adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Investment

Who pays taxes on investment income when children invest? – The Globe and Mail

Published

 on


An active crypto trader of any age can be deemed to be earning business income, whether they are over 18 or not.FG Trade/iStockPhoto / Getty Images

Are you a professional financial advisor? Register for Globe Advisor and then sign up for the new weekly newsletter on our newsletter sign-up page. Get exclusive investment industry news and insights, the week’s top headlines, and what you and your clients need to know.

To teach financial literacy, parents may encourage teens to try out investment trading with imaginary money in a practice account. But what are the tax implications when children graduate to trades that use real money?

When a child is under the age of 18, the answer depends on the source of the funds used to invest, says John Waters, vice-president, director of tax consulting services, at BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc. in Toronto.

300x250x1

Money that is the child’s – say, from a part-time job or an inheritance – can be invested and taxed in the child’s hands. However, if parents or other close relatives give money to the child to invest as a gift (or lend money at little to no interest), the attribution rules kick in and any interest or dividends are taxed in the giver’s hands.

“The idea is that you can’t split income generally by investing in your child’s name,” Mr. Waters says. “The one notable exception to that is capital gains. So, it’s possible to potentially invest on behalf of a child, earn capital gains, and have those gains attributable to the child who then pay taxes at their rate, which is often very low.”

When a child is over 18 years old, the attribution rules don’t apply to gifts of money – although they still apply to interest-free or low-interest loans if the purpose of the loan is to split income.

Setting minors up to invest

Minors aren’t generally allowed to open investment accounts in their own name, but there are workarounds with different tax consequences.

“A simple option, not ideal, is just to have the parent open up an account in the parent’s name,” Mr. Waters says. “In that scenario, of course, everything would be taxed in the parent’s hands.”

An alternative is to establish a formal trust for the child with the parents as trustees and the child as the beneficiary. In this case, the trust owns the assets, can invest them with (or without) the child’s input, and investment income is subject to tax within the trust, often at the highest marginal rates. When income is paid to the beneficiary, it’s taxable in the beneficiary’s hands.

Mr. Waters says that a trust’s complexity, including the requirement to file separate tax returns, makes this another less than ideal solution unless it’s set up to manage a larger inheritance.

“Probably the route that most people would go is an in-trust account or an informal trust,” he says. “Because it lacks the formal documentation to actually create a trust, there’s some question as to … what this is from a legal and, therefore, tax perspective. It’s a bit of a grey area.”

But the perspective that most people take is that the parent is an agent, acting on behalf of the child, and overseeing these funds for the benefit of that child, Mr. Waters adds.

However, if the informal trust is deemed to be a trust arrangement, it is subject to a further attribution rule. When the trustee also contributed the funds to the trust, all income – including capital gains – is attributed back to that trustee.

“Oftentimes, it makes sense to have, say, a grandparent make a gift and have the child’s parents be the trustee or agent controlling that account. Then, you bypass that,” Mr. Waters says. “But the concern would be if one or both of the parents makes that gift and then they are overseeing that account, you could have this additional attribution rule apply.”

Accurate recordkeeping is also essential to stay onside with the Canada Revenue Agency, and that may require parents to set up separate accounts for deposits to which the attribution rules apply.

Crypto trading adds another wrinkle

Teens may be especially attracted to the new kid on the block in investing: cryptocurrency. But trading in this space can introduce additional tax complications because cryptocurrency is treated as a commodity for the purposes of the Income Tax Act, says Vanessa Sarveswaran, vice-president, tax, retirement and estate planning, at CI Global Asset Management in Montreal.

“Any income from transactions involving cryptocurrency [can be] treated as business income or as capital gain, depending on the circumstances,” she says. “It’s the taxpayer’s responsibility to establish whether earnings from crypto are considered business income or capital gains.”

If the taxpayer holds the cryptocurrency for a long period of time, the sale of it is likely to be treated as a capital gain. In contrast, if the taxpayer trades cryptocurrencies actively, the sale of the asset is more likely to be treated as business income, she says.

While neither capital gains nor business income will be attributed back to parents, even if they provided the funds to trade (assuming that extra trust-focused attribution rule doesn’t apply), the distinction is important from a tax perspective because capital gains are taxed at a much lower rate than business income.

It also doesn’t matter whether a child is under or over 18. An active cryptocurrency trader of any age can be deemed to be earning business income.

As with other investment accounts, any interest or dividends earned in a cryptocurrency trading account set up for a minor but funded by a gift from parents will be attributed back to the parents.

Ms. Sarveswaran points out that not all cryptocurrency trading platforms provide tax slips, and some don’t even ask for a social insurance number. Therefore, it’s important for investors to track their transactions so they can report all taxable investment income on the appropriate tax return.

Beyond helping parents understand the tax issues related to teens and trading, advisors can encourage their clients to check in regularly on their children’s accounts, discuss the decisions they’ve been making, and ensure they can identify a scam, Ms. Sarveswaran adds.

“The kids should know the difference between reputable and untrustworthy sources before starting to trade on their own,” she emphasizes.

“Parents should also help children understand financial risk … meaning that crypto [and many other investments] can decline in value.”

For more from Globe Advisor, visit our homepage.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Investment

Taxes should not wag the tail of the investment dog, but that's what Trudeau wants – Financial Post

Published

 on

By


Kim Moody: Ottawa is encouraging people to crystallize their gains and pay tax. That’s a hell of a fiscal plan

Article content

The Canadian federal budget has been out for a week, which is plenty of time to absorb just how terrible it is.

The problems start with weak fiscal policy, excessive spending and growing public-debt charges estimated to be $54.1 billion for the upcoming year. That is more than $1 billion per week that Canadians are paying for things that have no societal benefit.

Advertisement 2

Article content

Article content

Next, the budget clearly illustrates this government’s continued weak taxation policies, two of which it apparently believes  are good for entrepreneurs. But the proposed $2-million Canadian Entrepreneurs Incentive (CEI) and $10-million capital gains exemption for transfers to an employee ownership trust (EOT) are both laughable.

Why? Well, for the CEI, virtually every entrepreneurial industry (except technology) is not eligible. If you happen to be in an industry that qualifies, the $2-million exemption comes with a long, stringent list of criteria (which will be very difficult for most entrepreneurs to qualify for) and it is phased in over a 10-year period of $200,000 per year.

For transfers to EOTs, an entrepreneur must give up complete legal and factual control to be eligible for the $10-million exemption, even though the EOT will likely pay the entrepreneur out of future profits. The commercial risk associated with such a transfer is likely too great for most entrepreneurs to accept.

Capital gains tax hike

But the budget’s highlight proposal was the capital gains inclusion rate increase to 66.7 per cent from 50 per cent for dispositions effective after June 24, 2024. The proposal includes a 50 per cent inclusion rate on the first $250,000 of annual capital gains for individuals, but not for corporations and trusts. Oh, those evil corporations and trusts.

Article content

Advertisement 3

Article content

There is a lot wrong with this proposed policy. The first is that by not putting individuals, corporations and trusts on the same taxation footing for capital gains taxation, the foundational principle of integration (the idea that the corporate and individual tax systems should be indifferent to whether an investment is held in a corporation or directly by the taxpayer) is completely thrown out the window. This is wrong.

Some economists have come out in strong favour of the proposal, mainly because of equity arguments (a buck is a buck), but such arguments ignore the real world of investing where investors look at overall risk, liquidity and the time value of money.

If capital gains are taxed at a rate approaching wage taxation rates, why would entrepreneurs and investors want to risk their capital when such investments might be illiquid for a long period of time and be highly risky?

They will seek greener pastures for their investment dollars and they already are. I’ve been fielding a tremendous number of questions from investors over the past week and I’d invite those academics and economists who support the increased inclusion rate to come live in my shoes for a day to see how the theoretical world of equity and behaviour collide. It’s not good and it certainly does nothing to help Canada’s obvious productivity challenges.

Advertisement 4

Article content

Of course, there has been the usual chatter encouraging such people to leave (“don’t let the door hit you on the way out,” some say) from those who don’t understand basic economics and taxation policy, but these cheerleaders should be careful what they wish for. The loss of successful Canadians and their investment dollars affects all of us in a very negative way.

The government messaging around this tax proposal has many people upset, including me. Specifically, it is the following paragraph in the budget documents that many supporters are parroting that is upsetting:

“Next year, 28.5 million Canadians are not expected to have any capital gains income, and 3 million are expected to earn capital gains below the $250,000 annual threshold. Only 0.13 per cent of Canadians with an average income of $1.4 million are expected to pay more personal income tax on their capital gains in any given year. As a result of this, for 99.87 per cent of Canadians, personal income taxes on capital gains will not increase.” (This is supposedly about 40,000 taxpayers.)

Bluntly, this is garbage. It outright ignores several facts.

Advertisement 5

Article content

For one thing, there are hundreds of thousands of private corporations owned and controlled by Canadian resident individuals. Those corporations will be subject to the increased capital gains inclusion rate with no $250,000 annual phase-in. Because of the way passive income is taxed in these Canadian-controlled private corporations, the increased tax load on realized capital gains will be felt by individual shareholders on the dividend distribution required to recover certain refundable corporate taxes.

Furthermore, public corporations that have capital gains will pay tax at a higher inclusion rate and this results in higher corporate tax, which means decreased amounts are available to be paid out as dividends to individual shareholders (including those held by individuals’ pensions).

The budget documents simply measured the number of corporations that reported capital gains in recent years and said it is 12.6 per cent of all corporations. That measurement is shallow and not the whole story, as described above.

Tax hit for cottages

There are also millions of Canadians who hold a second real estate property, either a cottage-type and/or rental property. Those properties will eventually be sold, with the probability that the gain will exceed the $250,000 threshold.

Advertisement 6

Article content

Upon death, an individual will often have their largest capital gains realized as a result of deemed dispositions that occur immediately prior to death. This will have the distinct possibility of capital gains that exceed $250,000.

And people who become non-residents of Canada — and that is increasing rapidly — have deemed dispositions of their assets (with some exceptions). They will face the distinct possibility that such gains will be more than $250,000.

The politics around the capital gains inclusion rate increase are pretty obvious. The government is planning for Canadian taxpayers to crystallize their inherent gains prior to the implementation date, especially corporations that will not have a $250,000 annual lower inclusion rate. For the current year, the government is projecting a $4.9-billion tax take. But next year, it dramatically drops to an estimated $1.3 billion.

This is a ridiculous way to shield the government’s tremendous spending and try to make them look like they are holding the line on their out-of-control deficits. The government is encouraging people to crystallize their gains and pay tax. That’s a hell of a fiscal plan.

Advertisement 7

Article content

Recommended from Editorial

  1. The federal Liberal government will release a new budget on Tuesday.

    Will budget include corporate excess profits tax?

  2. None

    A single act of courage is needed to fix tax system

  3. CRA on Thursday announced that bare trusts will be exempt from trust reporting requirements for 2023.

    Bare trust debacle shows CRA needs to respect taxpayers

There’s an old saying that tax should not wag the tail of the investment dog, but that is exactly what the government is encouraging Canadians to do in the name of raising short-term taxation revenues. It is simply wrong.

I hope the government has some second sober thoughts about the capital gains proposal, but I’m not holding my breath.

Kim Moody, FCPA, FCA, TEP, is the founder of Moodys Tax/Moodys Private Client, a former chair of the Canadian Tax Foundation, former chair of the Society of Estate Practitioners (Canada) and has held many other leadership positions in the Canadian tax community. He can be reached at kgcm@kimgcmoody.com and his LinkedIn profile is https://www.linkedin.com/in/kimmoody.

_____________________________________________________________

If you like this story, sign up for the FP Investor Newsletter.

_____________________________________________________________

Bookmark our website and support our journalism: Don’t miss the business news you need to know — add financialpost.com to your bookmarks and sign up for our newsletters here.

Article content

Comments

Join the Conversation

This Week in Flyers

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Investment

Everton search for investment to complete 777 deal – BBC.com

Published

 on

By


Getty Images
  • 2 hours ago

Everton are searching for third-party investment in order to push through a protracted takeover by 777 Partners.

The Miami-based firm agreed a deal to buy the Toffees from majority owner Farhad Moshiri in September, but are yet to gain approval from the Premier League.

On Monday, Bloomberg reported the club’s main financial adviser Deloitte has been seeking fresh funding from sports-focused investors and lenders to get 777’s deal over the line.

300x250x1

BBC Sport has been told this is “standard practice contingency planning” and the process may identify other potential lenders to 777.

Sources close to British-Iranian businessman Moshiri have told BBC Sport they remain “working on completing the deal with 777”.

It is understood there are no other parties waiting in the wings to takeover should the takeover fall through and the focus is fully on 777.

The Americans have so far loaned £180m to Everton for day-to-day operational costs, which will be turned into equity once the deal is completed, but repaying money owed to MSP Sports Capital, whose deal collapsed in August, remains a stumbling block.

777 says it can stump up the £158m that is owed to MSP Sports Capital and once that is settled, it is felt the deal should be completed soon after.

Related Topics

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Investment

Warren Buffett Predicts 'Bad Ending' for Bitcoin — Is It a Doomed Investment? – Yahoo Finance

Published

 on

By


NanoStockk / Getty Images

Currently sitting in sixth on Forbes’ Real-Time Billionaires List, Berkshire Hathaway co-founder, chairman and CEO Warren Buffett is a first-rate example of an investor who stuck to his core financial beliefs early in life to become not only a success but a once-in-a-lifetime inspiration to those who followed in his footsteps.

One of the most trusted investors for decades, the 93-year-old Buffett isn’t shy to pontificate on his investment philosophy, which is centered around value investing, buying stocks at less than their intrinsic value and holding them for the long term.

Read Next: Warren Buffett: 6 Best Pieces of Money Advice for the Middle Class
Find Out: 5 Genius Things All Wealthy People Do With Their Money

300x250x1

He’s also quite vocal on investments he deems worthless. And one of those is Bitcoin.

Sponsored: Protect Your Wealth With A Gold IRA. Take advantage of the timeless appeal of gold in a Gold IRA recommended by Sean Hannity.

Buffett’s Take on Bitcoin

Over the past decade, it’s been clear that the crypto craze isn’t something Buffett wants any part of. He described Bitcoin as “probably rat poison squared” back in 2018.

“In terms of cryptocurrencies, generally, I can say with almost certainty that they will come to a bad ending,” Buffett said in 2018. And his stance hasn’t wavered since. According to Benzinga, Buffett believes that cryptocurrencies aren’t a viable or valuable investment.

“Now if you told me you own all of the Bitcoin in the world and you offered it to me for $25, I wouldn’t take it because what would I do with it? I’d have to sell it back to you one way or another. It isn’t going to do anything,” Buffett said at the Berkshire Hathaway annual shareholder meeting in 2022.

Although the Oracle of Omaha has his misgivings about the unpredictable investment, does that mean crypto is doomed as an investment? Not necessarily.

For You: 10 Valuable Stocks That Could Be the Next Apple or Amazon

Is Buffett Wrong About Bitcoin?

Bitcoin bulls argue that while it’s not government-issued, cryptocurrency is as fungible, divisible, secure and portable as fiat currency and gold. Because they occupy a digital space, cryptocurrencies are decentralized, scarce and durable. They can last as long as they can be stored.

Crypto boosters continue to predict massive growth in the coin’s value. Earlier this year, SkyBridge Capital founder and former White House director of communications Anthony Scaramucci told reporters that Bitcoin could exceed $170,000 by mid-2025, and Ark Invest CEO Cathie Wood predicts Bitcoin will hit $1.48 million by 2030, according to Fortune.

“They really don’t understand the concept and the whole history of money,” Scaramucci said of crypto critics like Buffett on a recent episode of Jason Raznick’s “The Raz Report.” Because we place a value on “traditional” currency, it is essentially worthless compared with the transparent and trustworthy digital Bitcoin, Scaramucci said.

Currently trading around the $66,000 mark, Bitcoin is up nearly 50% in 2024. This means it’s massively outperforming most indexes this year, including the S&P 500, which is up about 6% in 2024.

Although Berkshire Hathaway has invested heavily in Bitcoin-related Brazilian fintech company Nu Holdings, which has its own cryptocurrency called Nucoin, it’s possible Buffett will never come around fully to crypto, despite its recent surge in value. It’s contrary to the reliable investment strategy that has served him very well for decades.

“The urge to participate in something where it looks like easy money is a human instinct which has been unleashed,” Buffett said. “People love the idea of getting rich quick, and I don’t blame them … It’s so human, and once unleashed you can’t put it back in the bottle.”

More From GOBankingRates

This article originally appeared on GOBankingRates.com: Warren Buffett Predicts ‘Bad Ending’ for Bitcoin — Is It a Doomed Investment?

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending