr. Ambler said, adding that a future government might also be wise to lower the feds’ “wildly extravagant subsidy programs” for the electric vehicle (EV) sector.

The Liberal government has given tens of billions of dollars in subsidies for EV manufacturing projects in Canada since 2020, saying the factories will eventually create thousands of new jobs.

‘No Cushion’ to Mitigate Debt Issue

Joseph Barbuto, director of research at the Economic Longwave Research Group, has a more pessimistic view of Canada’s debt. He says that while federal debt is at levels similar to the 1990s, the crisis will be “larger” because the government does not have the “fiscal room to mitigate the downturn.”

Mr. Barbuto said that while the Canadian government was able to help alleviate its debt issues in the 1930s and 1990s by lowering its interest rates, it does not have that same luxury in 2024. The Bank of Canada lowered its key policy rate from 1.25 percent to 0.25 percent in 2020, and was forced to raise it to 5 percent by 2023 in response to rising inflation.

“There’s no interest rate cushion on the other side. Interest rates can only fall back to zero,” Mr. Barbuto said, noting that higher interest rates make it more difficult for governments to service their debt.

“The problem with the monetary system is there’s no fiscal discipline that is pushed on governments, unlike [individuals] or corporations,” he said.

“There will be a point where because of the accumulated interest with rising interest rates, eventually it’s going to overwhelm the government and then people will not lend the government any kind of capital.”

Mr. Barbuto also expressed concern over Canada’s private debt-to-GDP ratio. Private debt refers to debt owed by private, non-financial entities such as businesses and households, as opposed to public debt owed by governments and banks. Canada’s ratio of private debt to nominal GDP sat at 217 percent in December 2023 compared to 124 percent in 1995.

Mr. Barbuto said Canada’s private debt-to-GDP ratio is higher than that of Japan’s in the 1990s, and pointed out that the Japanese economy had stagnated after the country’s asset price bubble burst in 1992.

The research director believes the Canadian economy will eventually see a debt crisis and collapse in real estate that will result in austerity measures, a shrinkage in the size of government, and the “creative destruction” of the old political and economic system. He said this would be the continuation of an economic cycle that has repeatedly happened throughout history.

“[It’s] inevitable and necessary. A debt detox or deleveraging is the same thing as a drug detox. Nobody likes it, … but it’s a necessary part of the cycle for it then to go back up,” he said.

For the Silo, Matthew Horwood/Epoch Times.