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

Simpson Walks the Party Line on Corporate Taxes

Yesterday’s Jeffrey Simpson column was entitled, “Walking the Line on Corporate Tax Cuts.” Incredibly, he walks the narrow 1.5% line between the Liberal and NDP proposals.

To his credit, Simpson takes an open-minded look at the evidence, which indicates “no discernible links” from corporate taxes to employment or investment. On this basis, he accepts the Liberal proposal to raise revenue by restoring the 2010 federal corporate tax rate of 18%.

He mysteriously goes on to conclude that the NDP proposal to restore the 2008 rate of 19.5% “is a move in the wrong direction.” He offers no theory of why 18% is reasonable but 19.5% “is unwise.”

To put these figures in perspective, the federal corporate tax rate (including surtax) was 22.1% in 2007, before the Conservative cuts began. It was 29.1% in 2000, before the Liberals started slashing.

If one accepts the excellent analysis in the first three-quarters of Simpson’s column, then the NDP proposal is somewhat better (not to mention more trustworthy) than the Liberal proposal.

However, having Simpson and the Liberals on board for even a modest corporate tax increase is definitely a move in the right direction.

UPDATE (April 18): I have the following letter in today’s Globe and Mail.

In Walking the Line on Corporate Tax Cuts (April 15), Jeffrey Simpson correctly explained that differences in corporate tax rates have no discernible effect on employment or investment. After arguing that the Liberals’ proposed federal corporate tax rate of 18 per cent is reasonable, he concludes that the NDP proposal of 19.5 per cent “is a move in the wrong direction.”

To put both cautious increases in perspective, this rate was 22 per cent as recently as 2007 and 29 per cent until 2000 (including the corporate surtax). The NDP would go modestly further than the Liberals in what Mr. Simpson’s own evidence indicates is the right direction.

Erin Weir, senior economist, International Trade Union Confederation, Brussels

Enjoy and share:

Comments

Comment from Donald Hughes
Time: April 16, 2011, 7:53 am

“He offers no theory of why 18% is reasonable but 19.5% ‘is unwise.'”

So, then, what’s your optimal tax rate and mix?

If there is no discernible link between corporate tax and investment, why not a 95% rate?

Comment from Erin Weir
Time: April 16, 2011, 2:55 pm

The conclusion that corporate tax rates have no discernible effect on investment is based on the range of rates that countries have actually implemented.

Of course, there is good reason to believe that a 95% corporate tax rate would curb investment.

I do not claim to have precisely identified the point at which a higher rate would appreciably affect investment. However, that point does not lie between the Liberal and NDP proposals.

Comment from Donald Hughes
Time: April 16, 2011, 9:26 pm

The issue would seem to be what the optimal mix is, though. Saying that it wouldn’t hurt that much to raise to a 33.5% combined rate as a Layton-Horwath team would probably do is pretty obviously correct to me, but that doesn’t seem like the real issue. I mean, for a party that still calls itself socialist, saying that there should be a massive tax cut for corporations relative to only a decade ago seems like a political dead end – unless there is some evidence (which there is) that corporate tax isn’t the best tax to raise revenue from.

Comment from Nathan Rao
Time: April 18, 2011, 7:12 am

Barrie McKenna says the following in his Globe piece this morning:

“Across OECD countries, government revenue from corporate income tax as a share of gross domestic product is higher now than in the late 1990s. And taxes of all kinds (corporate, individual and value-added) are bringing in more revenue as a share of the economy now versus a decade ago.”

This doesn’t sound right to me. Could someone provide (or point me to) a good response? Similarly, it would be interesting to see a good rebuttal of the awful piece by Doug Saunders in the Saturday Globe.

Thanks.

Comment from Nathan Rao
Time: April 18, 2011, 8:07 am

Oops, sorry, Armine Yalnizyan has already responded to the Saunders column here:

http://www.progressive-economics.ca/2011/04/16/the-legend-of-zero/

Comment from Erin Weir
Time: April 18, 2011, 9:13 am

Corporate tax revenues are higher relative to GDP because pre-tax corporate profits are much higher relative to GDP. However, corporate taxes now collect a smaller share of profits.

Write a comment





Related articles