The economic environment is a key factor, definitely. But we're still not convinced that tax increases are the answer - what if we face another economic downturn in 5-10 years?
people are not using those vehicles sufficiently and the maanagement fees are known to be so high as to erode the savings
why woudl you push more people into the arms of the financial industry when it would be easier for them to save more adeqautely in a large fund
what about the economic environment ? we keep hearing this but no detail as to how this fits the argument
Pension contributions are not taken out of the economy; they are immediately reinvested, creating jobs and bolstering business growth. The pension benefits paid out are taxed and spent in the economy. Most important for government coffers is that not only are these pensions not government payouts-
they’re bought and paid for by the pensioners –they actually offset Old Age Security and Guaranteed Income Supplements that government would otherwise pay.
We are seeing an increase in contract workers, definitely. Depending on how they structure their work, however, they are not always exempt from payroll taxes.
Absolutely - contract workers are at the greatest disadvantage becasue they cannot participate in any large fund at all - they're on their own
Yes, Johnny - every pension expert seems to agree
Reduced taxes overall helps business owners keep their prices low, pay their employees more, an reinvest in their business.
(Wow that logo got big! Sorry about that). :)
It comes down to ideology – either you believe that our taxes buy civilixzation or its every person for him/herself
A large collective plan – whether for retirement or for health care – is cheaper for everyone and everyone can benefit
People who don’t make the maximum will not get the maximum pension. That’s why the average pension now is about $7000 although the maximum is $12,000 – not nearly enough to live on
An interesting idea, @Analog. I will look into it. On its face, some employers could perhaps consider that in years the company is doing well, for eg.
why would that help Johnny?
How can @Analog make any additional contributions when @CFIB doesn't even support the option to increase CPP now?
We agree, @Johnny. Many Canadians are living much longer than they used to--and are still in good health--so working until 67 is a realistic option. It could be slowly phased in like the OAS changes were, perhaps, so those close to retirement now aren't affected but those who are younger are.
We're open to ideas on how to help Canadians save for retirement. CFIB doesn't think that doing so through a mandatory payroll tax increase is the answer.
the CPP is the major fund that survived the recent downturn when smaller plans did not - its chief actuary says its good for the next 75 years at aleast
@Viv you are right. Many public sector pension plans are totally underfunded right now -- look at Canada Post. They are increasing the cost of stamps and getting a bailout from the federal government just to pay for their 2014 pension liabilities.
Thanks folks, we're almost at the end of our live chat. Closing thoughts?
Yes, but the CPP was in bad shape not that long ago. It hasn't always been in good shape, that's why they increased premiums but not benefits in the 1990s
stop calling it a payroll tax - they only reason to do that is to remind people that your members don't want to help their employees secure their future.
but people always got their pensions
there are options on the table to increase the cap but politics and ideology got in the way
Helping Canadians save for retirement is an important issue. Doing that through the increase of mandatory payroll taxes will not allow small business owners, who employ 98% of Canadians to pay higher salaries and/or higher staff. Help Canadians save for retirement by considering other options such as reduced taxes, using other savings vehicles such as RRSPs and TFSAs.
Perhaps higher salaries would help people save more - are your members offering that?
Our members do think that the CPP is important, Susan, which is why they supported increases in the 1990s when the fund was in bad shape. But it is not meant to be the only retirement savings pillar for Canadians and as we're gently coming out of a difficult economic period, now is now the time to be increasing payroll taxes.
Thank you Monique, thank you Susan & thank you everyone for contributing to the conversation.
Any more thoughts before we conclude?
No the CFIB did not support the CPP increase in the 90's - they trotted out the "job Killing" mantra then as you are doing now
Thanks Maurice and Susan and to the contributors! Was a fun, lively conversation.
Thanks everyone! That concludes this live event. You'll be able to replay it later.