Macklem had been influenced by “Bay Street and bank economists, who have spent months raising the menacing spectre of a wage-price spiral.”
She said that it was not the role of the Bank of Canada to “undermine the collective bargaining power of workers,” and suggested that Mr. Macklem for his comments about wage restraints. Moreover, in suggesting that businesses should not build higher inflation into their wage contracts, the central bank is putting an undue burden on employees to help bring inflation down, they argue.Įarlier this month, Bea Bruske, president of the Canadian Labour Congress, wrote a scathing editorial admonishing Mr. It was a phenomenon that last happened in the 1970s and early 1980s when union membership was much higher than it is today and contracts were more likely to be indexed to inflation.
Labour leaders and left-leaning economists argue that the central bank is overemphasizing the risk of a wage-price spiral. But it is our role to provide Canadian businesses and households with the outlook for inflation,” he said. “We agree that it is not the Bank of Canada’s role to provide advice to companies on their business decisions. “Ending such a cycle takes much higher interest rates to bring inflation back down, and the economy slows much more, resulting in potentially widespread job losses,” Bank of Canada spokesperson Paul Badertscher wrote in an e-mail. The good - and bad - news about inflation But the Bank of Canada remains wary of a wage-price spiral: a situation where both businesses and workers expect permanently higher inflation, and so respectively push up prices and demand higher wages in a self-reinforcing cycle.Ĭanada’s inflation rate slows to 7.6 per cent in July, but more Bank of Canada rate hikes expected The rate of inflation declined slightly last month, and economists expect it to trend downward in the coming quarters. With consumer price inflation near a four-decade high, the Bank of Canada’s principal concern is getting prices under control and inflation back down to its 2-per-cent target. Macklem go out there and make those comments.” So it’s a shame that in the middle of all this, you see Mr. “We have an opportunity, right now, for workers to make gains. How we hold the line against new taxes this year and in the future will be a major factor in dictating California’s economic future.“It was just extremely disappointing to see the Governor of the Bank of Canada telling businesses to essentially hold the line on increasing wages,” Lana Payne, Unifor’s newly elected leader, said in an interview with The Globe and Mail. Unlike AB 1253, the “wealth tax” proposal requires voter approval and would appear on the 2022 ballot, where Californians could protect our state’s fiscal health by rejecting it soundly.Ĭalifornia needs a steadfast focus on keeping and attracting new investment. This would cost taxpayers an additional $22.3 billion per year in new taxes – at least until the targeted taxpayers packed up and moved to any one of the 49 states that doesn’t impose this type of flawed tax. The income tax hike also would hit many small businesses and entrepreneurs, since many pay business taxes under the personal income tax structure.Īnother major tax hike has been proposed in the form of Assembly Bill 310 and Assembly Constitutional Amendment 8, together calling for a new 1% tax on net worth in excess of $50 million and a tax of 1.5% on net worth in excess of $1 billion.
This measure proposes a major annual tax increase on California businesses and residents. A tax increase like this would continue to drive high-income earners out of the state and take the revenue they contribute to the general fund along with them. The proposal, Assembly Bill 1253, calls for a 1% surcharge on taxable income more than $1.18 million, a 3% surcharge on income over $2.36 million and a 3.5% surcharge on income of more than $5.9 million – all in addition to the existing 13.3% tax. One of these measures is Assembly Bill 71, which would increase taxes $2.4 billion a year on California businesses and residents – a tax increase that would make California even less competitive when seeking to attract jobs and investments.Īdditionally, a group of lawmakers proposed a union-backed personal income tax increase on California’s highest earners, with a top rate as high as 16.8%. Many others in the state Capitol also have come to understand that wealthy individuals and businesses already contribute a disproportionately large share of our state’s income and property tax revenue, and that keeping them in California is vital.ĭespite all this, there are those in the Legislature who continue championing a wide array of significant tax increases. Gavin Newsom has indicated that we will not support tax increases this year.
0 kommentar(er)
