Budget 2021: What’s missing?

The Liberal government has laid out billions in fresh spending after over two years without a federal budget — and while many of the government’s recent pledges graced its pages, others were notably absent.

It’s possible some policies were pushed out of reach as COVID-19 variants sent a third wave hurtling through Canada, forcing the government to refocus its priorities onto more immediate relief measures, according to one economist.

No capital gains tax on principal residences

One term that was notably absent from the entire budget document was “capital gains tax,” which some speculators had suggested could be tacked onto primary residence sales in the new budget.

Capital gains are the taxes paid when an investment, like a stock or a mutual fund, is sold. As things stand now, 50 percent of the earnings on these investments are taxed as income. So if you buy a stock at $10 and sell it for $20, you’d have to add five dollars under your income tax filings. The sale of primary residences is currently exempt from capital gains taxes.

However, Canadians currently have to pay capital gains tax on the sale of any secondary residences. But as prospective buyers look down the barrel of a white-hot real estate market, the idea of slapping a capital gains tax on primary residences has been floated as a potential method of cooling things down.

If imposed, anyone selling a house in Canada would have faced capital gains tax on the profits they make from the sale.

However, the Liberal government shied away from the prospect in its new budget, allaying the fears of Canadians who hold a massive portion of their equity in their homes — for now.

The budget doesn’t leave the issue of the hot housing market entirely untouched. Any homeowners who aren’t Canadian citizens or permanent residents are set to face an annual tax of one percent of the total value of their real estate starting in 2022, provided that property is considered vacant or underused.

No Universal Basic Income

The budget is also turning its back on the overwhelming endorsement of a Universal Basic Income (UBI) that emerged at the Liberal policy convention in early April.

At the party’s virtual convention just over a week ago, the resolution — which was co-sponsored by the Liberal caucus — passed by a vote 491-85.

The budget document, however, makes no mention of the popular policy.

UBI is a benefit that would see the federal government provide Canadians with a minimum amount of earnings — with no strings attached. While the Parliamentary Budget Officer said in a recent report that the program could chop Canada’s poverty rates in half by 2022, it would come with a steep price tag: an estimated $85 billion this fiscal year, rising to over $93 billion by 2026.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had previously signaled his lack of enthusiasm for UBI, stating that the costly program is not at the top of his list amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Obviously, COVID has exposed weaknesses in our country where vulnerable people are continuing to slip through the cracks,” he told reporters when pressed about the program in recent weeks.

“We will have conversations about the next steps as well, but our focus is very much on what we need to do to control COVID-19.”

Trudeau’s sentiment transferred into the budget document, which makes no mention of the program.

No wealth tax

The Liberal government will need the support of at least one other political party to pass its budget bill and avoid a federal election. But a key ask from the NDP is missing from the budget document: a wealth tax.

The federal NDP has been pushing for a wealth tax throughout the pandemic, pointing out on their website that “Canada’s richest CEOs earn more than 200 times the average income of Canadian workers.”

“Closing tax loopholes and shutting down tax havens would save Canadians more than $16 billion every year,” the NDP website reads.

“And our 1% wealth tax on people with over $20 million would ask the very richest people to pay a little bit more. That’s money we could use to build a fair and just economy — one where Canadians aren’t struggling to make ends meet.”

However, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said he didn’t find his ask fulfilled anywhere in the budget.

“They have not put in any significant measures to address the fact that the ultra-rich in Canada have seen not just profits, not just getting by, but record profits in this pandemic,” Singh said, reacting to the budget Monday evening.

“There’s no measure in this budget … to say that it should be the ultra-rich who pay their fair share.”

The Liberals did lay out some policies that will hit the pocketbooks of Canada’s wealthy. The budget proposes introducing a tax on select luxury goods — including on the sales of luxury cars and personal aircraft over $100,000 and boats, for personal use, over $250,000.

“It is estimated that this measure will increase federal revenues by $604 million over five years, starting in 2021-22,” the budget reads.

No new pharmacare funds

Trudeau has previously promised to implement a national pharmacare program, but so far, the government has only taken incremental steps in that direction.

Onlookers hoping to see that change in the new budget will not be greeted with good news.

The budget only mentions the word “pharmacare” four times, with a one-page section dedicated to the idea but with no new money on the table.

“The case for national universal pharmacare is well-established. The government is committed to working with provinces, territories, and stakeholders to build on the foundational elements that are already in progress, as the national strategy on high-cost drugs for rare diseases, toward the goal of a universal national program,” the budget reads.

It goes on to reiterate the government’s pledge to provide funding to the program for high-cost drugs for rare diseases and to “directly engage with willing partners on national universal pharmacare.”

The Liberal government has been voicing this pledge since the 2019 budget.

However, no new funds or initiatives were announced, leaving the budget lacking significant new strides towards universal pharmacare. That’s another move that may alienate NDP support for the budget bill — suggesting an election could be on the horizon.

“Pharmacare was something (Trudeau) campaigned on, he introduced in the throne speech, and now in this budget, is completely abandoned,” Singh said.

No GST hikes

While think tanks suggested the Liberals could hike the GST rate in a bid to help pay for pandemic-related financial aid, the budget shows the governing party has opted not to take advantage of the potential revenue source.

“GST Rate Consumption taxes are the least distortive to economic growth and, considering Canada’s relatively low reliance on them among OECD countries, are a superior way to raise needed revenues,” wrote the Toronto-based C.D. Howe Institute in a paper that is published ahead of the federal budget.

“In comparison with other revenue sources, consumption taxes such as GST do less harm to investment and growth than taxes on capital and personal income and are a more stable and reliable source of revenues.”

The report called on the federal government to boost the GST rate to seven percent from five percent — bringing it back to its pre-2006 levels.

However, the government didn’t include any GST hike in the federal budget, beyond mentioning some measures already laid out in the fall fiscal update. In that update, the government had laid out several changes to the GST/HST system to ensure it “applies fairly and effectively to the growing digital economy.”

While the budget reiterated those GST tweaks, it didn’t lay out any new hikes.

No increase in health transfers

The budget doesn’t provide any recurring boosts to provincial health transfers — a move that frustrated the Bloc Quebecois, which has repeatedly called on the federal government to do just that.

The budget reiterated its announcement from last month when the federal government proposed to provide provinces and territories with a $4 billion one-time top-up to the Canada Health Transfer.

It does not, however, layout any long-term increases to the transfers — which is what the provinces have repeatedly called for. The $4-billion figure also falls far short of what the provinces had called for — the premiers have repeatedly demanded that the annual transfer be increased by at least $28 billion a year, permanently.

When universal health care was first adopted, the cost was shared 50-50 between the federal government and the provinces. B.C. Premier John Horgan pointed out the fact in a March 4 press conference, during which he joined other premiers in calling for more funds.

Today, the federal government shoulders just 22 percent of healthcare costs — and the premiers are calling on them to boost that figure to 35 percent.

“Our public health-care system is at risk,” Horgan warned.

“COVID has brought (the challenge) into graphic light. It’s stark, it’s profound, and we need to take action.”

The Bloc Quebecois has repeatedly brought the demand to the House of Commons. In a March 3 press conference, Bloc Quebecois Leader Yves-Francois Blanchet said his party would not back the budget without health transfers — making the missing budget measure a potential poison pill for the party’s support.

The Bloc’s conditions for supporting the budget were “well-known, and they have been for a long time,” said Blanchet during the press conference, adding that the conditions include “the increase, without conditions in the transfers … health transfers.”

“Those are conditions without which we will not vote in favor of the budget,” Blanchet said.

Speaking after the budget was tabled on Monday, Blanchet said that while there are “good things” in the budget, there are things that “disappoint,” too.

“The government will have a deficit which will go up to ($150 billion) … without answering a request from all and each of the (premiers) in Canada about a transfer for healthcare positively,” he said. Blanchet stopped short of saying he’d vote against the budget, stating instead that his party will use “every possible procedure” to try to amend the budget in the “coming days.”

Source: Global News