Originally Posted by Alan2005 (Post 7834233)

One thing i've not worked out yet is what foods are what combination of GST/PST. I only notice that one tax goes up more often than the other when I'm at the till - maybe I should pay attention (or google the answer)

Originally Posted by JonboyE (Post 7834294)

I am not 100% sure myself. I think it is no GST or PST on the basics - bread and raw food that you cook yourself. GST on prepared foods, GST and PST on non-essential prepared foods like candy and cheesy whotsits. I am not clear on where the boundaries are.

Originally Posted by JonboyE (Post 7834166)

Originally Posted by The Aviator (Post 7834402)

Glad to see that bit :)

Originally Posted by Alan2005 (Post 7834456)

I thought aviation fuel was tax free world wide - can you imagine the cost of getting anywhere if it was taxed:ohmy:

Originally Posted by The Aviator (Post 7834704)

Av fuel is taxed in many parts of the world, incl BC collecting carbon tax on some flights. There is a push by BCSE to tax Av fuel further. This is their take "All aviation fuels should be taxed to discourage aviation."

Originally Posted by dboy (Post 7845734)

Sounds not as bad as i thought it was. Still don't like the way that Gordo introduced right after the election. I might be tempted to change my vote for the HST.

Sounds like the biggest impact is going to be eating out and purchase of new properties - although prices of houses are subject to negotiations and fair market value so might be a little misleading in that regard.

I read somewhere that the restaurant industry was trying to get the government to allow purchase of booze direct from the wholesaler rather than BC Liquour - no wonder booze is so 'spendy' (stole that from Oink) here.

Taxes on booze are criminal - pst/gst and liqour tax - plus its already marked up by BC Liquour.

Originally Posted by dboy (Post 7845734)

Sounds not as bad as i thought it was.

Originally Posted by JonboyE (Post 7846049)

There is a great deal of misinformation being dished out by the NDP and their supporters over this. One of the "send-this-email-to-at-least-ten-friends-and-we'll-stop-the-tax" type emails I received was an absolute joke. It claimed, in very bold print, that the HST would add over $2,000 to the average household bill. To support this it gave a list of the increases to the "average" household expenses. Half the items listed already have PST applied so, in reality, there will be no price increase. Even so their list only added up to $800. The biggest item on the list was an extra $210.00 on green fees. WTF?



It is standard politics - get all the sh*t out of the way in the first year and hope everyone has forgotten by the time the next election comes around. A new government has a ready excuse: "we've now had a chance to look at the books and it's even worse than we imagined". A re-elected government doesn't.

If the NDP can put together a credible platform by the next election the Liberals may pay for this. I am not going to hold my breath. It is interesting to see in the most recent polls that, although the Liberals have taken a hammering, the NDP share has not risen at all.




On average, 2% of the price of a new house is PST embedded in the costs of the contractor and their subs. If the developers reduce their prices by this amount, and given that the first $20,000 of the provincial component of the HST will be waived, there will only be significant increase to the more expensive new homes.



It is reasonable to ask why the restaurant industry has been effectively subsidized by the government for so long? This will level the playing field somewhat. Also, it only applies to the food part because the booze is taxed already. On a $100 meal including a bottle of wine the increase will be less than $5.

There are other items that will increase. Accountants only charge GST at present and will have to charge HST from next year! The most unsatisfactory increase will be to domestic fuel costs which currently are exempt from PST. They might want to do something about that.

It is also worth noting that there will be a provincial HST credit much like the current federal GST credit, so this will offset any additional costs to low income families.



I'm with you on this one. Last weekend in Fred Meyer's I wanted to cry. The exact same wine that costs $12.99 in the BC Liquor stores was on the shelf for $5.99. :(

Originally Posted by Alan2005 (Post 7846077)

Must admit that my initial reaction was against it. However, you've made some good points and I am somewhat persuaded that it isn't necessarily as bad as I initially thought. I'd want to see some proper analysis on a typical low-income family spend before making my mind up completely.

Originally Posted by JonboyE (Post 7834166)

B.C. is proposing the following point-of-sale rebates for the B.C. portion of the HST. Point-of-sale rebates are very similar to PST exemptions in that consumers do not pay tax at the time of purchase.

* Gasoline, diesel fuel, marine diesel and aviation fuel including biofuels components for motor vehicles, boats and aircraft.

* Children- sized clothing and footwear. The PST currently exempts children-sized clothing as well as adult- sized clothing purchased for children under the age of 15. While it is not possible to duplicate the exemption with respect to the adult sized clothing, it is proposed that a point-of-sale rebate be provided for children-sized clothing.

* Other point-of-sale rebates proposed include books, children’s car seats and car booster seats, diapers and feminine hygiene products.


http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/scp/hst/Questions.html

Basic foodstuffs, of course, are not subject to GST so will not be subject to HST either.

Originally Posted by ESarge (Post 7846636)

I'm obviously in the exception but I don't really have a problem with a broad-based, easy to administer consumption tax. I've just described NZ's GST...

I'm not sure I'm completely up with the economic justification - and I consider that embarrasing.

First off, a politician is elected to lead. If a politician decides to do something that wasn't part of his manifesto then I'm happy with that. He(she) faces the risk of not being returned at the next election. A government can't be run without doing unpopular things - otherwise you end up like California which has been effectively bankrupt because they weren't allowed to raise tax.

I once read an economics book about winner-take-all markets. i.e. only the best opera singer makes all the money. The second best makes an aweful lot less than the best - and the second best will have worked almost as hard (or have almost as much talent) as the best. These markets are found all over the place and distort things because everybody tries to get into the market thinking they're going to get paid like the best but only end up getting paid like the second best.
The proposed fix was consumption tax. :-P

The issue with increasing the number of exemptions is that it becomes more expensive to administer so the gains of the tax are reduced. It's very difficult to have a tax system that is both 'fair' and 'cheap'.

I didn't realise that PST was not refundable while HST is. That makes things interesting. Realise that the complaints about HST being added on new homes isn't quite accurate. Because of the refund you'll only end up paying HST on the *profit* the homebuilder has made. Whether the home buyer pays PST to the subbies indirectly in the price or pays HST directly and the home builder gets a refund on what they pay to the subbies it's all pretty much the same. (I don't think I've made this point very well. Might have to work through the numbers).

That HST amount will also end up floating the price of second-hand homes a little.

I believe I heard that the provincial government was going to get rid of a department with a few hundred people?

Originally Posted by Jsmth321 (Post 7846787)

California issues is not lack of money but lack of spending control on the part of politicians. The money is there if the morons didn't waste so much.

California and BC also have 2 different types of government, the ruling party in BC system has more power overall then the democrats who hold a majority in California, they still need opposition support for budgets and tax increases.

California also saw the largest increases in taxes and user fees this past February and by July they wanted to raise taxes and fees again, and you think thats fair?

California issue is and always has been lack of fiscal responsibility not lack of money.