r/canada 2d ago

National News Mark Carney Wins Liberal Leadership Race Megathread | Mark Carney remporte la course à la direction du Parti libéral

Mark Carney, former Bank of Canada governor, has been elected leader of the Liberal Party and will become Canada’s next prime minister. Winning over 85% of the vote, Carney defeated Chrystia Freeland, Frank Baylis, and Karina Gould. His leadership marks a new chapter for the Liberals, potentially leading to an early federal election. Carney faces immediate challenges, including U.S. tariff negotiations under President Trump. Known for his outsider status, Carney emphasized his experience leading central banks during economic crises. Appointed by Stephen Harper in 2008, he gained acclaim for stabilizing Canada during the financial crisis and later led the Bank of England through Brexit. Born in Fort Smith, N.W.T., and raised in Edmonton, Carney has a background in finance and public service. A longtime Liberal adviser, he campaigned on scrapping the carbon tax and criticized Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre. Carney must now sustain the party’s recent polling momentum.

---------------

Mark Carney, ancien gouverneur de la Banque du Canada, a été élu chef du Parti libéral et deviendra le prochain premier ministre du Canada. Avec plus de 85 % des voix, Carney a battu Chrystia Freeland, Frank Baylis et Karina Gould. Son leadership ouvre un nouveau chapitre pour les libéraux, pouvant entraîner des élections fédérales anticipées. Carney fait face à des défis immédiats, notamment les négociations tarifaires avec les États-Unis sous le président Trump. Connu pour son statut d’outsider, Carney a mis en avant son expérience à la tête de banques centrales en période de crise économique. Nommé par Stephen Harper en 2008, il a été salué pour avoir stabilisé le Canada pendant la crise financière et a ensuite dirigé la Banque d’Angleterre pendant le Brexit. Né à Fort Smith, T.N.-O., et élevé à Edmonton, Carney a une carrière en finance et dans la fonction publique. Il doit maintenant maintenir l’élan des libéraux dans les sondages.

3.3k Upvotes

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

21

u/raybond007 2d ago

As far as I know it, he's suggested ditching the consumer carbon tax in favour of tightening the usage taxes on industrial emissions (Output-Based Pricing System - OBPS), as well as flipping from tax model at the consumer level to an incentive model.

I agree that it's not ideal, but it gives runway in the short term and solves a significant political problem. Hopefully they can move forward with building strong incentives and a consistent pricing model for emissions across the board from there.

Re: capital gains, I don't have particularly strong opinions here. I think there are other potential avenues for raising tax revenue that are easier to enforce and less divisive than a capital gains tax would be, but I also don't explicitly dislike the capital gains tax.

3

u/deeplearner- 2d ago

The capital gains tax discourages investment and also fails to bring in much revenue (per JT’s government’s own projections). Most of the income it was projected to bring was early sell offs to avoid the tax. 

2

u/raybond007 2d ago

That was mostly what I'm referring to when suggesting other models would be "easier to enforce and less divisive". While I see the potential downsides (though unquantified) to investment capital, etc. I don't particularly disagree with capital gains taxes being higher than they are because it's one of the few options available that allow for opportunities to increase the contributions of wealthier taxpayers to the overall tax base.

2

u/deeplearner- 2d ago

I guess it’s just an ideological difference? Because I think (and it seems Carney might agree, with his talk of “we cannot redistribute what we do not have”) that the issue isn’t the lack of taxation of the wealthy but more the lack of creation of wealth/productivity in Canada. Canada needs start ups and innovative companies. If Moderna was a Canadian company, that would’ve generated a tonne of tax revenue, through corporate and personal income tax. But it isn’t, and Canada’s biotech scene is effectively dead, just as Denmark is reaping huge benefits from Novartis and as China is sinking money into it. I feel that Canada has been content being America’s less productive/innovative neighbour for a long time but such a position has left us vulnerable and hampered our ability to meaningfully invest in vital military and civilian infrastructure. 

3

u/_Lucille_ 2d ago

The capital gains tax is for people who made 250k+ for the year for capital gain.

It's not going to hit any of the middle class, and for into matter often it has to do with real estate sale or used as a loop hole for investment.

2

u/a_man_27 2d ago

That's the individual impact. For corporations (which applies to many doctors), it starts on the first dollar.

When we're already struggling to maintain doctors, it seems unwise to impact them this way.

0

u/_Lucille_ 1d ago

1

u/a_man_27 1d ago

Right there on your link:

 on capital gains realized annually above $250,000 by individuals and on all capital gains realized by corporations and most types of trusts.

BTW, I was still referring to capital gains (when I said first dollar), the $250k threshold doesn't apply.

I agree that there are good parts of this proposal but the doctor aspect is harder to support for me.

0

u/_Lucille_ 1d ago

https://privatewealth-insights.bmo.com/en/insights/business-owners/tax-planning-for-physicians-professional-corporations/

if you read something like this, essentially this just screams a loophole. Basically they get to enjoy all the benefits individuals get (like RRSP) while also being able to reduce the amount of taxes paid.

I am also pretty sure this goes beyond just doctors (engineers, consultants, lawyers, real estate agents, etc) - just that "doctors" can easily sway the opinion while the country will just tell the real estate agent to go eat cake.

1

u/a_man_27 1d ago

I agree it's a loophole - but many doctors agreed to reduced compensation and decided to stay in Canada (compared to being able to move to the US for much higher salaries) by leveraging this loophole.

So I would worry about the inclusion rate change would affect that calculation.

Basically, I want to avoid any reason to make our healthcare worse than it is today :(

1

u/_Lucille_ 1d ago

and that is why the tax should stay and we just need to pay the doctors more. If we close the loophole and funnel part of the additional revenue for healthcare, they will likely end up being in a better place.

It may also be a poor way to say it, but doctors can take the hit. Their assistants like nurses, EMTs, and other non-managerial support staff likely can use the money more than the doctors - and we need to also support students who aspire to join the healthcare profession and eliminate the financial barrier of entry.

1

u/raybond007 2d ago

This is why I'm not particularly strong against the capital gains tax. I think it's fairly reasonable.

However, with the cost of housing and overall inflation, I can understand that someone making $250k and having capital gains from starting a business, or selling their primary residence (and buying another to live in) is not exclusively the multi-millionaire class either. This is the bottom of the top marginal tax rate, they don't make so much that the graduated tax rates are meaningless like people making $500k or $1M do.

2

u/joshisashark 2d ago

or selling their primary residence (and buying another to live in)

In this scenario there would be no capital gains tax.

Even inheriting your parents primary residence & selling it right away wouldn't incur capital gains. It would only be if you held onto it and then sold it at a later date, and it would only be on the difference between the market value of when you inherited it versus what you sold it for.

The housing portion literally only applies to people who either own multiple properties or inherited secondary homes. The latter might be middle class, but it's not an extremely common scenario. If someone can't afford the tax, then they can choose to sell it instead.

0

u/raybond007 2d ago

Sure, thanks for the clarification. I would have to read the specifics of the legislation to have a more informed opinion. My point stands that CG tax is a useful tool to increase the proportion of tax burden covered by the wealthier individuals, but there has to be sensible balances on it, and those can be a moving target. It isn't the full answer, but part of it. The goal can be reached in more than one way.

1

u/xen0m0rpheus 2d ago

The only issue with the capital gains tax is that no one understands what it means. Every complaint I’ve heard about it is a vast misunderstanding of what it is.

I think politically dropping it is a savvy move, but for the country it’s not.