Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Conservatives clawing back "day care" cheques

As Liberals predicted at the time, the chickens are now coming home to roost on the Conservatives' $100/month “child care” plan. More evidence now that Harper is clawing back the tax on the cheques and that for many families that $100 will be closer to $65.

And hopefully families struggling to make ends meet have been setting some money aside for Harper because rather than taking the tax off the cheques on the first place families will have to pay back the difference on their income taxes.

This note from the LPC(BC) lays it out well. Although, guys, the neo-con thing just sounds lame. Let the facts speak for themselves, please?

Warning to parents: it's going to cost you!

Attention all parents with children under the age of six:
Have you seen one of these forms arrive in your mailbox?


OTTAWA-Canada's Neo-Conservative Government has very quietly mailed out an innocuous sounding "RC62" tax form to over a million families this week. What they didn't tell Canadians is that it is more like a tax bill - and they'd better start saving now because they owe Stephen Harper big money. They owe all of the back taxes on their monthly child care cheques . all at once!

"With Tory cuts forcing daycares to hike their fees, or shut down all together, the last thing parents need is a huge tax bill. Many families who were relying on a tax refund this year will be shocked to learn they now owe Stephen Harper a ton of cash," said Blair Wilson the Member of Parliament for West Vancouver - Sunshine Coast -Sea to Sky Country.

Box 10 of the form corresponds to the amount of money each family has received over the past year from Mr. Harper's ill-considered child care scheme. If a family has one eligible child the total in Box 10 will read $600 - if they have two young children will read $1200, and so on. This is "income" they have already received and likely already spent on child care or other family expenses.

"But now these families have to try and come up with hundreds and hundreds of dollars all at once to pay for Mr. Harper's political stunt. Any sensible government would have taxed this money at source before it was mailed out. But would a $65 dollar a month cheque gotten Mr. Harper any headlines?" asked Wilson.

Now ordinary families will have to pay big for Mr. Harper's election-time stunt. And this year's benefit has only been in effect for six months. Next year families are going to have to come up with twice as much. This whole plan has been a disaster from day one - and it hasn't even created a single new child care space.

Blair Wilson is the Chair of the BC Caucus of the Liberal Party of Canada. He was first elected as the Member of Parliament for West Vancouver - Sunshine Coast - Sea to Sky Country in 2006.

Visit Blair online at www.blairwilson.ca

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

27 comments:

Red Tory said...

Golly, what a surprise.

I wonder how the Conservatives will spin this one.

Anonymous said...

Hey - it's "universal" child care -...uh, huh.

Yup, it's a "universal dud" - and if the young parents fall for this at voting time, they deserve what they get.

evans said...

Sixty five dollars in my pocket is better than thirteen years of imaginary Lieberal national daycare.

Torian said...

duh

it was explained even before the elction that this money would be taxed to the lower income of the couple.

Anyone taken by surprise by this has been living under a rock.

I'd like to know how this guy comes up with $65- as I said, it will be taxed under the lower earner spouse, so the amounts will vary greatly.

As for "not a daycare space has been added", apparently this man does not know how to read. Harper's plan (tax credits to companies who create space in their workplace and cutting the funds the libs promised) does not end/start until March.

Last I checked, it is still feb.

knb said...

Harper's plan (tax credits to companies who create space in their workplace and cutting the funds the libs promised) does not end/start until March.

Last I checked, it is still feb.


Last I checked, no companies have shown any interest.

I'd like to know how this guy comes up with $65- as I said, it will be taxed under the lower earner spouse, so the amounts will vary greatly.

Now that's a great deal for single Mom's, (the one's who need the most help) isn't it?

Torian said...

knb:

let's have some evidence that no companies are interested...I cant remember which publication comes out with the most family friendly places to work, but the top 10 all have on site daycare.

I never said that single mom's dont need the help- of course they do!

Unfortunately, many of these subsidized spots are being taken by dual income families that need to work for the 3500sqft house and 2 SUV's and multiple trips a year.

I actually know of a few people pulling 6 figure salaries who are using subsidized care. Is that fair???

Why not let these people pay full fees for their space in the provate sector and let the people who really need it-mainly single parents who need to work and dont have any care options-access it

ottlib said...

torian:

It was explained the same way drug companies explain all of the nasty side-effects of the drugs they are peddling. Very quietly and quickly.

Many Canadians who have taken advantage of this saw the $100 sticker price and missed the other parts.

If that is dumb on their part too bad, they will not feel that way and they will blame the Conservatives for deceiving them.

It is that old adage of politics. Perception trumps reality every time.

Torian said...

ottlib,

did you get one of these cheques?

I did.

In my first one, it had an info sheet that explained that this money would be taxed on the lower income spouse, so people have no excuse not to know.

Of course, had they given the money away without ANY mention of the taxation issues, I'd be pissed, too. But they did, and not quietly and secretly, as you suggest.

Anonymous said...

Nice. Real smooth move Harper and Finley. Another reason Finley was shuffled out before tax season. She'd be hard pressed to explain this universal "take this lucre and you and your spawn piss off" help for families.
Baba sitting. Baba can get a hairdo and a bingo night for a MONTH of childcare wages.
Nice.

Anonymous said...

Nice. Real smooth move Harper and Finley. Another reason Finley was shuffled out before tax season. She'd be hard pressed to explain this universal "take this lucre and you and your spawn piss off" help for families.
Baba sitting. Baba can get a hairdo and a bingo night for a MONTH of childcare wages.
Nice.

Anonymous said...

Anyone taken by surprise by this has been living under a rock."

I'd suggest there are many under-rock-livers in Canada who are going to be miffed if they figure out why their refund is so small or non-existent.

Anonymous said...

You mean they're taxable.

Like what he's said from the outset.

BTW, the one's who'll recieve the most "clawback" are in the highest income bracket.

The most in need will have none clawed back.

Keep digging for an attack that'll have traction. You might want to get a better shovel.

In the meantime, did you hear that there's a major terrorist threat against Canada? Dion's timing (attacking the CPC for being too zealous against terrorists) was impeccable don't you think?

I originally thought that the CPC would just skweak by with a thin majority. But the way Dion's going, its looking more and more like a landslide.

Oh, hey, I also heard that the vote to destroy our economy (comply with Kyoto, which the libs didn't, which Dion says we couldn't, and which every leading economic analyst says we can't without seriously harming jobs, hell even Hargrove is saying it) is up today. Dion's SUPPORTING it. Nicely overplayed Dion. Way to leap for that radically left vote.

Yup, CPC majority.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, you guys are bang on. The whole notion of having the government tax a portion of regular checks we receive,

just seems so,

foreign.

I'm sure most Canadians will ask "what is this thing called 'tax' which you speak of, and why is the net lower than the gross. I have never seen this before...this...this...(how do you pronounce it?) taaaax thing"

Man, if this is what you guys are hanging onto.....

funny though. Made me laugh, and I do like to laugh.

Anonymous said...

BCer, I think you've hit a sore spot!

Tories must be worried about this if they've sent all their bored bloggin gtrolls to this comments section.

Trust me on this Jeff, people will be pissed when they realize what that form is, and when they see their tax refund evaporate.

Dear Tory trollers: nice talking points - but the fact is people will have to save up their money for two or three months to pay the taxes that are due now. No matter which way you cut it that means no money is spent on child care for those months.

Anonymous said...

Torian is dillusional. Mike Harris tried the exact same thing in Ontario - NO business day care was created - companies really don't want to get involved or have the responsility - Flaherty, Baird and Clements know this - why would Harper use a "failed" plan that never even took of the ground - it's just plain politiking.

I repeat - Mike Harris, neo-con of the worst kind tried this politiking and it "FAILED".

Anonymous said...

Boy it's easy to "buy off" these Tory lovers isn't it. Just throw a little candy at them and they get all excited - until they get cavities.

Ti-Guy said...

Man, you did hit a nerve. Torian, Evans and all the trollish anonymii are lying up a storm to play this down.

Rubes.

Orchard said...

I actually think that the Tories should keep up with this talking point. When the general public gets angry over this, just call them stupid. I'm sure that'll blow over well.

Anonymous said...

funny how you interepret mocking contempt, with fear.

this really is an echo chamber.

you guys honestly think Dion can beat harper,

my goodness, that is funny.

Dion, the "anybody but" product (actually, what, number four - after the real contenders dropped out no less) who's hitched his wagon onto a single issue, which just happens to be the issue he's got the least credibility on and which is now leading him to promise to destroy our economy), who is barely comprehensible,

that guy?

heh.

Anonymous said...

"Ti-Guy said...
Man, you did hit a nerve. Torian, Evans and all the trollish anonymii are lying up a storm to play this down."

Ti-guy calling people trolls.How ironic.You know,calls me a venomous creep for posting factual info, demands proof on here and another blog, i provide it, and he goes into the witness protection program instead of owning up to his misguided name calling.

Loseeeeer!!

Torian said...

http://www.todaysparent.com/lifeasparent/workfinance/article.jsp?content=20031113_104245_3704

http://www.canadastop100.com/family/

http://content.monster.ca/11668_en-CA_p1.asp

But then, I'm just delusional

Torian said...

and ti- hardly playing it down.

but for you guys to say that there was never any word or notice about the taxation when there obviously was would suggest you are being somewhat disingenuous (IOW lying), no?

I wont spin, but if I see untruths, I will speak out.

A BCer in Toronto said...

Torian, I won't speak for others but I'm not saying the tax hit wasn't revealed, or that it was hidden. But there is, I think a difference between the headline and the fine print. The $100/month was the headline, the taxable part was the fine print.

Should people have read the fine print? Absolutely. But I'm willing to wager a lot of people didn't. You can say they should have, and I'd agree. But that doesn't change the fact this news is going to hit them hard, and that they're going to feel misled and feel pissed at the Conservatives.

Scotian said...

"...I think a difference between the headline and the fine print. The $100/month was the headline, the taxable part was the fine print.

Should people have read the fine print? Absolutely. But I'm willing to wager a lot of people didn't. You can say they should have, and I'd agree. But that doesn't change the fact this news is going to hit them hard, and that they're going to feel misled and feel pissed at the Conservatives." BCer 2:17 PM, February 14, 2007

Exactly right, which is why the approach I am seeing from the CPC Trolletariat on this is especially toxic and like Orchard said telling the voters they were stupid to not look at the fine print will really make those same voters that much more inclined to vote for whomever making those comments is supporting...NOT. Insulting the intelligence of the average voter is something movement conservatism does a great deal of in NA, however I think it will come back to bite them in the behind here far more rapidly than it took in the USA. We shall see.

In the meantime though one can bet that the opposition parties (well at least the Libs and BQ, the NDP is much harder to guess thanks to the de facto alliance between the CPC and NDP where the Libs are concerned) will be driving this point home to Canadians, that the 1200 dollars a year comes out to little more than half that for many and will need planning for repayment of the difference come tax time. Somehow I doubt that many voters are going to see this as working out to much practical help regarding day care at all. Which would also be a case where perception is accurately reflecting reality despite all the CPC spin we have heard/seen to the contrary over the past year.

Anonymous said...

So I guess the announcment should have originally been:

NEW AMOUNTS TO BE TAXED! (details about these 'amounts' to follow, for the time being be aware that these new amounts will be taxed. What you'll be recieving is actually inconsequential, what's important is that the amounts [which shall not be disclosed untill the fact that they're taxable has resonated with the public] are being taxed.)

LOL.

Also, funny how Libs thought that the hundred bucks a month was so measly,

yet a fraction of this previous paltry sum, is now earth shattering.

You liberals crack me up.

A BCer in Toronto said...

You liberals crack me up.

More than mutual, I assure you mon ami.

Orchard said...

Hey there Jeff,

Wanna think about adding me to your blog roll? Huh? Huh?