Path: utzoo!dciem!nrcaer!cognos!geovision!pt
From: pt@geovision.uucp (Paul Tomblin)
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: Somebody inform me on the error of my ways...
Message-ID: <723@geovision.UUCP>
Date: 23 Aug 89 12:39:22 GMT
References: <401@fs1.ee.ubc.ca> <1713@cs-spool.calgary.UUCP>
Reply-To: pt@geovision.UUCP (Paul Tomblin)
Distribution: can
Organization: GeoVision Corp, Ottawa, Canada
Lines: 25

In article <1713@cs-spool.calgary.UUCP> fare@enelg.UUCP (Michael David Farebrother) writes:
>
>	I just wonder if someone could shoot some holes in my theory.
>Apart from the fact that no-one would elect people planning to do this,
>what is wrong with throwing out the income tax act, and replacing it with
>a "30(?)% income tax" , no exclusions, no deductions, just report your
>income and pay 30% of it.  
>	Maybe the number is not enough, but what about the basic idea?

The problem with that basic idea is that the Canadian Government has had the
idea for decades that the Income Tax Act is a social program, not an
instrument to generate revenue.  If we could overcome that obstacle, we
would only then have to contend with the thousands of irate tax lawyers,
accountants, civil servants, and other assorted chiselers.  It would also be
hard on people whos income is kind of ambiguous.  For instance, I'm a
computer consultant part-time.  I want to buy a 386.  Does this get
subtracted from my net income?  What about the trips and phone calls I had
to make to get my first contract?

(Just my $0.02 contribution to can.taxlaw)
-- 
Paul Tomblin,  First Officer, Golgafrinchan B Ark       | ADA was invented 
    UUCP:   nrcaer!cognos!geovision!pt ??               | because  Vogon 
    Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here aren't      | Poetry wasn't
    necessarily even mine!                              | deadly enough.