Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Marshall Savings Plan petition tabled by Liberal MP Paul Szabo

On March 4, 2010 Liberal MP Paul Szabo rose in the House of Commons and tabled the following petition (signed by 3,421 Canadians) and did so with the following motion: “In view of the fact that there is no justification for the imposition of the 31.5% tax on income trusts that the government take all necessary steps to introduce and implement the Marshall Savings Plan.”

The Petition reads as follows:


The Prime Minister solemnly promised to all Canadians during the 2006 election that his government would NEVER tax Income Trusts and subsequently reversed that promise by claiming that income trusts cause tax leakage as the justification for breaking that promise.

In claiming that income trusts cause tax leakage, the Prime Minister left out all the taxes paid by the 38% of income trusts in RRSPs/RRIFs, etc., the proper inclusion of which in his calculation would result in the determination that no tax leakage exists whatsoever, as determined by reputable groups like HLB Decision Economics, BMO Capital Markets. RBC Capital Markets and PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Income trusts did not cause tax leakage, which was simply a false pretense that has now resulted in the takeover of 51 income trusts by foreigners and other non taxable entities and which as a direct consequence HAS caused three times as much tax leakage as was falsely alleged to have existed in the first place.

The income trust tax also creates an unlevel playing field between the 75% of Canadians without pensions who must pay the 31.5% trust tax and the 25% of Canadians with pensions who can evade the 31.5% tax.

WHEREAS: This creates a grossly unfair two tiered pension system, and leaves the remaining 169 trusts, whose Canadian investors pay $6 billion in annual tax revenue, at risk of foreign takeover and further tax losses.

The Prime Minister has prorogued Parliament for the specific purpose of 'recalibrating' his policies in a Budget to be tabled to Parliament on March 4, 2010 that addresses the needs of Canadians and deals with Canada's deficit and pension crises that arose from the recent financial turmoil. Therefore,

We, the undersigned residents of Canada
, call upon the Government of Canada to: acknowledge that the Government's financial justification for imposing the tax was flawed and to recalibrate and remedy the matter by adopting the Marshall Savings Plan (MSP) in Budget 2010, on the basis of the following signatures and with the knowledge that a recent Environics poll (see attached) indicates that 79.6% of Canadians support the inclusion of the MSP in Budget 2010.


Dr Mike said...

Man oh man , even with the enticement of billions in new tax revenue to adopt the Marshall Plan , the Cons would not go there.

All I can say is that they must be really afraid to reopen this wound.

I guess just the embarrassment alone of the 18 blacked-out pages that were subsequently recalled would be enough to stay away from this subject once & for all no matter how bad the country needs to extra cash or no matter how much healthcare this could buy.

Woweee , scary isn`t it.

Dr Mike Popovich

Henry Sack said...

I am disappointed that Paul Szabo is being pushed by the income trust lobby and will never vote for him again.

Anonymous said...

Paul Szabo:

As a constituent of yours, I read today of reports that you courageously spoke up in the House against Mr. Harpers' lie involving income trusts and for this I thank and commend you.

A shame that more in the Commons do not do likewise... a lie told with a smile is still a lie and unchallenged, will soon be accepted as truth.

With appreciation,


Anonymous said...

March 9, 2010

Paul Szabo
House of Commons
Ottawa, ON. K1A 0A6

Dear Mr. Szabo;

Thank you for presenting your motion to get the Marshall Plan
implemented in the budget. You have left me one small sliver of hope that your party could still be persuaded to vigourously promote the plan and force the Tories to act.

I'm far from being an expert in political strategy and I hate to be
critical of Mr. Ignatieff, but my gut feeling is he has done just about the worst thing he possibly could by saying that even though he doesn't support it, he will let the budget pass by keeping enough Liberal MP's out of the house when the vote is taken. He is already being portrayed as "spineless" in the popular press, and you can count on the Tories taking every opportunity they can to reinforce that image. And there is just enough substance now for it to stick.

Even apart from the public relations aspect, I suggest it is a questionable strategy. The public doesn't want an election? So what?

They didn't want one in 2008 either, but it didn't hurt Mr. Harper any to call it. And doing everything he could to avoid that unwanted
election didn’t do Mr. Dion any good. By adopting the position he has, Mr. Ignatieff has once again given up all control of the political agenda to the Tories, and if conditions go their way this summer, as they very well may, I fear the damage to the Liberal prospects may be fatal. Not just for the next election but for a decade or more to come, a prospect that is just as disagreeable to me as it is to you.

In my opinion the absolute best thing Mr. Ignatieff could do right now is demand the Tories cancel the income trust tax and adopt the Marshall plan in the budget. If they do, the Liberals can in good conscience vote for it. If they don't, then the Liberals will show up in force in the house when the vote is taken and try to defeat the budget. Not only is this the right thing to do ethically, economically (provides stimulus which is still necessary) and fiscally (actually enhances tax
collections), it will change the public's image of the Liberals from
wimps to a credible, strong alternative. It would instantly switch you from defense to offence.

Then what? Either the Tories change their budget or they don't. If they don't, either they get support from some wimpy opposition party other than the Liberals or they are defeated in the house and we have an election. Whatever happens, Mr. Ignatieff can legitimately portray
himself as a strong, democratic leader who takes positions on the basis of hard facts and sound logic, as against the Harper Tories who because of either fanatical ideology or some hidden agenda are prepared to
sacrifice the Country's best interests for their own selfish ends.
Strikes me as a pretty solid basis to fight an election on if it comes to that. Hope you agree, and that you can persuade your colleagues.

Yours truly,

Ted R

Dr Mike said...

Henry ---pffffffffffftttttttttttttt.

Szabo is a saint.

Dr Mike Popovich