Castanet

SmokeOnTheWater wrote:I thought it was

5% Gst plus 7% Pst = 12%

versus

12% Hst

Same amount but less exemptions with Hst, therefore you pay more taxes.

Certainly, that is what is declared on your receipts when you make purchases, but under PST, your suppliers will have had to pay PST on certain inputs (their goods and services), too. This would be an expense to your suppliers and something which needs to be built into the price of the goods and services they sell you. Further, your suppliers' suppliers would have PST as an expense on certain inputs and would have to build this into the price they charge your suppliers. And so on.

What you end up paying in 'hidden' PST will depend on the nature of the inputs and supply chain necessary for whatever particular good or service you're buying.

By contrast, all HST-registered entities re-claim all HST they pay on their inputs*, so there is no hidden HST on the goods and services you buy.

You can more accurately think of it like this.

Goods: 5% GST plus 7% PST plus ?% hidden PST
Services: 5% GST plus ?% hidden PST

versus

12% HST

It is also kind of striking how simple the HST side of things looks. The GST/PST system is job creation for accountants and finance people, whose salary and benefits you also pay for in the goods and services you purchase and the other taxes you pay.

I would think there are few accountants out there that would choose GST/PST over HST. You've got to think that there is something wrong with a system when the people who stand to benefit from it the most don't want it!


Just to be clear, I am in agreement with everybody else that the government raised more revenue with HST than with GST/PST, but don't forget the hidden PST you're paying on all goods and services when comparing the two systems.



*with the exception of a few things, such as business entertainment, where only 1/2 the HST can be re-claimed, or on exempt supplies where there could well be a component of 'hidden' HST (not to be confused with zero-rated supplies).

Graphite wrote:HST was brought in under a lie. That is part of the reason people fought so hard to be rid of it. As well, hst would have been charged on some bigger ticket items when gst never was charged.

I would rather pay less in taxes and not privatize schools and health care. I would rather pay politicians less money and pensions. I would rather they cut government spending on foolish things. Its pretty straight forward.

ps the proposal to lower the hst to 10% was only used as a bribe if we all voted to keep it. They just didn't want to have to pay back all the money they borrowed to implement the unjust tax. They knew they would make more money off the HST due to taxing certain things the GST never taxed. If I recall this right, Gordon Campbell stated publicly it was the greatest thing we could to to help fix our economy at the time. Also keep in mind Campbell is the reason BC didn't get family day until now. He said it would cost the economy too much. Even thought almost all the other provinces have had this holiday in February for years already. Campbell did not appear to be friends of the common people, more friendly with business.

A few questions for you, Graphite.

the proposal to lower the hst to 10% was only used as a bribe if we all voted to keep it.

Can you explain (without being political) what is so bad about the HST that you can't even be 'bribed' with lower taxes to accept it?

They just didn't want to have to pay back all the money they borrowed to implement the unjust tax.

Did you particularly want them to pay the money back? If so, why? Why is it so bad if your government receives money?

They knew they would make more money off the HST due to taxing certain things the GST never taxed.

Do you have any examples?

If I recall this right, Gordon Campbell stated publicly it was the greatest thing we could to to help fix our economy at the time.

The idea that the HST was the 'greatest thing' is subjective, but maybe we can agree the HST was better for the economy than GST/PST. Yes/no?

Also keep in mind Campbell is the reason BC didn't get family day until now. He said it would cost the economy too much. Even thought almost all the other provinces have had this holiday in February for years already.

By all means, use this as one of your arguments as to why you don't like Campbell or the BC Liberals, but do you mind if we all disregard this as irrelevant to the HST specifically?

Campbell did not appear to be friends of the common people, more friendly with business.

As far as I know, most 'common people' work for businesses and a good number are sole proprietors. We also rely on business for most of our needs: food, water, housing, fuel, transport, etc. Admittedly, 'corporate greed' is running away with itself, but most businesses do not have and can't even hope to have this affliction. So generally, isn't 'good for business' also good for people?

You asked for examples on what the HST would be charged on that would increase taxes, a simple search on google rendered a wikipedia page that illustrates this well. (you could have looked this up yourself) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sales_taxe ... h_Columbia

"Changes from the PST

The HST added an additional 7% of sales tax to the following items:

Newspapers
Certain school supplies
Magazines
Private Sale of automobiles
EnergyStar windows
Thermal insulation, weather stripping, and caulking
First aid kits
Smoke detectors valued less than $250
Food producing plants and trees
Household moving services
Adult sized clothing for children
Shoe repair
Tailoring services
Dry cleaning
Used adult clothing purchased for less than $100
Snack foods
Restaurant meals
Catering and event planning services
Basic cable television
Local residential phone
Repair to certain household appliances
Repair, maintenance or renovation services for real property
Landscaping, lawn-care, private snow removal, and house cleaning
Computer software repair services
Taxis
Camping sites
Domestic air, rail and bus travel originating in British Columbia
Motor vehicle parking
Real estate commissions
Massage therapy services
Over-the-counter medications
Vitamins
Admission to professional sporting events
Movie tickets
Safety helmets for sports
Golf memberships and driving range fees
Gym and athletic memberships
Ballet, karate, trampoline, hockey, soccer lessons, etc.
Tickets for live theatre
Bicycles
Admission to museums and art galleries
Music concerts
Ski lift passes
Children's sized ski boots
Hockey rink and rental halls
Music or video purchased and downloaded electronically.
Funeral services
Fitness trainers
Hair stylists/barbers
Esthetician services
Accounting services
Interior design services
Wedding planning services
Veterinarian services
Cigarettes
Cigars
Chewing tobacco
Nicotine replacement products
Postage
Personal Protective Equipment including: helmets, harnesses, safety footwear, eye protection etc."

If you want your government to lie to you, and bribe you in the short term to get what they want in the long term you are certainly welcome to your opinion.

Sorry, I was asking for specific examples in support of your comment:

They knew they would make more money off the HST due to taxing certain things the GST never taxed.

but maybe you meant to put PST instead of GST. The examples you gave had GST charged on them, and now they have HST charged on them, but they didn't have PST charged to the consumer at the point of sale.

In which case, why shouldn't they have tax charged on them in the same way as all other supplies?

If you want your government to lie to you, and bribe you in the short term to get what they want in the long term you are certainly welcome to your opinion.

I look past the lies and the bribery (those wouldn't be my choice of words), and look at the important detail of what we have and how it works. With the HST, a lot of things worked better, more efficiently and more fairly.

RichardW wrote:With the HST, a lot of things worked better, more efficiently and more fairly.

yeah, it works better for business, you know the ones who received the biggest BENEFIT from the HST. the fact that it has been 3 plus years and not ONE of the promises the liberals made have come true, prices were not reduced, jobs were not increased. the fact that the hst is still being promoted by the liberal lapdogs is hilarious.

Maybe if they had taken the time to make it into a real HST without all their other fancy taxes, carbon tax. transit tax, you name it,it would have gone over better. If they had the intelegence to do things properly in the first place they wouldn't be in court all the time and wouldn't be in the trouble they are now. They screwed up royally and they are probably getting kicked out for it.

angel980 wrote:Cause something that took 3 days to implement takes like 2 years to go away cause the libs want the cash.
Thanks Gordo you chump.

Well not quite 3 days.... more like 343 days actually.

"The BC Liberal government announced on July 23, 2009 that it intended to replace the PST by an HST, combining the GST with a provincial tax following the same rules as the GST." The HST came into effect in British Columbia on July 1, 2010.

Bear in mind that is 343 days from the date the HST was officially announced. They were more than likely planning and laying out the groundwork for the HST many months in advance of the official announcement (but that's another story in and of itself!).

On August 26, 2011 Elections BC announced that British Columbia voters, via a mail-in ballot, defeated the new tax in the binding British Columbia sales tax referendum and BC would return to the PST on April 1, 2013.

That's 584 days to revert back to the PST. Not quite as sensational as you imply but that's not really surprising since the whole anti-HST movement was based entirely on sensationalism and exaggeration.

Yes Campbell lied about the HST before the election. Yes, people were *bleep* off about being lied to but defeating the HST only to return right back to the grossly inefficient PST (complete with all of its layers of bureaucracy) simply to punish the Liberals for lying about the HST was not at all unlike cutting off your nose just to spite your face.

Smurf wrote:Maybe if they had taken the time to make it into a real HST without all their other fancy taxes, carbon tax. transit tax, you name it,it would have gone over better. If they had the intelegence to do things properly in the first place they wouldn't be in court all the time and wouldn't be in the trouble they are now. They screwed up royally and they are probably getting kicked out for it.

Agreed.

hmmmm, seems to me the bc hst could simply be best described as a wealth transferring tax program whereby "business" interests, instead of having to compete and EARN increased livelihood and profits from customers/consumers, .....managed to convince government to take it from joe, jane, and kids- ....and pass a goodly portion of the "take" on to the business community ......unearned. Carbon Tax and business tax reductions = same principle. The "promised" benefits (the responsibility of business not government) certainly never materialized, ......as so many knew they never would. (And never really intended to).

Logitack wrote: the fact that it has been 3 plus years

Actually the real fact is that it has been 2 plus years.

No, the proposal was to gradually lower HST to 10%.

Which would mean less taxes being paid eventually.

2 percent less paid on more things is still paying more taxes isnt it? doesnt matter how sexy that you make the HST in desperation after you scramble....the fact that it was rammed through premeditated before an election (which was denied) was why it was removed. like my dad said....the spanking will alays be worse of you lie and i find out. well.....the liberals found that out the hard way. maybe this time rather than a bad system that will be amended they will think through a better system that will be better for business and taxpayers.

sooperphreek wrote:2 percent less paid on more things is still paying more taxes isnt it?

I don't want to bring up the old threads, but it was clearly shown that the number of items you'd have to pay HST as opposed to simply GST previously was a minority. In fact if you were to spread the the tax along all items, the average tax you were paying was around 10.8% which is more than 10%.

So yes, the population of BC chose to pay more in taxes in the long run - and now they have to live with that choice. In other words, they chose to think emotionally (OMG, they lied to us! The rich are taking from the poor!) as opposed to logically (hmmm, we'll pay 12% for now and in 2014 we'll be paying only 10%, which is better than PST+GST!). Thinking emotionally is a clear choice of immaturity and non-constructive behavior - proving once again that collectively we are a nation of 5 year olds and deserve what we get.

Anyone who actually believed the "promise" that the BC HST would be dropped from 12% to 10%, at least without raising other taxes or creating new ones to compensate, was dreaming ......both in Technicolor and 3D. So few it seems heard, read or understood the waivers that were delivered along with that idea.

Edit to add: Put another way, almost everyone heard the proposal to gradually reduce the HST from 12 to 10%, ....some even heard the associated dialogue re proposed Carbon Tax changes at the same time. But it seems only the brightest among the electorate went on to hear and read everything that followed, ..usually preceded by the words "provided" and/or "if". And as things have worked out since, there is no way they could have met that reduction proposal. And I fully suspect they knew at the time they made it they wouldn't be able to.

Logitack wrote:yeah, it works better for business, you know the ones who received the biggest BENEFIT from the HST. the fact that it has been 3 plus years and not ONE of the promises the liberals made have come true, prices were not reduced, jobs were not increased. the fact that the hst is still being promoted by the liberal lapdogs is hilarious.

Initially yes, businesses have a reduced tax burden. But this is a business's competitive edge. Either the business will decrease prices or will use the slight increase in profitability to absorb the rising prices of inputs. If any given business doesn't do this, then their competitors will. The difference won't be significant, and will probably manifest itself as prices not rising, rather than prices dropping.

Most of the prices I saw kept right on rising. What should happen doesn't always happen as we know only too well.