I can certainly understand that point of view. Here is another one – I’ve been working for over 20 years full time and have had several full time jobs but not once have I collected UI. So, I’ve helped supplement other people who have had periods of unemployment. If I’m fortunate, I will never have to dip into UI – on the other hand, I will never see any of that money back for being a productive worker.

Secondly, I typically have paid income taxes at or near the highest rate for the last 15 years. I’ve never been incarcerated, in the hospital (except for 2 days when I was 10 for a tonsillectomy), needed to be rescued or any other sort of drain on the federal government except for my university education in Canada. If I pay $25,000 a year just in income taxes, do I get a larger share of government benefits than someone who pays $5,000 in taxes? What about when I pay $50k or even $100k a year in taxes?

Typically people with larger incomes also spend more – generating additional tax revenue to municipal (property taxes with larger homes), provincial (PST) and federal (GST) coffers. I believe that is more fair since I get the same benefit of paying $6.50 in taxes on a $50 pair of shoes than anyone else does buying that pair of shoes.

I am proud that Canada is socialist in that we collectively put our resources together to help the less fortunate. I also understand that there will be people who will be net contributors (as I have so far in my fortunate life) and there will be others who take more than they give.

I know that I’ve contributed more money towards the various governments than the average person in my working lifetime. There are people who have contributed much, much more and people who have contributed much, much less. I don’t criticize them or think of them either as greedy or lazy.

I don’t think there is a tax system that will be considered fair by all segments of the society.

I do think that most people would like to be net contributors, especially those from previous generations.

I think it would be unfair to label people with high incomes as greedy – I’ve seen greed in people from all ranks of income levels, just like I’ve seen generosity in all ranks.

Would I support lowering the limit at which OAS gets cutback? Yes, because, unlike the CPP, you are not directly contributing to it in a visible way. Obviously it is based on federal tax revenues so as long as I’m earning or buying goods and services, I’m contributing to the program. Which means I’m probably contributing more than most people.

People (e.g. entertainers or entrepreneurs) who make millions of dollars and pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in all forms of taxes help out more people (indirectly) than you or I. While it is involuntary, the fact is they do. Wouldn’t it be ironic if the people helped out the most, those at the lowest end of the scale, would then turn around and criticize their benefactors for their excesses?

According to this paper http://www.springerlink.com/content/f445236200lg2137/fulltext.pdf, it measures, among other things, the “inequality index”. The countries with the lowest difference between the rich and the poor are dominated with European names and the Scandinavian countries especially. Canada is beaten by 22 countries out of the 126 listed (US was used as the benchmark). I guess it has to be some consolation to we Canucks that we get Ikea, some very good hockey players (and Volvo if that’s your thing).

What gets me even more is that people with that income or higher are still looking for tax breaks. Low income people should be so lucky. Well they can always apply for INCOME ASSISTANCE.

Most hard working people never get a chance to make that kind of money in their lifetime. It’s time society wasn’t so GREEDY!

The clawbacks are the problem many Canadians run into when their entire retirement savings are only pension and RRSP. With no tax deductions and every dollar of income being taxable, you can only avoid clawbacks by taking lower income.

You are probably right that only about 5% of seniors have any part of their OAS clawed back, but I have not seen this figure for all clawbacks. The clawbacks on GIS, age credit and GST are all at lower brackets than the OAS clawback.

My estimate it that about half of Canadians are affected by clawbacks at their MTR, which means that one extra dollar of income will be subject to one clawback program or another in addition to income tax.

Annuities can help you when compared to bonds or GICs. However, you can get the same affect where part of your payment is your principal with a systematic withdrawal from a mutual fund. Then the taxable part will also be capital gains, instead of interest from the annuity.

Ed

One suggestion I read about reducing your taxable income (thus reducing the impact of clawbacks) would be to purchase annuities. Because they include a ROC component, only the interest portion would count against income.

Of course, if you can defer or minimize withdrawing money from your RRSP that would also help.

But, I also read that only about 5% of seniors face any kind of OAS clawback while only 2% lose it completely.

Most people on this blog, IIRC, would be happy to be in the problem where their retirement income was so high as to impact their OAS benefits.

You should apply 6 months before your 65th birthday (or, for recent immigrants, that might be 6 months before your 10th anniversary of living in Canada). However, there are provisions for retroactive payments covering up to 12 months.
OH! You’re my new favorite blogger fyi

One suggestion I read about reducing your taxable income (thus reducing the impact of clawbacks) would be to purchase annuities. Because they include a ROC component, only the interest portion would count against income.

Of course, if you can defer or minimize withdrawing money from your RRSP that would also help.

But, I also read that only about 5% of seniors face any kind of OAS clawback while only 2% lose it completely.

Most people on this blog, IIRC, would be happy to be in the problem where their retirement income was so high as to impact their OAS benefits.

You should apply 6 months before your 65th birthday (or, for recent immigrants, that might be 6 months before your 10th anniversary of living in Canada). However, there are provisions for retroactive payments covering up to 12 months.