Main menu:

History of RPE Thought

Posts by Tag

RSS New from the CCPA

  • 2019 Federal Budget Analysis February 27, 2019
    Watch this space for response and analysis of the federal budget from CCPA staff and our Alternative Federal Budget partners. More information will be added as it is available. Commentary and Analysis  Aim high, spend low: Federal budget 2019 by David MacDonald (CCPA) Budget 2019 fiddles while climate crisis looms by Hadrian Mertins-Kirkwood (CCPA) Organizational Responses Canadian Centre for Policy […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Boots Riley in Winnipeg May 11 February 22, 2019
    Founder of the political Hip-Hop group The Coup, Boots Riley is a musician, rapper, writer and activist, whose feature film directorial and screenwriting debut — 2018’s celebrated Sorry to Bother You — received the award for Best First Feature at the 2019 Independent Spirit Awards (amongst several other accolades and recognitions). "[A] reflection of the […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • CCPA-BC welcomes Emira Mears as new Associate Director February 11, 2019
    This week the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives – BC Office is pleased to welcome Emira Mears to our staff team as our newly appointed Associate Director. Emira is an accomplished communications professional, digital strategist and entrepreneur. Through her former company Raised Eyebrow, she has had the opportunity to work with many organizations in the […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Study explores media coverage of pipeline controversies December 14, 2018
    Supporters of fossil fuel infrastructure projects position themselves as friends of working people, framing climate action as antithetical to the more immediately pressing need to protect oil and gas workers’ livelihoods. And as the latest report from the CCPA-BC and Corporate Mapping Project confirms, this framing has become dominant across the media landscape. Focusing on pipeline […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Study highlights ‘uncomfortable truth’ about racism in the job market December 12, 2018
    "Racialized workers in Ontario are significantly more likely to be concentrated in low-wage jobs and face persistent unemployment and earnings gaps compared to white employees — pointing to the “uncomfortable truth” about racism in the job market, according to a new study." Read the Toronto Star's coverage of our updated colour-coded labour market report, released […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Progressive Bloggers

Meta

Recent Blog Posts

Posts by Author

Recent Blog Comments

The Progressive Economics Forum

The Small Change EI Premium Rebate

Prime Minister Harper today re-announced the 2011 Budget proposal to introduce a one year program to reduce EI employer premiums by up to $1,000 for small businesses which expand employment in 2011 compared to 2010.

I would characterise this as more of a token gift to the Canadian Federation of  Independent Business than a serious job creation measure.

The credit is very small – a maximum of $1,000 – and has an estimated total cost of $165 million. Total Canadian labour income is running at $856 Billion per year, so the rebate amounts to an employer cost reduction of only about .002%. (Not all labour income is subject to EI premiums, but this is approximately the total cost of payroll.)  While there may be some small impact on hiring at the margin, much of any incremental growth in employment in 2011 will take place irrespective of the new credit.

The premium reduction applies only to employers who expand employment in 2011 and paid under $10,000 in EI employer premiums in 2010. It would apply only to very small enterprises.

In 2010, the maximum employer premium for one employee was $1,075, levied at a rate of 2.4% of earnings to a maximum of 2.4% of $43,200 or just over $1,000. Thus an employer with just ten permanent, full time workers earning more or less the average wage would exceed the threshold.

Of course, small businesses with more part-time, low paid workers will qualify, but the cut off point is probably around 25 or 30 employees.

In re-announcing the measure Harper said

“Small businesses are the engine of job creation in Canada, and are indispensible in their role as job creators and innovators …. Providing incentives to business to hire new employees creates jobs and creates economic growth.”

That line will go down well with small business, but small businesses are NOT the engine of job growth in Canada.

As I have noted recently in the PEF blog ” Who Are the Job Creators?” small business does not contribute disproportionately to job creation. The share of all private sector employment accounted for by businesses with less than 20 workers was just 24.5% in 2010, about the same as 24.2% three years earlier.

I might also note that the EI premium reduction will be charged to the “new” EI account which is in deficit, so it will have to paid for by somewhat higher premiums for workers and larger employers down the road.

In sum, this is surely an inconsequential job creation measure.

Enjoy and share:

Comments

Comment from travis fast
Time: March 29, 2011, 2:18 pm

It appears this election is not going to be about big ideas rather about each leader handing out token gifts to what it considers to be its core constituents.

Comment from Sixth Estate
Time: March 29, 2011, 4:03 pm

It’s been a while since I took an econ class, but honestly I cannot see many small business owners being in a situation where a $1000 deduction would make the difference between expanding their business and not expanding it.

At the very least, I assume that the number of businesses for whom it will not make a difference but who will pocket the tiny chunk of change anyways is substantially larger than the number of businesses for which this will actually make a difference. So it is quite indiscriminate for the supposed goal (more jobs), too.

Comment from travis fast
Time: March 29, 2011, 5:18 pm

Might be enough to entice some off book employees onto the books. Though I doubt it.

Comment from Brandon L
Time: March 29, 2011, 5:30 pm

Im conservative, young in my twenties. The irony many in this blog, have done a very good job in attacking the rich, so much so, this is laughable.

I find it funny, are we to only work in large corperations. I cannot wait till we have only one supra-multinational company for every industry, and only one union for every industry. Regulators will ensure the workers are protected. Union will own a shares of that consolidated company. Is not fascism great. I even got a name Industrial Reconstruction Institute (IRI), we could then have one of the largest industrial sectors, only positives.

The economy will go into a never before seen age of prosperity, where commities of the heads of idustriesthe economy meet with regulators, who mediate for the unions.

I wish to employ people. At this moment in time I can hire 2 worker, while I pay myself nothing, and afford to pay out 5$ an hour for two months. Should I spread the wealth around, or hoard?????

……or should I get a job for a rich oil company???? Why cannot us poor people at the bottom start businesses and compete with the rich.

We have made it by our own decree, that only rich can people hire people. What kind a of society do you prescribe too!!! or would you like to remove the rich completly and have everyone employed, locally, provicially, and federally.

Untill the poor upstarts like I can employ people like my grandfather who was not rich. we have those who are poor working two full time job watching incomes fall, requiring more hours of work then my parents or there parents for the same goods and services they had!!!!

Write a comment





Related articles