News
Did I make a mistake by not investing in a house? – CBC.ca
This First Person column is the experience of Lise Watson who lives in Toronto. For more information about CBC’s First Person stories, please see the FAQ.
My family and I live down the hall from my 90-year-old mother in a co-op building in the heart of Toronto. She’s fiercely independent, and even after my dad died, she insisted on living alone.
So instead of trying to find her a new home close to me, I packed up my bags and moved into her building.
The co-op has been our home for over 20 years. We live in an attractive, well-maintained red brick building. We are blessed with two lovely rooftop gardens, a central location close to all amenities and public transit, and a membership that cares deeply about social justice and environmental sustainability. We know and care about all of our neighbours and have a diverse membership of seniors, young children, and differently abled people. Everyone is welcome.
Most importantly, our home is affordable.
As members all pitch in and work together to maintain our building, the co-op can keep rent levels lower than market rates.
We pay $1,160 monthly for a two-bedroom apartment, and that means we can continue living in a city which is becoming increasingly expensive. Just across the street, a two-bedroom apartment that is not in a co-op building is renting for almost $2,500 per month with heat and hydro on top. And that’s the norm.
I’m grateful to live where I do, but the long-term future for co-ops like ours is uncertain. Established in the 1980s, our co-op is in need of new kitchens, bathrooms and heat pumps.
While my co-op has savings for capital projects such as this for now, it’s built on leased property and its future isn’t secure. I’m also constantly reminded of the pressures that many co-ops face in the media. Many are struggling with repair costs; some have been forced to raise rents to factor these expenses into their housing charges. Others need to go to banks to secure new financing or are applying for government assistance.
If my co-op is unable to maintain its sustainable rent, my family will be forced to look outside the city for affordable housing.
I am 65 years old. I’m proud and happy with all that I have accomplished in my life, but in these troubled economic and social times, I have some doubts about my life decisions and investments.
Growing up, I never wanted to be a homeowner.
My father was the son of a fish and chip shop owner in northern England. He immigrated to Canada with high hopes and dreams in the 1950s. Dad was a self-taught copywriter and layout man. He met and fell in love with my mom at a Toronto ad agency. My parents scrimped and saved to buy a newly built home in Oakville, Ont., in the mid-1960s. It was a dream come true for them at the time.
Farmer’s fields, ravines, and forests surrounded our family home. After finding local cows one day trampling our neighbour’s patio, my parents realized that good fencing was a necessity. I still vividly remember my dad digging post holes himself with a crowbar and it seemed to take forever.
Their budget was severely stretched. My parents couldn’t lay down grass in our backyard until a few years later, so we kids trailed into the house with red clay muck on our shoes regularly, much to my mom’s dismay. As children we spent hours each summer climbing trees and jumping into piles of yellowed grass and leaves, checking out the tadpoles and frogs in the creeks, and picking and eating sour apples from abandoned orchards.
It sounds idyllic now, but it lacked a sense of community. There was little infrastructure, no school, churches, community organizations, public transit, or even nearby grocery stores for many years.
There was a sense of isolation and it was emotionally detrimental to a city gal like my mom who became a homemaker after her marriage. We were a one-car family and my dad drove to Hamilton every day for work. We were bussed several miles to school each day.
I wanted a different kind of life. I dreamed of going to university and travelling. So I struck out on my own after high school and funded my own part-time university education at the University of Toronto at the downtown campus. The city was an oasis for me, and I never left except to travel.
My quest to find a vibrant and welcoming community led me to Toronto’s African music scene, and later to West Africa where I married my husband. Six years ago, I brought him and his son to Canada. I have happily supported them as they adjusted to a vastly different culture and now make remarkable contributions to our community. For decades, I have complemented my career in university student service by volunteering at music festivals and a community radio station and in 1997, I started my own community arts publication.
I have had a rich and rewarding life. But the financial consequences are beginning to take a toll as Toronto becomes unaffordable.
Today I wonder if I made the right decision by investing in education and life experiences rather than housing security and material possessions. I admit that I have been privileged to make this kind of a choice. Home ownership was low on my priority list. If I had a safe, clean home, that was good enough for me. I never dreamed that some day affordable housing would become scarce.
Some of my oldest friends made different decisions than me. They focused on home ownership, paying off the mortgage and raising families. Today they are retired, sit in their gardens — some even have pools — and enjoy the grandkids and travel to all-inclusive Caribbean resorts. They appear relatively content and clearly not worried about housing security.
I envy the peace of mind they have but still contend that this was not the life for me. I know I did the right thing for me — and my mom — at the time. But now I fear for our housing future.
Do you have a similar experience to this First Person column? We want to hear from you. Write to us at firstperson@cbc.ca.
News
Capital gains tax change draws ire from some Canadian entrepreneurs worried it will worsen brain drain – CBC.ca
A chorus of Canadian entrepreneurs and investors is blasting the federal government’s budget for expanding a tax on the rich. They say it will lead to brain drain and further degrade Canada’s already poor productivity.
In the 2024 budget unveiled Tuesday, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said the government would increase the inclusion rate of the capital gains tax from 50 per cent to 67 per cent for businesses and trusts, generating an estimated $19 billion in new revenue.
Capital gains are the profits that individuals or businesses make from selling an asset — like a stock or a second home. Individuals are subject to the new changes on any profits over $250,000.
The government estimates that the changes would impact 40,000 individuals (or 0.13 per cent of Canadians in any given year) and 307,000 companies in Canada.
However, some members of the business community say that expanding the taxable amount will devastate productivity, investment and entrepreneurship in Canada, and might even compel some of the country’s talent and startups to take their business elsewhere.
Benjamin Bergen, president of the Council of Canadian Innovators (CCI), said the capital gains tax has overshadowed parts of the federal budget that the business community would otherwise be excited about.
“There were definitely some other stars in the budget that were interesting,” he said. “However, the … capital gains piece really is the sun, and it’s daylight. So this is really the only thing that innovators can see.”
The CCI has written and is circulating an open letter signed by more than 1,000 people in the Canadian business community to Trudeau’s government asking it to scrap the tax change.
Shopify CEO Tobi Lütke and president Harley Finkelstein also weighed in on the proposed hike on X, formerly known as Twitter.
We need to be doing everything we can to turn Canada into the best place for entrepreneurs to build 🇨🇦<br><br>What’s proposed in the federal budget will do the complete opposite. Innovators and entrepreneurs will suffer and their success will be penalized — this is not a wealth tax,…
—@harleyf
Former finance minister Bill Morneau said his successor’s budget disincentivizes businesses from investing in the country’s innovation sector: “It’s probably very troubling for many investors.”
Canada’s productivity — a measure that compares economic output to hours worked — has been relatively poor for decades. It underperforms against the OECD average and against several other G7 countries, including the U.S., Germany, U.K. and Japan, on the measure.
Bank of Canada senior deputy governor Carolyn Rogers sounded the alarm on Canada’s lagging productivity in a speech last month, saying the country’s need to increase the rate had reached emergency levels, following one of the weakest years for the economy in recent memory.
The government said it was proposing the tax change to make life more affordable for younger generations and fund efforts to boost housing supply — and that it would support productivity growth.
A challenge for investors, founders and workers
The change could have a chilling effect for several reasons, with companies already struggling to access funding in a high interest rate environment, said Bergen.
He questioned whether investors will want to fund Canadian companies if the government’s taxation policies make it difficult for those firms to grow — and whether founders might just pack up.
The expanded inclusion rate “is just one of the other potential concerns that firms are going to have as they’re looking to grow their companies.”
He said the rejigged tax is also an affront to high-skilled workers from low-innovation sectors who might have taken the risk of joining a startup for the opportunity, even taking a lower wage on the chance that a firm’s stock options grow in value.
But Lindsay Tedds, an associate economics professor at the University of Calgary, said the tax change is one of the most misunderstood parts of the federal budget — and that its impact on the country’s talent has been overstated.
“This is not a major innovation-biting tax change treatment,” Tedds said. “In fact, when you talk to real grassroots entrepreneurs that are setting up businesses, tax rates do not come into their decision.”
As for productivity, Tedds said Canadians might see improvements in the long run “to the degree that some of our productivity problems are driven by stresses like housing affordability, access to child care, things like that.”
‘One foot on the gas, one foot on the brake’
Some say the government is sending mixed messages to entrepreneurs by touting tailored tax breaks — like the Canada Entrepreneurs’ Incentive, which reduces the capital gains inclusion rate to 33 per cent on a lifetime maximum of $2 million — while introducing measures they say would dampen investment and innovation.
“They seem to have one foot on the gas, one foot on the brake on the very same file,” said Dan Kelly, president of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business.
A founder may be able to sell their successful company with a lower capital gains treatment than otherwise possible, he said.
“At the same time, though, big chunks of it may be subject to a higher rate of capital gains inclusion.”
Selling a company can fund an individual’s retirement, he said, which is why it’s one of the first things founders consider when they think about capital gains.
Mainstreet NS7:03Ottawa is proposing a hike to capital gains tax. What does that mean?
Dennis Darby, president and CEO of Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters, says he was disappointed by the change — and that it sends the wrong message to Canadian industries like his own.
He wants to see the government commit to more tax credit proposals like the Canada Carbon Rebate for Small Businesses, which he said would incentivize business owners to stay and help make Canada competitive with the U.S.
“We’ve had a lot of difficulties attracting investment over the years. I don’t think this will make it any better.”
Tech titan says change will only impact richest of the rich
Toronto tech entrepreneur Ali Asaria will be one of those subject to the expanded capital gains inclusion rate — but he says it’s only fair.
“It’s going to really affect the richest of the rich people,” Asaria, CEO of open source platform Transformer Lab and founder of well.ca, told CBC News.
“The capital gains exemption is probably the largest tax break that I’ve ever received in my life,” he said. “So I know a lot about what that benefit can look like, but I’ve also always felt like it was probably one of the most unfair parts of the tax code today.”
While Asaria said Canada needs to continue encouraging talent to take risks and build companies in the country, taxation policies aren’t the most major problem.
“I think that the biggest central issue to the reason why people will leave Canada is bigger issues, like housing,” he said.
“How do we make it easier to live in Canada so that we can all invest in ourselves and invest in our companies? That’s a more important question than, ‘How do we help the top 0.13 per cent of Canadians make more money?'”
News
Canada Child Benefit payment on Friday | CTV News – CTV News Toronto
More money will land in the pockets of Canadian families on Friday for the latest Canada Child Benefit (CCB) installment.
The federal government program helps low and middle-income families struggling with the soaring cost of raising a child.
Canadian citizens, permanent residents, or refugees who are the primary caregivers for children under 18 years old are eligible for the program, introduced in 2016.
The non-taxable monthly payments are based on a family’s net income and how many children they have. Families that have an adjusted net income under $34,863 will receive the maximum amount per child.
For a child under six years old, an applicant can annually receive up to $7,437 per child, and up to $6,275 per child for kids between the ages of six through 17.
That translates to up to $619.75 per month for the younger cohort and $522.91 per month for the older group.
The benefit is recalculated every July and most recently increased 6.3 per cent in order to adjust to the rate of inflation, and cost of living.
To apply, an applicant can submit through a child’s birth registration, complete an online form or mail in an application to a tax centre.
The next payment date will take place on May 17.
News
Ontario Legislature keffiyeh ban remains in place – CBC.ca
Keffiyehs remain banned in the Ontario Legislature after a unanimous consent motion that would have allowed the scarf to be worn failed to pass at Queen’s Park Thursday.
That vote, brought forth by NDP Leader Marit Stiles, failed despite Premier Doug Ford and the leaders of the province’s opposition parties all stating they want to see the ban overturned. Complete agreement from all MPPs is required for a motion like this to pass, and there were a smattering of “nos” after it was read into the record.
In an email on Wednesday, Speaker Ted Arnott said the legislature has previously restricted the wearing of clothing that is intended to make an “overt political statement” because it upholds a “standard practice of decorum.”
“The Speaker cannot be aware of the meaning of every symbol or pattern but when items are drawn to my attention, there is a responsibility to respond. After extensive research, I concluded that the wearing of keffiyehs at the present time in our Assembly is intended to be a political statement. So, as Speaker, I cannot authorize the wearing of keffiyehs based on our longstanding conventions,” Arnott said in an email.
Speaking at Queen’s Park Thursday, Arnott said he would reconsider the ban with unanimous consent from MPPs.
“If the house believes that the wearing of the keffiyeh in this house, at the present time, is not a political statement, I would certainly and unequivocally accept the express will of the house with no ifs, ands or buts,” he said.
Keffiyehs are a commonly worn scarf among Arabs, but hold special significance to Palestinian people. They have been a frequent sight among pro-Palestinian protesters calling for an end to the violence in Gaza as the Israel-Hamas war continues.
Premier calls for reversal
Ford said Thursday he’s hopeful Arnott will reverse the ban, but he didn’t say if he would instruct his caucus to support the NDP’s motion.
In a statement issued Wednesday, Ford said the decision was made by the speaker and nobody else.
“I do not support his decision as it needlessly divides the people of our province. I call on the speaker to reverse his decision immediately,” Ford said.
PC Party MPP Robin Martin, who represents Eglinton–Lawrence, voted against the unanimous consent motion Thursday and told reporters she believes the speaker’s initial ruling was the correct one.
“We have to follow the rules of the legislature, otherwise we politicize the entire debate inside the legislature, and that’s not what it’s about. What it’s about is we come there and use our words to persuade, not items of clothing.”
When asked if she had defied a directive from the premier, Martin said, “It has nothing to do with the premier, it’s a decision of the speaker of the legislative assembly.”
Stiles told reporters Thursday she’s happy Ford is on her side on this issue, but added she is disappointed the motion didn’t pass.
“The premier needs to talk to his people and make sure they do the right thing,” she said.
Stiles first urged Arnott to reconsider the ban in an April 12 letter. She said concerns over the directive first surfaced after being flagged by members of her staff, however they have gained prominence after Sarah Jama, Independent MPP for Hamilton Centre, posted about the issue on X, formerly Twitter.
Jama was removed from the NDP caucus for her social media comments on the Israel-Hamas war shortly after Oct. 7.
Jama has said she believes she was kicked out of the party because she called for a ceasefire in Gaza “too early” and because she called Israel an “apartheid state.”
Arnott told reporters Thursday that he began examining a ban on the Keffiyeh after one MPP made a complaint about another MPP, who he believes was Jama, who was wearing one.
Liberals also call for reversal
Ontario Liberal Leader Bonnie Crombie also called for a reversal of the ban on Wednesday night.
“Here in Ontario, we are home to a diverse group of people from so many backgrounds. This is a time when leaders should be looking for ways to bring people together, not to further divide us. I urge Speaker Arnott to immediately reconsider this move to ban the keffiyeh,” Crombie said.
Stiles said MPPs have worn kilts, kirpans, vyshyvankas and chubas in the legislature, saying such items of clothing not only have national and cultural associations, but have also been considered at times as “political symbols in need of suppression.”
She said Indigenous and non-Indigenous members have also dressed in traditional regalia and these items cannot be separated from their historical and political significance.
“The wearing of these important cultural and national clothing items in our Assembly is something we should be proud of. It is part of the story of who we are as a province,” she said.
“Palestinians are part of that story, and the keffiyeh is a traditional clothing item that is significant not only to them but to many members of Arab and Muslim communities. That includes members of my staff who have been asked to remove their keffiyehs in order to come to work. This is unacceptable.”
Stiles added that House of Commons and other provincial legislatures allow the wearing of keffiyehs in their chambers and the ban makes Ontario an “outlier.”
Suppression of cultural symbols part of genocide: MPP
Jama said on X that the ban is “unsurprising” but “nonetheless concerning” in a country that has a legacy of colonialism. “Part of committing genocide is the forceful suppression of cultural identity and cultural symbols,” she said in part.
“Seeing those in power in this country at all levels of government, from federal all the way down to school boards, aid Israel’s colonial regime with these tactics in the oppression of Palestinian people proves that reconciliation is nothing but a word when spoken by state powers,” she said.
Amira Elghawaby, Canada’s Special Representative on Combatting Islamophobia, said on X that it is “deeply ironic” on that keffiyehs were banned in the Ontario legislature on the 42nd anniversary of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
“This is wrong and dangerous as we have already seen violence and exclusion impact Canadians, including Muslims of Palestinian descent, who choose to wear this traditional Palestinian clothing,” Elghawaby said.
Arnott said the keffiyeh was not considered a “form of protest” in the legislature prior to statements and debates that happened in the House last fall.
“These items are not absolutes and are not judged in a vacuum,” he said.
-
Media11 hours ago
DJT Stock Rises. Trump Media CEO Alleges Potential Market Manipulation. – Barron's
-
Media13 hours ago
Trump Media alerts Nasdaq to potential market manipulation from 'naked' short selling of DJT stock – CNBC
-
Investment12 hours ago
Private equity gears up for potential National Football League investments – Financial Times
-
News23 hours ago
Ontario Legislature keffiyeh ban remains, though Ford and opposition leaders ask for reversal – CBC.ca
-
News24 hours ago
Best in Canada: Jets Beat Canucks to Finish Season as Top Canadian Club – The Hockey News
-
Sports17 hours ago
2024 Stanley Cup Playoffs 1st-round schedule – NHL.com
-
Business23 hours ago
RCMP national security team investigating Yellowhead County pipeline rupture: Alberta minister – Global News
-
Investment21 hours ago
Want to Outperform 88% of Professional Fund Managers? Buy This 1 Investment and Hold It Forever. – The Motley Fool