Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Corporate Taxes: Gary Mar 1, AFL 0

There may be reasons as to why Gary Mar is the wrong man for the top political job in Alberta, but his support of corporate tax cuts is not one of them.
 
The Alberta Federation of Labour believes it to be of major concern, and has zeroed in on the candidate who the latest poll shows is the frontrunner for the PC leadership.
 
The AFL believes says Mar's plan amounts to a $660-million question giveaway to,  "wealthy corporations" and they wonder if Mar is then planning deep cuts to make up for the lost revenue.
 
There is much wrong with the claims of the AFL, and if indeed our next Premier plans to reduce corporate tax rates, then all the facts need to be on the table.
 
First of all, it's unclear what exactly a "wealthy" corporation is in the first place. There are profitable companies and wealthy people, but the reverse is illogical.
 
If indeed we want to see gainful employment in this province then I should think we would want companies to be profitable. If those profits are going into people's pockets, then it is income tax and capital gains tax that will take care of that.
 
The fact is, workers are the ones who end up paying for higher corporate taxes. The evidence is quite clear: higher corporate taxes are associated with lower wages. Surely the Alberta Federation of Labour is supportive of higher wages.
 
And it's not necessarily the case that a cut would mean a $660-million shortfall - or any revenue shortfall for that matter. Alberta's corporate tax rate has gone down incrementally from 15.5 per cent in 2001 to it's present 10 per cent.
 
But those reductions have not created any revenue shortfalls. In fact, corporate tax revenues continued to rise (PDF) every year with the exception of a short dip in the recession of '08 and '09. Of course, that's when those so-called wealthy compnies weren't as profitable.
 
The fearmongering of the AFL doesn't quite mesh with the facts.
 
Further reading on the matter - with extensive links to various academic research - here.

No comments:

Post a Comment