HST Dies!

[Flubber]

Last question

You have talked a lot about the loss of sovereignty to the provionce and talked about the province needing to beg for an allowance under the HST etc etc. I am just curious if you

1. read any of the relevant agreements to know what they provide OR
2. if all those statements were rheteroic fed to you by others OR
3. they are lies you are stating intentionally in order to induce a response.

[Flubber]

NYE

Your example of income taxes is relevant in that it is another example of the feds administering a tax regime for the benefit of the province. However the key difference is that there I understand the feds are collecting taxes levied pursuant to provincial statutes. THe structure of the HST in BC was that it was solely federal legislation. So the feds are collecting a federal tax and then distributing money to the province. THis is what Ben objects to.

If the province had passed identical legislation as the feds , Ben could have no argument on the constitution at all ( They did this in each of NS and NL to create offshore oil regulation-- all the court decisions gave sole jurisdiction to the feds but as a face-saving and political measure both levels passed identical legislation to give jurisdiction to a federal-provincial joint board with equal say.

Back to the income tax example . . . Even thougfh the provinces still have the legislative power to change their legislation, the feds can only effectively administer with enough notice of changes and with provisions that do not diverge too too far from their norm. I have not examined the income tax administration provisions but I would be surprised if they differ that markedly from the provisionsé requirements for HST administration

[notyoueither]

Other provinces have adjusted their portion of HST. I see no reason why BC would be different. It is absurd to think that a Province agreed to never, ever adjust a tax within it's jurisdiction. I'd need to see something other than blatherings by Ben of Vander Zalm.

Whether CanRev or the BC Treasury collects the money, ample notice of change would be required in any event.

[blackrain30]

hmm

[Ben Kenobi]

If the province had passed identical legislation as the feds , Ben could have no argument on the constitution at all ( They did this in each of NS and NL to create offshore oil regulation-- all the court decisions gave sole jurisdiction to the feds but as a face-saving and political measure both levels passed identical legislation to give jurisdiction to a federal-provincial joint board with equal say.

If they had simply adjusted the PST to collect the same things as the HST, then yes, that would be perfectly constitutional, and I'd have no beef with that aside from the increase in taxation. They may still do this.

[Ben Kenobi]

You have talked a lot about the loss of sovereignty to the provionce and talked about the province needing to beg for an allowance under the HST etc etc. I am just curious if you

Personal opinion. I don't see why the Feds have to be involved at all. The reason they do it this way is because of the Federal Transfer payments, which I've indicated to you I'm also opposed to, because it makes the provincial government less responsive to the will of the people within the province.

[Ben Kenobi]

based on your contradictory statements aboout your concerns

Only in your own mind. You need to read more carefully.

I stated that my initial concern was the increase in taxation and that the constitutional issue became more of a concern after I met with Bill VanderZalm and had a chance to talk with him. I've said that throughout the thread. I don't see how that's contradictory.

[Ben Kenobi]

Matters of constitutional law are determined by lower courts all the time. All sorts of folks argue constitutional matters and when it gets heard in the supreme court of the province (or lots of time in federal TAX court , that decision is binding. Automatically going to the supremes is through the reference process which was not invoked here.

An option the litigants chose to forgo, in lieu of their petition strategy which was successful. We had other options also that I'm not going to get into here. All I'm saying is that the option for appeal was always there.

[Flubber]

An option the litigants chose to forgo, in lieu of their petition strategy which was successful. We had other options also that I'm not going to get into here. All I'm saying is that the option for appeal was always there.

Just for clarity

1. THe litigants would have no right to reference this to the supremes
2. Appeal periods do expire.

[Flubber]

If they had simply adjusted the PST to collect the same things as the HST, then yes, that would be perfectly constitutional, and I'd have no beef with that aside from the increase in taxation. They may still do this.

I do not believe this is certain to be accurate. There are some elements of the HST as it was drafted that may go beyond a provinces ability to tax within the province. THis can get very complex and get into the nuances of the tax.


If both governments wanted complete certainty, they would pass complementary legislation creating a sungle tax, each as to where their jurisdiction lies.

[notyoueither]

I do not believe this is certain to be accurate. There are some elements of the HST as it was drafted that may go beyond a provinces ability to tax within the province.

Can you give an example?

[Agent Sox]

There is a theory that the reason the Hubble Space Telescope was delayed so much when it was first built and had those problems was because the rest of the universe the telescope would be looking at hadn't been "built" yet, so some preparation time needed to be put in to make sure the telescope saw the right stuff. And now with the James Web telescope the same thing is happening.

[Flubber]

I do not believe this is certain to be accurate. There are some elements of the HST as it was drafted that may go beyond a provinces ability to tax within the province.

Can you give an example?

Not currently-- hence all the waffle words in my prior response-- I need to look a little more-- It might have been the original GST reference case or one of the other prior cases on
'direct taxation" that I flipped through. It wasn't relevant to what I was answering at the time but there were nuances involved in the difference between a GST and a retail sales tax that were not at all obvious (it might have been about services provided to a non-resident of the province ( think if a Alberta resident sits in Edmonton and seeks advice from his Vancouver lawyer about his Chinese interests )but again I could be misremembering so I would rather wait before saying anything definitive. (headed out boating this weekend so I know you will be waiting excitedly for my return and answer -- NOT)

I simply have an issue with the idea that the province can simply create a tax IDENTICAL to the GST on their own authority. I think that is most likely NOT a correct assumption

[notyoueither]

headed out boating this weekend so I know you will be waiting excitedly for my return and answer

Screw you! I'm going to Seba.

[Flubber]

headed out boating this weekend so I know you will be waiting excitedly for my return and answer

Screw you! I'm going to Seba.

and I am going to Koocanusa!! hot weather awaits