Todd Stone gets it wrong - again!!

[Urbane]

Thanx for the post. I have to say that I am surprised by the statistic of 85% of employers paying MSP premiums. I have been working for 40 years and have never had my premiums paid and my spouse for only about ten years in the same span. Not to question the original post that Stone is an imbecile, mind you. I just found that stat interesting.

I wonder if Carole James' stats are right:

Richard Truscott, vice-president, B.C. and Alberta, of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, said about 20 per cent of his members pay MSP premiums for employees and the “double whammy” next year is going to be particularly harsh. Truscott said if the government had been “wise and responsible” it would have done a thorough economic impact study which would have revealed how much of a squeeze the new tax will put on businesses.

He said he doubts that only 15 per cent will be affected.

“It looks like a huge swath of small businesses will have to pay the new health tax and that’s going to be a tough pill to swallow.”
http://vancouversun.com/health/local-he ... health-tax

[rustled]

Carole James states that stats show 85% of employers pay MSP premiums for their employees. As of this past January, MSP premiums were reduced by 50%. Does that not save these businesses money???

The "Employer Health Tax" does not impact until the employers' PAYROLL reaches $500,000. That means an employer with 10 employees making $50,000 per year does not pay the "Employer Health Tax".

Compare this with Ontario who also has an "Employer Health Tax":

https://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/tax/eht/index.html
Scroll down to "Tax Rates".

Doesn't this mean that of those 85% of businesses, all of those with payrolls over 500,000 will be paying both the MSP (at 50%) AND the health tax for a full year? Or has this been sorted and I missed it? If they're paying both, what does the math look like on that? (I'd make the attempt, but I'm afraid of gaffing it up again!)

ETA: Urbane, looks like we were wondering some of the same stuff!

[Urban Cowboy]

Thanx for the post. I have to say that I am surprised by the statistic of 85% of employers paying MSP premiums. I have been working for 40 years and have never had my premiums paid and my spouse for only about ten years in the same span. Not to question the original post that Stone is an imbecile, mind you. I just found that stat interesting.

I wonder if Carole James' stats are right:

Richard Truscott, vice-president, B.C. and Alberta, of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, said about 20 per cent of his members pay MSP premiums for employees and the “double whammy” next year is going to be particularly harsh. Truscott said if the government had been “wise and responsible” it would have done a thorough economic impact study which would have revealed how much of a squeeze the new tax will put on businesses.

He said he doubts that only 15 per cent will be affected.

“It looks like a huge swath of small businesses will have to pay the new health tax and that’s going to be a tough pill to swallow.”
http://vancouversun.com/health/local-he ... health-tax

Well we've seen how the NDP faithful arrive at their stats, something along the lines of pull the real one and then multiply by four.

Perhaps James is using the same formula.

Personally I don't believe for a moment, that 85% are already paying it, and think that Truscott is far closer to the real number.

Naturally downplaying the effect on business, makes what's going on more palatable, would be James' reasoning.

[GordonH]

Carole James states that stats show 85% of employers pay MSP premiums for their employees. As of this past January, MSP premiums were reduced by 50%. Does that not save these businesses money???

The "Employer Health Tax" does not impact until the employers' PAYROLL reaches $500,000. That means an employer with 10 employees making $50,000 per year does not pay the "Employer Health Tax".

Compare this with Ontario who also has an "Employer Health Tax":

https://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/tax/eht/index.html
Scroll down to "Tax Rates".

Every employee who's employer pays there monthly MSP premium will see that as untaxed income on their T4's.
So what that could do is either drop the employee possible refund or possibly cause them to pay.

[hobbyguy]

Information posted in 2016 indicated that only 40% of MSP premiums were paid by employers. Given that participation in the workforce is about 62%, and government employees get their MSP paid, and many government retirees as well - the 85% figure doesn't make sense.

Which of course brings up another question. CUPE retirees a number of years back were being offered straight pension money, or a reduced pension with MSP premiums paid. I wonder whet kind of mess that creates? Will those that opted for the reduced amount plus MSP premiums paid get done over??

[Cactusflower]

^^ Some businesses will be hard hit. It's fine to talk about the majority that may not be hard hit but we must remember those that are. Tell me why the MSP premiums weren't rolled into the income tax?? You were all for that as I recall.

Because (big drum roll) if the premiums were rolled into the income tax, the usual suspects would be whining about that too.

[hobbyguy]

^^ Some businesses will be hard hit. It's fine to talk about the majority that may not be hard hit but we must remember those that are. Tell me why the MSP premiums weren't rolled into the income tax?? You were all for that as I recall.

Because (big drum roll) if the premiums were rolled into the income tax, the usual suspects would be whining about that too.

Yup, because the MSP premiums were more progressive. Do the math versus income taxes in Manitoba where the NDP set up the tax structure that way, and the working poor come off the worst. The MSP premium progressiveness allowed much more targeted relief for the working poor.

[Urbane]

Because (big drum roll) if the premiums were rolled into the income tax, the usual suspects would be whining about that too.

So your answer is that the government's reason for not rolling the MSP into the income tax is purely political. On that we can agree. What we'll end up with now is a hidden tax, the very thing that the Liberals were accused of establishing. Funny how that works.

[Cactusflower]

Because (big drum roll) if the premiums were rolled into the income tax, the usual suspects would be whining about that too.

So your answer is that the government's reason for not rolling the MSP into the income tax is purely political. On that we can agree. What we'll end up with now is a hidden tax, the very thing that the Liberals were accused of establishing. Funny how that works.

No, Urb, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that no matter what the NDP does you guys will complain. Why don't you just come out and admit it.....you hate the NDP for one reason, and one reason only; because you're BC Liberal supporters?

[The Green Barbarian]

.....you hate the NDP for one reason, and one reason only; because you're BC Liberal supporters?

"Hate" is a silly word when used in the context of politics, as hate is an emotion, but definitely see it used mostly by Leftists when they are trying to be as sanctimonious as possible. It's pretty easy why everyone is not happy with the NDP right now, they weren't elected. And now it appears they are going to waste millions of our taxpayers dollars launching some brainless court challenge to appease a tiny minority of insane lunatics in BC. The NDP just jacked up taxes. The NDP can't govern. The NDP should be kept as far from power as possible. This has nothing to do with any other party, and everything to do with what incompetent boobs the NDP are. As a party, they should be disbanded as soon as possible, for the good of all mankind.

[Urban Cowboy]

No, Urb, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that no matter what the NDP does you guys will complain. Why don't you just come out and admit it.....you hate the NDP for one reason, and one reason only; because you're BC Liberal supporters?

As always your assessment is incorrect. I'd support any party that demonstrates competence, and some ethics, two attributes I've never noted in the NDP party.

Time and time again, they have demonstrated ineptitude, and that they are completely self serving, pretending to care about the rest of us, when the truth is anything but.

That's why I detest the NDP, and I doubt that I'm standing alone.

I would honestly have been willing to give them a chance, provided that after 16yrs in opposition, they demonstrated some humility, and willingness to address their shortcomings. Instead, all that time went by, and what do we have, the same old NDP, making the same old mistakes, and confirming for us, that they did nothing to keep abreast of important topics, during their time in opposition, or there wouldn't be a need to spend our money on endless studies.

They did absolutely zero homework, and yet feel they are qualified to govern. I think not.

[Urbane]

No, Urb, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that no matter what the NDP does you guys will complain. Why don't you just come out and admit it.....you hate the NDP for one reason, and one reason only; because you're BC Liberal supporters?

Why do you keep fibbing? In the ICBC thread a few days ago I said: "For what it's worth I think that the government's proposed changes to ICBC make sense and it's too bad that the Liberals didn't make them long ago." Making things up is bad for one's credibility so I'd suggest strongly that you stop doing it.

The question that I asked was why NDP'ers, and some others on here, who had been pushing for the MSP premiums to be rolled into the income tax, were not saying much about Horgan doing something completely different. One NDP poster replied that the government wasn't looking at our forums so that was a non-answer. And you answered: "Because (big drum roll) if the premiums were rolled into the income tax, the usual suspects would be whining about that too."

Now you're backing off of that and instead seem to be suggesting that you weren't actually answering my question but rather just complaining about those who critique NDP policy. Another non-answer so thanks for nothing. This thread seems to be about Todd Stone putting a decimal point in the wrong place so carry on with that discussion.

[flamingfingers]

While I seldom pay much attention to anything the Fraser Institute says due to the fact they are a 'charitable' (LOL) right-wing 'think tank', this article seems to prove that 'workers will pay':

A key policy announcement in B.C.’s 2018 budget is the elimination of Medical Services Premiums (MSP) in 2020 and introduction of a new payroll tax—the employer health tax (EHT).

Some claim this tax swap will lift the financial burden off individual British Columbians and place it on businesses. In reality, however, the new EHT will ultimately be borne by workers through lower pay.

The EHT will be implemented in 2019, one year before MSP premiums are eliminated. It will apply to businesses with annual payrolls of more than $500,000 and has a maximum tax rate of 1.95 per cent. The rate is phased in as a business’ annual payroll increases. And the maximum rate is applied to a business with a payroll of $1.5 million or more.

Again, superficially, replacing the MSP with the EHT makes it seem like workers will generally pay less, since businesses will directly pay the EHT. But who really pays the cost of a payroll tax?

A payroll tax increases the total cost of labour. Businesses can respond by reducing employment, accepting lower profits, passing the costs to customers, or shifting the costs to workers by reducing their wages or benefits.

Research on who actually incurs the costs of payroll taxes has consistently found that workers—not businesses—bear significant part of the tax burden, even if businesses are the ones who directly make the tax payments to the government.

To understand the magnitude of the possible impact, a recent Fraser Institute study measured the impact of payroll tax hikes on worker wages. It found that a 1 per cent increase in the employer portion of payroll taxes is associated with a 0.03 per cent to 0.14 per cent reduction in the hourly wage rate. In dollar terms, this suggests that a one percentage-point increase in the un-weighted average combined employer-portion payroll tax rate (10.52 per cent) would translate into annual wages that are lower by between $137 and $605.

Bottom line: British Columbian workers will pay for the new employer health tax.

This confirms what I argued in posts that were made many months ago and was beaten upside and downside by elements who staunchly argued that the employers were simply being beneficent.

Nope, Nada, Not! There are no benevolent employers!!!!

[Urban Cowboy]

I'm fairly certain a number of us have been saying more or less that all along.

The budget as presented will hit those very ones, that the NDP is proclaiming they are helping.

Business can't keep absorbing hits to its bottom line, which leave it limited choices, they close, they move elsewhere that's more business friendly, they pass the cost on to their product or services, or they eliminate some jobs to keep their payroll at current levels. None of these solutions helps the less fortunate in any way, shape, fashion, or form.

There may be more housing on the market in the future, thanks to a recession, but with that comes unemployment, and with that, comes lack of ability to qualify for a mortgage.

It's all connected.

Nope, Nada, Not! There are no benevolent employers!!!!

Actually there are employers who care about their employees. Where I feel your side goes off the rails, is that you tend to believe all employers are rolling in dough, greedy, and exploit their workforce, which is hardly the case.

Are there some bad ones? Sure there are, just as there are exceptions to every rule, but it's not the norm.

Many would run the other way, if they had to deal with just a tiny portion, of the stress, pressure, red tape, financial risk, let alone time commitment, that accompanies being a business owner.

[flamingfingers]

Urbane wrote:

This thread seems to be about Todd Stone putting a decimal point in the wrong place so carry on with that discussion.

Todd Stone is too dumb to put a decimal point anywhere. He didn't even try to figure it out on his own. He just went with what he thought was going to be embarrassing to the sitting government. It blew up in his blank face.