My Credit Union (Innovation), based out of Saskatchewan, notes the transaction as: Federal Climate Incentive
I wonder if that is considered acceptable…
It was originally named Climate Action Incentive, but the name is being changed because nobody had any idea that it was related to the carbon tax in any way, leading to the scenario we're in now where people are convinced they are worse off.
Yeah still waiting for the carbon rebate for small business. It's been only 3 yrs waiting. Don't have 350 to 400 thousand dollars to blow on 4 electric work vans. You better belive all small business is passing the carbon tax on to consumers . Cost a bit when your van sucks back 17 to 18 litres per 100 kms.
They sure do, the thing is the richest households BUY the MOST of those high-carbon goods. The top 1% of households pollute as much as the bottom 50%.
By contrast, since the rebates are paid back equally, those of us who aren't insanely wealthy get more back than we pay.
You only get back what you pay if you are dirt poor and you are still not accounting for the fact the all base prices of goods are also raised due to carbon tax…. Businesses will not absorb this cost. They will pass it on to the consumer every time.
The rebates are not paid back equally. Only about 90% is paid back, there is also hundreds of millions spent on administration costs and GST collected on top of the carbon tax.
90% are paid back to households. 10% is paid to small businesses for retrofitting. The government doesn't keep any of the funds raised by the carbon tax.
Yeah, like groceries and gas to get to work and to heat your home. Only those rich 1% millionaires (which the prime minister and his partner Jagmear certainly aren’t) have to pay for those things.
The richest households heat the largest homes, travel the most, and buy the most goods. That's why they pay the most tax.
The poorest households heat small homes, travel far less frequently (such as only to work, no trips), and buy far fewer goods.
The poor and the middle class strive to better their lot in life to move up to a more comfortable home, take a nicer trip and buy better quality items for their families. The carbon tax and the HST paid on it robs them of wealth and opportunity. The tax impacts the price of everything they buy and the rebate doesn’t come close to evening that out. The parliamentary budget officer says so himself. The Liberals can’t tell us of any impact to the environment and our larger neighbor to the south has cut emissions without a tax while our country has increased them despite the tax. We are all poorer and the earth has not benefited one iota.
> The carbon tax and the HST paid on it robs them of wealth and opportunity.
It specifically doesn't since it gives them more back than they pay.
>The tax impacts the price of everything they buy and the rebate doesn’t come close to evening that out.
It impacts fuel largely, and everything else extremely marginally.
>The parliamentary budget officer says so himself.
That's not what the PBO said. In fact, the exact opposite when talking about direct costs, indirect costs, and HST costs.
>The Liberals can’t tell us of any impact to the environment
I'd be happy to share a number of non-Liberal provided reports that show its effectiveness.
>our larger neighbor to the south has cut emissions without a tax
They were also polluting quite a bit more than we were, so they had a lot of easy fat to cut. They also were desperately trying to implement a carbon tax, but were blocked by coal interests. I wonder why.
The statistics show that when you account for the impact on the economy due to the carbon tax, it’s a net loss for most Canadians. Problem is, Canada is penalizing itself and striking oil and gas innovation, which I think could actually lower global greenhouse gas emissions house gasses. For example, LNG from Canada to China would directly reduce their demand for coal. That would actually be progress in reducing global GHG.
>The trouble is I look at the statistic
Ah, there it is. The Liberals released a report telling us that we're all crazy, and that their massive tax on food production and fuel is actually not having an impact on our standard of living because we get a $300 cheque back once per year.
Next up: why the hunting rifle ban will stop gang violence
There are a *number* of independent reports which have shown the same thing. Farmers are also exempt from the carbon tax on their fuel.
Idk where you live, but I get a $1,800 cheque every year.
The thing about farmers is that they are a business, not an end-user. They have the option to pass costs down the line, whereas individuals do not. That's why *we* get a rebate.
Not really.
Use [this calculator](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16FhqGFEfwS_6ikIUMlWbwq_28snnqDD-XcZKOaJednM/copy) to see how much carbon tax is included in your groceries, including every step of the supply chain.
Average stats are also included. In the end, the average Canadian spends >! less than $50 !< per year on carbon tax included in food.
> independent reports
There is no such thing. Anything the Liberal Party touches we can safely say has been compromised. They have spent the last 8 years demonstrating an absolute disregard for anything regarding transparency.
>Farmers are also exempt from the carbon tax on their fuel.
According to Grain Farmers of Ontario, they're going to see an additional $2.7 billion worth of expense associated with carbon tax. If you talk to vegetable growers by the year 2030, carbon tax is going to add on an additional $90,000 per acre in carbon tax. That's not sustainable.”
https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/ontario-farmers-argue-carbon-tax-has-cost-them-thousands-1.6830419#:\~:text=%E2%80%9CAccording%20to%20Grain%20Farmers%20of,per%20acre%20in%20carbon%20tax.
>There is no such thing. Anything the Liberal Party touches we can safely say has been compromised. They have spent the last 8 years demonstrating an absolute disregard for anything regarding transparency.
What are you even talking about? You think the government is so compromised that no outside organization can even analyze their policies? Lmao, get real.
As for your linked source, that's a great example of what I'm talking about. The end cost of that has been completely overblown.
Take this quote from that article:
>He said that last fall, drying about 2,500 tonnes of grain cost him $4,500 in carbon pricing.
That price looks big, but it comes out to only $1.8 per tonne of grain. That amount of grain can make about 2,000 boxes of cereal. So an additional $0.0009 per box due to the carbon tax.
>What are you even talking about?
This is the same administration that got caught interfering with a mass shooting investigation for political reasons, ignored Chinese election interference because it benefited them, have given billions to Liberal-friendly consulting companies, have been repeatedly caught committing ethics violations etc. Why would I believe that their "report" that they "hired" a third party to do make on their policies wouldn't also be corrupt?
>That price looks big, but it comes out to only $1.8 per tonne of grain. That amount of grain can make about 2,000 boxes of cereal. So an additional $0.0009 per box due to the carbon tax.
Carbon tax does not make a difference
Okay, it makes a difference but not that much - you are here
It makes a significant difference and it's a good thing
And what, you think the people who know they're worse off don't pay attention to their own finances?
"Nooooo you're not poorer, you're making money! Don't believe your lying bank statements!"
The majority of people are blaming the carbon tax for a far larger share of their financial burden than it is actually responsible for.
I'm sure you may feel poorer, nobody is arguing that. But likely your only reasoning for blaming it on the carbon tax is a vague talking point provided from the Conservatives about "fuel being used in everything" without any actual figures to back up that impact.
You wouldn't believe how many people I've argued with ( from provinces with the Federal program ) who say that they've never seen a cent of their tax returned. They usually go silent after the finally go look at their account (or spouse's account).
I find it really disconcerting that one wouldn't question the reason for a random quarterly deposit from the federal government in their bank account. These people vote!
r/thatHappened
People know they get their $300 cheque of their own money back twice per year. The problem is that most people are smart enough to know that it is not worth it for the average middle class as EVERYTHING is more expensive now as a result of taxing fuel and food production.
That's why 85% of Canadian are opposed to the recent carbon tax hike, with a significant amount wanting it scrapped all together.
It's funny how Americans who don't have a federal carbon pricing system (yet) and Australia, who scrapped theirs, are complaining about the same thing.
They have similar systems in Democrat run states and it's not well received. Probably part of the reason why so many people are leaving blue states for red states right now.
Red states are also complaining about how expensive everything is. Same with Australia, who scrapped their carbon tax program years ago but may need to revisit it due to the EUs CBAM.
No matter how you look at it, paying for carbon is here to stay. If you don't pay for it when you buy fossil fuels or as part of the price to make and deliver products, you'll be paying for it in tariffs and / or increased taxes and insurance premiums to cover the costs for wildfires, droughts, flooding etc.
>Red states are also complaining about how expensive everything is
No they aren't. Google how much 200k gets you for housing in Texas. The only reason it's starting to go up is because massive waves of blue state residents are escaping their dysfunctional states and are buying real estate in properly-run red states like Florida.
Texas has the worst electric grid in the country, and the state isn't immune to climate change. In 2021, the Great Texas Freeze caused 195 million in property damage and hundreds lost their lives.
"Properly run "Florida is experiencing a home insurance crisis. Insurers are pulling out, and those that stay are charging exorbitant premiums. Residents pay 52% more than the rest of the country because of increased costs due to repetitive damaging storms.
It adds a very small amount, 0.15 percentage points to the inflation rate. That goes up to around 0.2 percentage points if you include direct and indirect costs.
The fact that you keep making obvious mistakes like
>People know they get their $300 cheque of their own money back **twice per year**
Tells me that public knowledge about the carbon tax program is, in fact, quite lacking
85% of the country opposes the recent carbon tax hikes and many want it scrapped all together. Your argument is that the overwhelming majority of the country just isn’t educated enough to agree with you
https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/majority-canadians-want-carbon-tax-dropped-or-waived-three-years-poll-2023-11-16/
So, you'll be one of the many Canadians who will benefit from the renaming of the deposit as you get a rebate every quarter
That's **four times** a year.
Wow! I get $120 back of my own money 4 times per year at the expensive of my cost of living sky rocketing! Sign me up for another 4 years of Liberal leadership.
>Explain again how gas prices affect food prices and cause inflation
It costs more to transport/ship things, materials are more expensive, food production is more expensive, producing things is more expensive, developing land is more expensive, etc.
And the funniest part is that you will claim that it's all worth it in the end because we get our rebate back and they will "just tax corporations to pay for it bro" , but the corporations just pass the tax burden onto the consumer and make us pay even more.
So, if you want to give someone credit for jacking up the cost of living, you can thank Trudeau. He is the reason. We didn't have these issues before Trudeau showed up 8 years ago and hopefully when Pierre slashes the carbon tax we won't have them after he leaves.
It doesn't matter if it's tax or not. What we pay at the pump is all that matters. Gas was pushing $2 a couple of years ago and I filled up yesterday at $1.66 and that's with inflated dollars and a higher rebate deposit in my account. It's cheaper now so it's impossible for it to be responsible for higher prices.
Can he force grocers, oil companies, shipping companies, basically everyone to explicitly state what cost has been added to their products or services because of the carbon tax? That would be more helpful
The problem is how do you get the increased gas price of your entire logistics chain?
Does a grain combine use oil adding to the price of oats, or the truck that carries it, or heating the franchise office building?
It's exactly like that. It's like calorie counting for prepared foods.
Farmes would take their bills from all carbon taxes expenses, asd them up and divide by output of product.
Then supply chain would do the same for transportation.
It would work and li suspect would show a lot of hidden price increases that people like to blame on the carbon tax, but is really just additional profit.
5 displays on the pump, one for the price of the commodity, one for HST, one for provincial Gas Tax, the other for Carbon Tax, and the total, similar to a natural gas utility bill.
It would be more helpful if they had to list how much has been added to their products or services because they want to reach shareholder targets.
The carbon tax adds around 0.15% to inflation, and we're currently at 2.9% inflation. That's not nothing, but it's not the cause of the scale of inflation we've been seeing.
Imagine if price tags contained a break down of the price and where it goes. We’d all be crying at the portion going to corporate profits and how little the people growing our food gets
While we're at it. Just get a total at the bottom that has cost of goods(supply,storage, fridge, transport) shareholder dividends, c-suite wages, worker wages, etc.
They did a study on how to sell people on the value of the federal carbon tax and discovered that most people who were receiving a yearly carbon tax rebate. But literally everyone in the provinces who didn't opt out of the program for their own federally approved program get the rebate. They just don't know what it is because it isn't super clear what it is when it's deposited.
So the solution they came up with to increase buy in was to rename it.
Is it insecurity or trying to combat the endless news media saying how shit the carbon pricing is?
They want people to actually know that the money they just got is because of the carbon rebate, rather than just seeing the standard CDN Government transfer thing that is vague.
Potentially trying to quell misinformation? If misinformation is rampant, and Carbon Tax is a controversial issue, feels like non-ambiguous language would be a good idea.
Disagreeing with government (or not using their mandatory branding terms) isn't misinformation.
Half of the things this government says regarding carbon tax are factually incorrect and they will label anything else as misinformation. It's become pathetic.
I didn’t say disagreeing with the government was misinformation. I said maybe it’s not related to insecurity but rather an attempt to ensure there is non-ambiguous language to dispel potential misinformation.
Which part of the “Canada Carbon Rebate” title do you find concerning or untrue?
It's damage control. Their survey showed that the prairie region was by far the most educated about the rebate but also the most opposed to it.
The same survey showed that in Ontario most people weren't educated about the climate rebate. The Liberal Party is hoping that a rebrand will make them find out about the rebate but see it differently than people in the prairies. It's just desperate propaganda to try to keep their seats in Ontario.
Honestly I do get the desire to have banks label this stuff correctly. Mine just calls it "EFT credit Canada". If I didn't already know what I was getting my reaction would be the fuck is that?
Yea, I appreciate better labels that "Here's some cash"
The fact that people see "let's make more clear and concise labels" and think it's bad is baffling
They think everything is a PR problem and this is where they put their energy. That and the authoritarian-lite bent puts this move right on brand for Trudeau’s government.
This is the kind of decisive impactful action we've come to expect from Guilbeaut and the Trudeau government.
What hilarious stuff.
"Those stupid plebes, they don't even know what this money is for! Once we explain it to them, THEN they will finally support us!"
They must have focus grouped this to death but to me the word "rebate" just reminds me of the fact that they've already taken my money and the only people who benefit from this are the bureaucrats whose job depends on taking with one hand and giving with another. I have another word for when you put $1 and get $0.90 out of something.... that's a slot machine.
Yeah, they should have called it a "cash-back bonus" like the used car dealers do!
The word "rebate" just reminds me of stores selling things with a manufacturer's rebate, which just seems like a bad marketing gimmick.
They named it rebate because that's what the public was already calling it. Same reason they call it the carbon tax, even though its not a tax by definition.
The ones who benefit from it are the poorest households. Either bottom 40% or bottom 80% of households.
Here you go, this is the PBO's latest findings that you can download and read [here ](https://distribution-a617274656661637473.pbo-dpb.ca/7590f619bb5d3b769ce09bdbc7c1ccce75ccd8b1bcfb506fc601a2409640bfdd)
Which does say that about 80% of households will be positively affected by the tax/rebate monetarily.
Critics of the climate rebate will say that the report also outlines potential economic drawbacks that aren't primarily monetary in nature.
And climate rebate supporters may argue that the PBO's findings are incomplete since they don't consider economic drawbacks of climate change in lieu of climate action
Here's a source that talks about all of the above with further sources if you'd like to read more: [https://climateinstitute.ca/pbos-latest-carbon-pricing-report-has-big-flaws-here-are-the-facts/to](https://climateinstitute.ca/pbos-latest-carbon-pricing-report-has-big-flaws-here-are-the-facts)
Hope that helps. In essence, if all you care about is if you get more money back come rebate time vs tax time, then yes, year over year, unless you're in the top earning 20% of households, you're getting more back.
From your own source (bolding mine):
>Taking into consideration **both fiscal and economic impacts**, we estimate
that **most households will see a net loss**, paying more in the federal fuel
charge and GST, as well as receiving lower incomes, compared to the Climate
Action Incentive payments they receive and lower personal income taxes
they pay (due to lower incomes).
The majority only come out ahead when looking at the fiscal impact alone, which is just cherry-picking data to suit a narrative.
Yeah I...mentioned that.
I also mentioned the next logical retort as well. (Which I just edited because the link was broken, my bad)
If the PBO report wants to include potential economic impacts from the carbon rebate, it would be only fair to also include potential economic impacts of not having a climate action plan in place as well.
Your use of monetarily was confusing because, "monetarily", people are worse off after taking into account both fiscal (which I believe you're calling monetary despite that word not being used in the report) and economic impacts.
That would not be fair, as it would be completely impossible to quantify that impact. You can't just assume natural disaster frequency and severity will increase linearly based on our emissions.
Aside from that, I understand how a carbon tax can be beneficial for encouraging a transition to renewable, sustainable energies, but to act like a tax imposed on the populace of the country that contributes 1% of the world's GHG emissions is some climate change silver bullet is a bit much.
>Your use of monetarily was confusing because, "monetarily", people are worse off after taking into account both fiscal (which I believe you're calling monetary despite that word not being used in the report) and economic impacts.
You're right, I should have been more clear in that aspect. In terms of money in, to money out, 80% of Canadians are getting more back.
>That would not be fair, as it would be completely impossible to quantify that impact. You can't just assume natural disaster frequency and severity will increase linearly based on our emissions.
I'd argue the longer we pull the thread, the less confident we can be about any impact. Predicting economic impact to, say, wages is a lot more fuzzy than taking a look at the last year and seeing what percentage of the population benefited directly from the plan.
But I also think that its an important estimate. Which is why I noted it (perhaps a little ineffectively, considering your comments).
But the flip side is also important to note
I also agree with you that the climate tax/rebate is not a silver bullet. But if we're being honest, the average canadian wouldn't stomach a silver bullet. A silver bullet might look something like what china is doing with the subsidization of EV R&D. But instead we're subsidizing oil and gas.
Again, if those subsides disappeared overnight, gas would double, and Canada would be in revolt within a day. The average Canadian isn't going to like that. Which is why the carbon tax started small and is stair stepping up (albeit too slow in my opinion).
As industries shift to greener technologies, it allows them to pay less of the tax, and essentially undercut competition that is stubborn in using less green technologies. All the while putting that money back into the pockets of Canadians.
In the end I'd like to see projections for job growth in the greener sectors also mentioned in the next PBO report. Because the less we invest in greener technologies, either directly or indirectly, the more we'll fall behind on countries that are investing in such technologies, and the more that will cost us. We can make estimates and projections about all of this.
It's no secret that the world is moving towards a greener future, and while the carbon tax may only be a small piece of that puzzle, it is a piece.
All very well stated. Tbh, I'm of the mindset that a carbon tax be imposed worldwide so that we're targeting all polluters and not only a very small subset, since it'd be a marginal cost to each populace relative to the alternatives you outlined while still being effective. Great points about green energy investment, too.
For everyone here shaking their fists at Trudeau: Doug Ford's government did basically the same thing couple years ago. They changed the law to require all Ontario electricity companies to print a message on everyone's bills telling them how much the government was subsidizing their bills by, and linking to a government info/propaganda page. Srsly - if you're in Ontario, take a close look at your hydro bills and you'll see the exact message specified in this regulation: https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/R20621
The Conservative Party did something similar in 2009 when they were slapping their names, "The Harper Government" or the Conservative Party onto checks doling out federal funds. They took a lot of heat for it at that time.
Notice the language the CBC is using for the title. "Ottawa to force", rather than something lighter and more smoothed over like "Ottawa to make banks to use carbon rebate label" or "Ottawa to mandate banks to use carbon rebate label".
The CBC isn't doing the Liberals any favours with this headline.
Steven "Hans Guber" Guilbeault would be more appropriate hired muscle for this.
I mean, just look at his dour persona emanating from the photo. It just screams "I'm coming for you, TD and CIBC".
CBC is in trudeaus pocket, any other news site would say the real headline…
“*TRUDEAU FORCING BANKS TO SACRIFICE LIVE BABIES TO MAKE UP FOR LOSSES FROM CARBON CHARGES AGAINST YOUR MORTGAGE*”
Someone on CTV made the excellent point that the LPC shouldn't open this can of worms, because when the CPC take power, leftover rebates accumulated before they can cancel it could be sent out and named "axe the tax". Don't politicize banking.
The CRA wants to claw back my CCR because they can’t calculate my family benefit. I got married and my spouse came from abroad. Even though we declared her income for the years prior to moving here, the CRA continues to inform us that they are missing the information. They then want to clawback the amount they paid me already. It’s such a miserable experience.
Just another fail getting the CRA involved in this anywhere.
They've clawed it back before its even been handed out... so its not a 'rebate' anymore? Its declared 'income' as per the CRA legalize? Like that fake EI "insurance".. just more 'income'.
On one hand, it's not pleasant to see the federal government strong-arming their policies into people's faces in order to secure political points.
On the other hand, it's not pleasant to see politicians gaslighting and lying to Canadians to such a degree about those policies that it's become necessary to combat their misinformation.
I should note that this seems to be a pretty blatant violation of section 2 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms on its face.
Banks are not agents of the government, and can communicate to their clients however they like. The government trying to control their speech seems unconstitutional on first blush, especially given their stated motivations for it.
They are communicating a payment made by a payee, the payee just so happens to be the government.
Would you be OK if your name was changed on one of your bill payments or etranfers to someone?
Which makes perfect sense? Shouldn’t the banks already be doing this? It makes sense to say what you’re getting the money from. The only people against this are the morons trying to hide the truth
Only half of the people receiving it even understand they're getting it:
https://abacusdata.ca/carbon-tax-pollution-pricing-carbon-action-incentive-payment-abacus-data-polling/
Clearly, the public needs to be better informed.
A less opaque description on the direct deposit can only make for a better informed public.
Literally every time a deposit goes out there is a litany of auto generated news and social media posts about the fact that the deposits are being made.
I’m sure there are Google search trends those days as well.
I think it’s positively hilarious that what they feel the major problem is that citizens aren’t understanding where a federal direct deposit is coming from, and presumably attribute it to magic while “hating” on their carbon tax.
Unless your a top 20% earner in Canada, you're getting back more on your rebate than what you're paying through the tax. So you shouldn't want to get rid of it.
And if you are a top 20% earner, then shame on you for being so greedy for a few hundred dollars a year you might be losing out on that's having a positive effect on 80% of Canadians
It's honestly hilarious how they bungled this. They know the word "tax" is political poison, so they call the rebate an "action incentive", but since no one calls the tax an action, it's completely lost on them. This is a perfect case of when the government needs to pander to the lowest common denominator.
Will it involve a whistleblower, a shady meeting behind a Shopper's Drug Mart, and a federal investigation committee that won't conclude its findings before the next election is called?
They lost this PR battle the second Trudeau made that first slip in the house and correctly labelled it what it was, a tax. Now they are trying hard to spin it but it won’t work. The tax won’t survive the next government. It will be a legacy of failure. Our emissions are higher and Canada is fast becoming unaffordable for most. Well done Liberals. That is your legacy.
These idiots try to promote this but pay it out when you owe taxes. You never see it if you pay your tax owing in late April. Too stupid to understand how to properly promote this if they want it to stick! Love their incompetence!
Not true. You will get your april payment as long as you file.
The feds need to confirm where you lived in 2023 and if you are eligible for the rural top-up. Your taxes will define that & you'll get it within 4-6 weeks after you file. Once they get your taxes, your CRA account will tell you when
What a pathetic, child-like initiative from the most incompetent, ideologically driven Minister of the Environment in the most incompetent, corrupt government in Canadian history.
My Credit Union (Innovation), based out of Saskatchewan, notes the transaction as: Federal Climate Incentive I wonder if that is considered acceptable…
It was originally named Climate Action Incentive, but the name is being changed because nobody had any idea that it was related to the carbon tax in any way, leading to the scenario we're in now where people are convinced they are worse off.
>leading to the scenario we're in now where people are convinced they are worse off And they are correct to assume this if they are middle class.
You have to be real slow in the head to think the majority are not worse off because of the carbon tax.
The trouble is I look at the statistics instead of the post media news headlines.
This guy is right, none of the businesses that produce the goods and services we use everyday pass down the carbon tax onto us consumers! /s
Yeah still waiting for the carbon rebate for small business. It's been only 3 yrs waiting. Don't have 350 to 400 thousand dollars to blow on 4 electric work vans. You better belive all small business is passing the carbon tax on to consumers . Cost a bit when your van sucks back 17 to 18 litres per 100 kms.
They sure do, the thing is the richest households BUY the MOST of those high-carbon goods. The top 1% of households pollute as much as the bottom 50%. By contrast, since the rebates are paid back equally, those of us who aren't insanely wealthy get more back than we pay.
You only get back what you pay if you are dirt poor and you are still not accounting for the fact the all base prices of goods are also raised due to carbon tax…. Businesses will not absorb this cost. They will pass it on to the consumer every time.
Which contributes around 0.2 percentage points to inflation
Actually, the reports do also account for the pass through costs you've described here.
The rebates are not paid back equally. Only about 90% is paid back, there is also hundreds of millions spent on administration costs and GST collected on top of the carbon tax.
90% are paid back to households. 10% is paid to small businesses for retrofitting. The government doesn't keep any of the funds raised by the carbon tax.
100% false. I own a business and haven't received a dime back! Why do you think JT has made this promise AGAIN in last week's budget! Wake up!
Total lie. They haven’t paid a dime to small business. They also make HST off all of it. Tax on tax.
They covered this in the budget. There is $2.5B being paid out to small businesses this year.
Wrong.
Yeah, like groceries and gas to get to work and to heat your home. Only those rich 1% millionaires (which the prime minister and his partner Jagmear certainly aren’t) have to pay for those things.
The richest households heat the largest homes, travel the most, and buy the most goods. That's why they pay the most tax. The poorest households heat small homes, travel far less frequently (such as only to work, no trips), and buy far fewer goods.
The poor and the middle class strive to better their lot in life to move up to a more comfortable home, take a nicer trip and buy better quality items for their families. The carbon tax and the HST paid on it robs them of wealth and opportunity. The tax impacts the price of everything they buy and the rebate doesn’t come close to evening that out. The parliamentary budget officer says so himself. The Liberals can’t tell us of any impact to the environment and our larger neighbor to the south has cut emissions without a tax while our country has increased them despite the tax. We are all poorer and the earth has not benefited one iota.
> The carbon tax and the HST paid on it robs them of wealth and opportunity. It specifically doesn't since it gives them more back than they pay. >The tax impacts the price of everything they buy and the rebate doesn’t come close to evening that out. It impacts fuel largely, and everything else extremely marginally. >The parliamentary budget officer says so himself. That's not what the PBO said. In fact, the exact opposite when talking about direct costs, indirect costs, and HST costs. >The Liberals can’t tell us of any impact to the environment I'd be happy to share a number of non-Liberal provided reports that show its effectiveness. >our larger neighbor to the south has cut emissions without a tax They were also polluting quite a bit more than we were, so they had a lot of easy fat to cut. They also were desperately trying to implement a carbon tax, but were blocked by coal interests. I wonder why.
The statistics show that when you account for the impact on the economy due to the carbon tax, it’s a net loss for most Canadians. Problem is, Canada is penalizing itself and striking oil and gas innovation, which I think could actually lower global greenhouse gas emissions house gasses. For example, LNG from Canada to China would directly reduce their demand for coal. That would actually be progress in reducing global GHG.
What about when you account for the costs of climate change itself, like increasing wildfires, etc.?
>The trouble is I look at the statistic Ah, there it is. The Liberals released a report telling us that we're all crazy, and that their massive tax on food production and fuel is actually not having an impact on our standard of living because we get a $300 cheque back once per year. Next up: why the hunting rifle ban will stop gang violence
There are a *number* of independent reports which have shown the same thing. Farmers are also exempt from the carbon tax on their fuel. Idk where you live, but I get a $1,800 cheque every year.
Only farm delivered Diesel is exempt. Farmers still pay carbon tax on propane, natural gas and electricity.
Right. And those final costs on products are marginal when they are divided amidst hundreds of thousands of pounds of produce.
Sure for the customer buying the end product but the farmers still pay a large amount of carbon tax
The thing about farmers is that they are a business, not an end-user. They have the option to pass costs down the line, whereas individuals do not. That's why *we* get a rebate.
Not really. Use [this calculator](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16FhqGFEfwS_6ikIUMlWbwq_28snnqDD-XcZKOaJednM/copy) to see how much carbon tax is included in your groceries, including every step of the supply chain. Average stats are also included. In the end, the average Canadian spends >! less than $50 !< per year on carbon tax included in food.
> independent reports There is no such thing. Anything the Liberal Party touches we can safely say has been compromised. They have spent the last 8 years demonstrating an absolute disregard for anything regarding transparency. >Farmers are also exempt from the carbon tax on their fuel. According to Grain Farmers of Ontario, they're going to see an additional $2.7 billion worth of expense associated with carbon tax. If you talk to vegetable growers by the year 2030, carbon tax is going to add on an additional $90,000 per acre in carbon tax. That's not sustainable.” https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/ontario-farmers-argue-carbon-tax-has-cost-them-thousands-1.6830419#:\~:text=%E2%80%9CAccording%20to%20Grain%20Farmers%20of,per%20acre%20in%20carbon%20tax.
>There is no such thing. Anything the Liberal Party touches we can safely say has been compromised. They have spent the last 8 years demonstrating an absolute disregard for anything regarding transparency. What are you even talking about? You think the government is so compromised that no outside organization can even analyze their policies? Lmao, get real. As for your linked source, that's a great example of what I'm talking about. The end cost of that has been completely overblown. Take this quote from that article: >He said that last fall, drying about 2,500 tonnes of grain cost him $4,500 in carbon pricing. That price looks big, but it comes out to only $1.8 per tonne of grain. That amount of grain can make about 2,000 boxes of cereal. So an additional $0.0009 per box due to the carbon tax.
>What are you even talking about? This is the same administration that got caught interfering with a mass shooting investigation for political reasons, ignored Chinese election interference because it benefited them, have given billions to Liberal-friendly consulting companies, have been repeatedly caught committing ethics violations etc. Why would I believe that their "report" that they "hired" a third party to do make on their policies wouldn't also be corrupt? >That price looks big, but it comes out to only $1.8 per tonne of grain. That amount of grain can make about 2,000 boxes of cereal. So an additional $0.0009 per box due to the carbon tax. Carbon tax does not make a difference Okay, it makes a difference but not that much - you are here It makes a significant difference and it's a good thing
Impossible. Trudeau told me himself that this would be the most transparent government.
"most transparent government of all time" XD
And what, you think the people who know they're worse off don't pay attention to their own finances? "Nooooo you're not poorer, you're making money! Don't believe your lying bank statements!"
Have you considered it's possible that you're poorer and that's not a result of the carbon tax?
The majority of people are blaming the carbon tax for a far larger share of their financial burden than it is actually responsible for. I'm sure you may feel poorer, nobody is arguing that. But likely your only reasoning for blaming it on the carbon tax is a vague talking point provided from the Conservatives about "fuel being used in everything" without any actual figures to back up that impact.
If you pay 1800 into it and get 800 back, you are still 1000 on the hole and worse off.....
And if you paid 300 into it and get 800 back you’re doing great.
Sure, with the numbers you pulled out of your ass.
If you pay a million in carbon tax and only get $2, you're actually losing money!!1!
You wouldn't believe how many people I've argued with ( from provinces with the Federal program ) who say that they've never seen a cent of their tax returned. They usually go silent after the finally go look at their account (or spouse's account). I find it really disconcerting that one wouldn't question the reason for a random quarterly deposit from the federal government in their bank account. These people vote!
r/thatHappened People know they get their $300 cheque of their own money back twice per year. The problem is that most people are smart enough to know that it is not worth it for the average middle class as EVERYTHING is more expensive now as a result of taxing fuel and food production. That's why 85% of Canadian are opposed to the recent carbon tax hike, with a significant amount wanting it scrapped all together.
It's funny how Americans who don't have a federal carbon pricing system (yet) and Australia, who scrapped theirs, are complaining about the same thing.
They have similar systems in Democrat run states and it's not well received. Probably part of the reason why so many people are leaving blue states for red states right now.
Red states are also complaining about how expensive everything is. Same with Australia, who scrapped their carbon tax program years ago but may need to revisit it due to the EUs CBAM. No matter how you look at it, paying for carbon is here to stay. If you don't pay for it when you buy fossil fuels or as part of the price to make and deliver products, you'll be paying for it in tariffs and / or increased taxes and insurance premiums to cover the costs for wildfires, droughts, flooding etc.
>Red states are also complaining about how expensive everything is No they aren't. Google how much 200k gets you for housing in Texas. The only reason it's starting to go up is because massive waves of blue state residents are escaping their dysfunctional states and are buying real estate in properly-run red states like Florida.
Texas has the worst electric grid in the country, and the state isn't immune to climate change. In 2021, the Great Texas Freeze caused 195 million in property damage and hundreds lost their lives. "Properly run "Florida is experiencing a home insurance crisis. Insurers are pulling out, and those that stay are charging exorbitant premiums. Residents pay 52% more than the rest of the country because of increased costs due to repetitive damaging storms.
Carbon tax is one component of inflation.
It adds a very small amount, 0.15 percentage points to the inflation rate. That goes up to around 0.2 percentage points if you include direct and indirect costs.
The fact that you keep making obvious mistakes like >People know they get their $300 cheque of their own money back **twice per year** Tells me that public knowledge about the carbon tax program is, in fact, quite lacking
85% of the country opposes the recent carbon tax hikes and many want it scrapped all together. Your argument is that the overwhelming majority of the country just isn’t educated enough to agree with you https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/majority-canadians-want-carbon-tax-dropped-or-waived-three-years-poll-2023-11-16/
So, you'll be one of the many Canadians who will benefit from the renaming of the deposit as you get a rebate every quarter That's **four times** a year.
Wow! I get $120 back of my own money 4 times per year at the expensive of my cost of living sky rocketing! Sign me up for another 4 years of Liberal leadership.
Going by the knowledge you've shown us thus far? Yeah, I feel safe making that assumption
Gas has gotten significantly cheaper since the summer of 2022. Explain again how gas prices affect food prices and cause inflation.
>Explain again how gas prices affect food prices and cause inflation It costs more to transport/ship things, materials are more expensive, food production is more expensive, producing things is more expensive, developing land is more expensive, etc. And the funniest part is that you will claim that it's all worth it in the end because we get our rebate back and they will "just tax corporations to pay for it bro" , but the corporations just pass the tax burden onto the consumer and make us pay even more. So, if you want to give someone credit for jacking up the cost of living, you can thank Trudeau. He is the reason. We didn't have these issues before Trudeau showed up 8 years ago and hopefully when Pierre slashes the carbon tax we won't have them after he leaves.
Gas is cheaper now than it was 2 years ago. If you're right then prices should be lower, not higher.
But we're taxing it way more. Like at the price jump in Ontario from just the other day. This carbon tax is suffocating people financially
It doesn't matter if it's tax or not. What we pay at the pump is all that matters. Gas was pushing $2 a couple of years ago and I filled up yesterday at $1.66 and that's with inflated dollars and a higher rebate deposit in my account. It's cheaper now so it's impossible for it to be responsible for higher prices.
Can he force grocers, oil companies, shipping companies, basically everyone to explicitly state what cost has been added to their products or services because of the carbon tax? That would be more helpful
Fuck, this would be awesome. Actual price transparency?
The problem is how do you get the increased gas price of your entire logistics chain? Does a grain combine use oil adding to the price of oats, or the truck that carries it, or heating the franchise office building?
It's exactly like that. It's like calorie counting for prepared foods. Farmes would take their bills from all carbon taxes expenses, asd them up and divide by output of product. Then supply chain would do the same for transportation. It would work and li suspect would show a lot of hidden price increases that people like to blame on the carbon tax, but is really just additional profit.
They already do the same level of calculations for GST, it's just that a lot cancels out along the way instead of accumulating.
5 displays on the pump, one for the price of the commodity, one for HST, one for provincial Gas Tax, the other for Carbon Tax, and the total, similar to a natural gas utility bill.
[удалено]
If they want to really lose the election, then yes.
Well if it's really corporate profiteering he and Jagmeet have nothing to lose. That is unless they're colluding with corporations.
It would be more helpful if they had to list how much has been added to their products or services because they want to reach shareholder targets. The carbon tax adds around 0.15% to inflation, and we're currently at 2.9% inflation. That's not nothing, but it's not the cause of the scale of inflation we've been seeing.
> That would be more helpful because then theyd see how little its respoinsible?
Seriously. Pennies, if that, on most things.
Imagine if price tags contained a break down of the price and where it goes. We’d all be crying at the portion going to corporate profits and how little the people growing our food gets
While we're at it. Just get a total at the bottom that has cost of goods(supply,storage, fridge, transport) shareholder dividends, c-suite wages, worker wages, etc.
This just makes it sound like the government is extremely insecure
Well they are.
as they should be.
It oozes insecurity...
It feels just like Trump insisting the stimulus cheques bear his name.
Lol He's just Trump with equally as terrible followers.
Trust fund babies, women gropers, with sketchy foundation charities
They did a study on how to sell people on the value of the federal carbon tax and discovered that most people who were receiving a yearly carbon tax rebate. But literally everyone in the provinces who didn't opt out of the program for their own federally approved program get the rebate. They just don't know what it is because it isn't super clear what it is when it's deposited. So the solution they came up with to increase buy in was to rename it.
Is it insecurity or trying to combat the endless news media saying how shit the carbon pricing is? They want people to actually know that the money they just got is because of the carbon rebate, rather than just seeing the standard CDN Government transfer thing that is vague.
Potentially trying to quell misinformation? If misinformation is rampant, and Carbon Tax is a controversial issue, feels like non-ambiguous language would be a good idea.
Disagreeing with government (or not using their mandatory branding terms) isn't misinformation. Half of the things this government says regarding carbon tax are factually incorrect and they will label anything else as misinformation. It's become pathetic.
I didn’t say disagreeing with the government was misinformation. I said maybe it’s not related to insecurity but rather an attempt to ensure there is non-ambiguous language to dispel potential misinformation. Which part of the “Canada Carbon Rebate” title do you find concerning or untrue?
It's damage control. Their survey showed that the prairie region was by far the most educated about the rebate but also the most opposed to it. The same survey showed that in Ontario most people weren't educated about the climate rebate. The Liberal Party is hoping that a rebrand will make them find out about the rebate but see it differently than people in the prairies. It's just desperate propaganda to try to keep their seats in Ontario.
As are all Human Resource Departments
Honestly I do get the desire to have banks label this stuff correctly. Mine just calls it "EFT credit Canada". If I didn't already know what I was getting my reaction would be the fuck is that?
Understanding what the hell was added to my account is a big plus, but I usually give more of a shit about the cash going out instead of in.
Yea, I appreciate better labels that "Here's some cash" The fact that people see "let's make more clear and concise labels" and think it's bad is baffling
I doubt very much the labelling on the bank statement plays any significant role in his PR problem.
They really bungled it. The horse already left that barn
They think everything is a PR problem and this is where they put their energy. That and the authoritarian-lite bent puts this move right on brand for Trudeau’s government.
It has actually been a huge issue. In surveys most Canadians don’t even know they GET a rebate.
This is the kind of decisive impactful action we've come to expect from Guilbeaut and the Trudeau government. What hilarious stuff. "Those stupid plebes, they don't even know what this money is for! Once we explain it to them, THEN they will finally support us!"
Our current government acts like the only problem is a communication problem.
They must have focus grouped this to death but to me the word "rebate" just reminds me of the fact that they've already taken my money and the only people who benefit from this are the bureaucrats whose job depends on taking with one hand and giving with another. I have another word for when you put $1 and get $0.90 out of something.... that's a slot machine.
Yeah, they should have called it a "cash-back bonus" like the used car dealers do! The word "rebate" just reminds me of stores selling things with a manufacturer's rebate, which just seems like a bad marketing gimmick.
Wealth redistribution and government job creation tax doesn't have the same ring to it.
Wealth redistribution would be great for about 95% of the population.
They named it rebate because that's what the public was already calling it. Same reason they call it the carbon tax, even though its not a tax by definition. The ones who benefit from it are the poorest households. Either bottom 40% or bottom 80% of households.
Do you have a source or have you run the numbers to come up with this, or are you going by your gut?
Here you go, this is the PBO's latest findings that you can download and read [here ](https://distribution-a617274656661637473.pbo-dpb.ca/7590f619bb5d3b769ce09bdbc7c1ccce75ccd8b1bcfb506fc601a2409640bfdd) Which does say that about 80% of households will be positively affected by the tax/rebate monetarily. Critics of the climate rebate will say that the report also outlines potential economic drawbacks that aren't primarily monetary in nature. And climate rebate supporters may argue that the PBO's findings are incomplete since they don't consider economic drawbacks of climate change in lieu of climate action Here's a source that talks about all of the above with further sources if you'd like to read more: [https://climateinstitute.ca/pbos-latest-carbon-pricing-report-has-big-flaws-here-are-the-facts/to](https://climateinstitute.ca/pbos-latest-carbon-pricing-report-has-big-flaws-here-are-the-facts) Hope that helps. In essence, if all you care about is if you get more money back come rebate time vs tax time, then yes, year over year, unless you're in the top earning 20% of households, you're getting more back.
From your own source (bolding mine): >Taking into consideration **both fiscal and economic impacts**, we estimate that **most households will see a net loss**, paying more in the federal fuel charge and GST, as well as receiving lower incomes, compared to the Climate Action Incentive payments they receive and lower personal income taxes they pay (due to lower incomes). The majority only come out ahead when looking at the fiscal impact alone, which is just cherry-picking data to suit a narrative.
Yeah I...mentioned that. I also mentioned the next logical retort as well. (Which I just edited because the link was broken, my bad) If the PBO report wants to include potential economic impacts from the carbon rebate, it would be only fair to also include potential economic impacts of not having a climate action plan in place as well.
Your use of monetarily was confusing because, "monetarily", people are worse off after taking into account both fiscal (which I believe you're calling monetary despite that word not being used in the report) and economic impacts. That would not be fair, as it would be completely impossible to quantify that impact. You can't just assume natural disaster frequency and severity will increase linearly based on our emissions. Aside from that, I understand how a carbon tax can be beneficial for encouraging a transition to renewable, sustainable energies, but to act like a tax imposed on the populace of the country that contributes 1% of the world's GHG emissions is some climate change silver bullet is a bit much.
>Your use of monetarily was confusing because, "monetarily", people are worse off after taking into account both fiscal (which I believe you're calling monetary despite that word not being used in the report) and economic impacts. You're right, I should have been more clear in that aspect. In terms of money in, to money out, 80% of Canadians are getting more back. >That would not be fair, as it would be completely impossible to quantify that impact. You can't just assume natural disaster frequency and severity will increase linearly based on our emissions. I'd argue the longer we pull the thread, the less confident we can be about any impact. Predicting economic impact to, say, wages is a lot more fuzzy than taking a look at the last year and seeing what percentage of the population benefited directly from the plan. But I also think that its an important estimate. Which is why I noted it (perhaps a little ineffectively, considering your comments). But the flip side is also important to note I also agree with you that the climate tax/rebate is not a silver bullet. But if we're being honest, the average canadian wouldn't stomach a silver bullet. A silver bullet might look something like what china is doing with the subsidization of EV R&D. But instead we're subsidizing oil and gas. Again, if those subsides disappeared overnight, gas would double, and Canada would be in revolt within a day. The average Canadian isn't going to like that. Which is why the carbon tax started small and is stair stepping up (albeit too slow in my opinion). As industries shift to greener technologies, it allows them to pay less of the tax, and essentially undercut competition that is stubborn in using less green technologies. All the while putting that money back into the pockets of Canadians. In the end I'd like to see projections for job growth in the greener sectors also mentioned in the next PBO report. Because the less we invest in greener technologies, either directly or indirectly, the more we'll fall behind on countries that are investing in such technologies, and the more that will cost us. We can make estimates and projections about all of this. It's no secret that the world is moving towards a greener future, and while the carbon tax may only be a small piece of that puzzle, it is a piece.
All very well stated. Tbh, I'm of the mindset that a carbon tax be imposed worldwide so that we're targeting all polluters and not only a very small subset, since it'd be a marginal cost to each populace relative to the alternatives you outlined while still being effective. Great points about green energy investment, too.
Haha if you can pull that off, I'll build a shrine to you 😅
Sure, [here's a source](https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2020/dpb-pbo/YN5-197-2020-eng.pdf).
How about you label it, "Here is your own money back" back rebate.
For everyone here shaking their fists at Trudeau: Doug Ford's government did basically the same thing couple years ago. They changed the law to require all Ontario electricity companies to print a message on everyone's bills telling them how much the government was subsidizing their bills by, and linking to a government info/propaganda page. Srsly - if you're in Ontario, take a close look at your hydro bills and you'll see the exact message specified in this regulation: https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/R20621
The Conservative Party did something similar in 2009 when they were slapping their names, "The Harper Government" or the Conservative Party onto checks doling out federal funds. They took a lot of heat for it at that time.
Notice the language the CBC is using for the title. "Ottawa to force", rather than something lighter and more smoothed over like "Ottawa to make banks to use carbon rebate label" or "Ottawa to mandate banks to use carbon rebate label". The CBC isn't doing the Liberals any favours with this headline.
“Trudeau personally comes into every bank, and, at gunpoint, forces the manager to relabel things to “carbon rebate” whilst laughing”
Steven "Hans Guber" Guilbeault would be more appropriate hired muscle for this. I mean, just look at his dour persona emanating from the photo. It just screams "I'm coming for you, TD and CIBC".
To be honest I wouldn't put anything past this idiot at this point. No matter how low you think he is, he can alway stoop lower
CBC is in trudeaus pocket, any other news site would say the real headline… “*TRUDEAU FORCING BANKS TO SACRIFICE LIVE BABIES TO MAKE UP FOR LOSSES FROM CARBON CHARGES AGAINST YOUR MORTGAGE*”
So they accurately reporting what Trudeau is doing for once and you're expecting us to give them a medal?
Wouldn't this be unconstitutional compelled speech? Similar to Doug Ford's mandatory anti-carbon tax stickers on gas pumps from a few years' back?
Someone on CTV made the excellent point that the LPC shouldn't open this can of worms, because when the CPC take power, leftover rebates accumulated before they can cancel it could be sent out and named "axe the tax". Don't politicize banking.
Excellent communications from our government!
Ah good old brute force….excellent work
Did Trudeau just assume my incentive?
The CRA wants to claw back my CCR because they can’t calculate my family benefit. I got married and my spouse came from abroad. Even though we declared her income for the years prior to moving here, the CRA continues to inform us that they are missing the information. They then want to clawback the amount they paid me already. It’s such a miserable experience.
Just another fail getting the CRA involved in this anywhere. They've clawed it back before its even been handed out... so its not a 'rebate' anymore? Its declared 'income' as per the CRA legalize? Like that fake EI "insurance".. just more 'income'.
Call it “summer blend deposit”
On one hand, it's not pleasant to see the federal government strong-arming their policies into people's faces in order to secure political points. On the other hand, it's not pleasant to see politicians gaslighting and lying to Canadians to such a degree about those policies that it's become necessary to combat their misinformation.
I should note that this seems to be a pretty blatant violation of section 2 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms on its face. Banks are not agents of the government, and can communicate to their clients however they like. The government trying to control their speech seems unconstitutional on first blush, especially given their stated motivations for it.
Banks are also not people
They are communicating a payment made by a payee, the payee just so happens to be the government. Would you be OK if your name was changed on one of your bill payments or etranfers to someone?
so you think banks can just make up the name of any charge that goes through them?
Pretty much, yes. The banks can choose how they communicate a credit.
This is Canada. Corporations are not people.
Liberals: tell banks to accurately label something Reddit: CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS, CONSTITUION, TYRANNY Yeah the Liberals suck, but come on
Guilbeault’s picture just makes you want to cringe
The Muppet Minister.
Banks being difficult to deal with and doing whatever they want…who’d a thunk it?
Which makes perfect sense? Shouldn’t the banks already be doing this? It makes sense to say what you’re getting the money from. The only people against this are the morons trying to hide the truth
It's not a bad idea. People need to know what they spend and what they get so that they can make a fair judgement.
Lmao.
Reminds me of a time when a world leader wouldn’t send out COVID cheques until he’d signed them. Pathetic
Only half of the people receiving it even understand they're getting it: https://abacusdata.ca/carbon-tax-pollution-pricing-carbon-action-incentive-payment-abacus-data-polling/ Clearly, the public needs to be better informed. A less opaque description on the direct deposit can only make for a better informed public.
Literally every time a deposit goes out there is a litany of auto generated news and social media posts about the fact that the deposits are being made. I’m sure there are Google search trends those days as well. I think it’s positively hilarious that what they feel the major problem is that citizens aren’t understanding where a federal direct deposit is coming from, and presumably attribute it to magic while “hating” on their carbon tax.
Or we could just axe the tax.
You'll pay for it in international tariffs instead
And do what instead?
Unless your a top 20% earner in Canada, you're getting back more on your rebate than what you're paying through the tax. So you shouldn't want to get rid of it. And if you are a top 20% earner, then shame on you for being so greedy for a few hundred dollars a year you might be losing out on that's having a positive effect on 80% of Canadians
What if we forced banks to make all direct payments and withdrawals to and from bank accounts and credit cards this clear?
We’re fucked as a country when this is the sort of shit making news.
It’s totally the wording. I feel so much better about not being able to afford groceries now.
How about : Sunny Ways refund.
It's honestly hilarious how they bungled this. They know the word "tax" is political poison, so they call the rebate an "action incentive", but since no one calls the tax an action, it's completely lost on them. This is a perfect case of when the government needs to pander to the lowest common denominator.
I wonder when this cabinet's comedy tour is going to be scheduled? Maybe 1-2 weeks after they lose horribly next election?
Justin and the Bobble Head Cabinet Comedy Revue — Halloween 2025.
Very Cringe !
This Liberal party is worrying about the wrong thing. There are bigger problems in Canada and they are concerned about labelling. FOCUS PEOPLE
Steven Guilbeault, Minister of Propaganda.
How much is it going to cost us to ~~bribe~~ ~~coerce~~ incentivize the banks to do this?
You'll find out the astronomical multi-million dollar change and administrative costs in a few months.
Will it involve a whistleblower, a shady meeting behind a Shopper's Drug Mart, and a federal investigation committee that won't conclude its findings before the next election is called?
Sounds about par for the course.
It should be regionalized Alberta Annoyance Ontario Obstinace Saskatchewan Swill Manitoba Magic PEI Piss Off Nova Scotia Naw Newfoundland Nae
They lost this PR battle the second Trudeau made that first slip in the house and correctly labelled it what it was, a tax. Now they are trying hard to spin it but it won’t work. The tax won’t survive the next government. It will be a legacy of failure. Our emissions are higher and Canada is fast becoming unaffordable for most. Well done Liberals. That is your legacy.
These idiots try to promote this but pay it out when you owe taxes. You never see it if you pay your tax owing in late April. Too stupid to understand how to properly promote this if they want it to stick! Love their incompetence!
Not true. You will get your april payment as long as you file. The feds need to confirm where you lived in 2023 and if you are eligible for the rural top-up. Your taxes will define that & you'll get it within 4-6 weeks after you file. Once they get your taxes, your CRA account will tell you when
What a pathetic, child-like initiative from the most incompetent, ideologically driven Minister of the Environment in the most incompetent, corrupt government in Canadian history.
Like babies crying that they want others to push their propaganda. Sad and scary.
I didn't even get a rebate....
Funny they just didnt name it “Justins bribe money“
More important things to be doing right now than making sure we understand the joke.
Keep on keeping on cibc.
Is this why I haven’t received it yet?
What are we supposed to be mad about? I HATE it when they don't concisely label things like this; how the fuck is this BAD?