They also shit on people's lawns.
karlhungus
joined 2 years ago
We have a "charter of rights and freedoms" in particular: https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art2b.html. So as much as I dislike this kind of stuff they are still allowed to have it.
I could see someone seeing that hat and assuming it's a MAGA hat, and kicking the guy out -- and the security guards "just doing their jobs".
It still sucks, and i'm glad they said sorry
depending on the pr.... My thinking is I would have likely voted NDP with Liberal as second, rather than how i did vote: Liberal (party i thought had the greatest chance in my riding of causing us to not go conservative). I think this would likely have happened to a significant number of voters. Given all that I'm suspicious that any predictions that you could make given data under FPTP if there had been PR are valueless.
Assuming he pays 25% tax, which i'd be very suspicious about, he's about 2 million short of his current "fair share".
26 000 000 * 0.25 = 6 500 000
26 000 000 * 0.33 = 8 580 000
If he's deferring till retirement, then likely his tax rate is less, and the bank is lending him money which he can spend freely and call a capital loss lowering his effective tax rate when he does incur those taxes.
The thing about being this wealthy is you can afford to pay people to find ways to lower this rate.
I don't think i'm "mad" about this, but concerned. This kind of inequality leads to violent upheaval, and is currently the cause of a whole pile of unnecessary suffering. If we didn't have people that were this wealthy and some of that money was distributed to say education, healthcare, UBI, we could all have a much healthier pleasant life.
You don't pay taxes on the option, because you haven't bought the option till you exercise it.
Anyway the amount was kinda fixed (it's been awhile) like 25%, it was also years ago, so things may have changed. They are also distinct from RSU's which i believe aren't taxed as low, but still better than top marginal tax rate for income.
Anyway it doesn't seem like those are really the whole story (https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/36l575/eli5_how_can_it_be_that_ceos_often_pay_an/) -- it looks like the tax escape mechanism is to get deferred stocks - which admittedly for the Tobias case we'd have to see how those stocks were awarded. I still think my point 2 applys - why would he take compensation in this mostly stocks manner (and like every other CEO i've seen) unless there was some benefit.
I was ready to get up in arms, but this is actually good news. It looks like at one point in tiny text under our national parks it would say "state park" -- which doesn't make sense in canada, they are fixing that.
Although the locations were titled "provincial park" in large text, in small print, many across the country were labelled as "state parks" — a longstanding practice, according to the company.
However, that language came under increased scrutiny in the wake of U.S. President Donald Trump's repeated threat that he wants to annex Canada against the wishes of Canada's political leaders and widespread public opinion.
-
I've exercised options from a company in canada, they were taxed distinctly (and more favourably) from income.
-
He'd have no reason to take his payment this way otherwise. (FWIW Every CEO (both canadian and american) of a wealthy company i've seen has taken their pay in a manner similar to this: most of the comp is in stocks)
Your supposition that "every economist agrees that a wealth tax doesn't make any sense mathematically", I find in bad faith, not that you are against it. It's obvious that you are against it.
Maybe you have a book that argues in favor of a wealth tax
I don't see how you could talk about economics and not know about that book.
He earns 1$ income, the rest is options, his income is below the minimum taxable. The taxes he pays on options aren't income tax.
view more: next ›
To subscribe to Amazon Prime?