Business
Cut Corporate Income Taxes massively to increase growth, prosperity
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
By Ian Madsen
The federal Liberal government’s current budget proposal to increase the inclusion rate for capital gains tax was met with justifiable criticism and opposition – primarily from business groups. There is another corporate income tax increase looming. A 2018 corporate tax reduction, intended to make Canada less uncompetitive versus the 2017-enacted tax reform and cut in the United States (which came into effect fully in 2018), is set to expire starting this year.
According to a study by University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy’s Trevor Tombe, Canada’s corporate income tax rate on new investments will jump from 13.7% to 17% by 2027. Even worse, for Canada’s high-value-added manufacturing sector, taxation will triple. For a nation that is having a hard time, encouraging both domestic or foreign investors to invest in new plant, equipment and related goods and services, to reverse meagre productivity growth – as noted by the Bank of Canada – this development is beyond questionable.
This rise will hinder future improvement in incomes and the standard of living – making it a serious issue. It should be obvious to policymakers that increasing income tax on businesses and investment should be avoided. The legislation to make the 2018 provisions permanent is, alarmingly, not urgent to politicians seeking to appease certain types of class warfare-cheering voters.
There is at least one policy that could make Canada more attractive to business, investors, and hard-pressed ordinary citizens. It would be, dramatically and substantially, slash corporate income taxes – plus make paying taxes easier, as Magna Corporation founder Frank Stronach has suggested. It may surprise some Canadians, but, Ottawa’s take from corporate income taxes is a relatively small, but fast rising proportion of federal overall revenue: 21%, in fiscal 2022-23, according to Ottawa, up from 13% in fiscal 2000-21 notes the OECD.
This may seem ‘just fine’: let companies pay the taxes and reduce the tax burden on ordinary people. However, what actually happens is that every corporate expense, including taxes, reduces cash flow. The money remaining could either be reinvested or paid out as dividends to owners. A reminder: owners are founding families; pension fund beneficiaries (employees, citizens); and ordinary individuals.
As to reinvesting available funds, the less there are, the less capital investment can occur. Investment is required to replace existing equipment, or add new equipment, devices, software and vehicles for businesses. This not only keeps companies competitive, but also makes employees more productive. This, in turn, makes the whole economy more profitable, thereby increasing taxes paid to governments.
As for the dubious reason for the tax hike, gaining more revenue – recent experience in the United States is instructive. The 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act reduced corporate income tax from 39% of pre-tax income to 21%. The result: U.S. federal corporate income tax revenue rose 25% from 2017 to fiscal 2021. Capital investment rose dramatically too, by 20%, a key goal of many Canadian policymakers.
Taxes should be cut, enabling productivity improvement and bringing a future prosperity that we all yearn for. It would also keep us internationally competitive. We are currently mediocre, being around a 25% rate (OECD).
Canada has a hard time attracting investors. Now, our trading partners are leaving us in the dust.
Ian Madsen is the Senior Policy Analyst at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
Energy Talking Points by Alex Epstein
Alex Epstein
This is the kind of integrity we need from industry—and from Congress.
Dear Chairman Smith and Chairman Crapo:
We, the undersigned American energy producers and investors, write to voice our principled support for full repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act’s (IRA) energy subsidies, including subsidies that would appear to be to our firms’ and industry’s benefit. This is the only moral and practical path forward if we are to truly unleash American energy.
In recent weeks, Congress has been embroiled in battles over which, if any, of the IRA energy subsidies to cut. Lobbyists representing every corner of the energy landscape, including trade groups that many of us are part of, are jockeying to preserve their own piece of the pie, claiming that it is uniquely valuable.
We have oil lobbyists fighting to keep carbon capture and hydrogen subsidies, solar and wind lobbyists fighting to keep solar and wind subsidies, biofuel lobbyists fighting to keep biofuel subsidies, and EV lobbyists fighting to keep EV subsidies.
If this continues, we will likely preserve most if not all of the subsidies, which, deep down, everyone knows are not good for America.
The fundamental truth about subsidies is very simple. For any product, including energy, a subsidy is just a way of taking money from more efficient producers—and from taxpayers—and giving it to less efficient producers. The result is always less efficient production and therefore higher costs or lower quality for Americans.
The most egregious example of subsidies’ destructiveness is the IRA’s solar and wind subsidies, which pay electric utilities to invest much more money in solar and wind than they otherwise would, and thus much less in coal and gas than they otherwise would. Ultimately this means higher electricity prices and certainly less electricity reliability for Americans.
The IRA subsidies’ devastating harm to American energy is more than enough to compel us, as energy producers, to oppose them.
But their harm goes far beyond energy, as they will dramatically increase our debt and ultimately undermine every aspect of our economy.
A central Congressional priority is to curb the national debt during the upcoming budget reconciliation exercise. But according to credible estimates, the IRA will cost over $1 trillion over the next decade and trillions more after that. Worse, the IRA subsidies are expected to misallocate, into uncompetitive business and jobs, $3 trillion of investment by 2032 and $11 trillion by 2050. That’s a disaster for our economy, and for real job opportunities.
Clearly, the right thing to do is to eliminate all these subsidies. When lobbyists say that these subsidies are essential for America, what they’re really saying is that their backers have made investments in projects that have no near term cost-effectiveness and that are totally dependent on indefinite subsidies to sustain themselves.
Most people know the truth, but are afraid to say it due to institutional pressures. Too many Congressmen are afraid of alienating trade groups. Too many trade groups are afraid of alienating their large and vocal members who have made investments hoping for indefinite subsidies. All the while, too few are talking about freedom.
That’s why we invite our colleagues to do the right thing: level with the American people, say that we made a mistake, and that those who built subsidy-dependent businesses took on the kind of risk that we do not want to reward.
Keeping the IRA subsidies—despite all the evidence that they benefit only special interests at the expense of America—risks making our nation ever more like Europe, where industries do not succeed by providing the best value to consumers, but by providing the best favors to politicians. That’s not the America we want to work in.
Sincerely,
Bud Brigham, Founder, Atlas Energy Services and Brigham Exploration
David Albin, Managing Partner, Spectra Holdings
Adam Anderson, CEO, Innovex International
Thurmon Andress, Chairman and CEO, Andress Oil
Don Bennett, Managing Partner, Bennett Ventures LP
Greg Bird, CEO and President, Jetta Operating Company
David de Roode, Partner, Lockton
Andy Eidson, CEO, Alpha Metallurgical Resources
Matt Gallagher, President and CEO, Greenlake Energy
Mike Howard, CEO, Howard Energy
Justin Thompson, CEO, Iron Senergy
Ed Kovalik, CEO, Prairie Operating Company
Thomas E. Knauff, Executive Chairman, EDP
Lance Langford, CEO, Langford Energy Partners
Mickey McKee, CEO, Kodiak Gas Services
Mike O’Shaughnessy, CEO, Lario Oil and Gas Company
D. Martin Phillips, Founder, EnCap Investments LP
Karl Pfluger, midstream executive
David Rees-Jones, President, Chief Energy
Rob Roosa, CEO, Brigham Royalties
Bobby Shackouls, Former CEO, Burlington Resources
Ross Stevens, Founder and CEO, Stone Ridge Holdings Group
Kyle Stallings, CEO, Desert Royalty Company
Justin Thompson, CEO, Iron Senergy
Mike Wallace, Partner, Wallace Family Partnership
Ladd Wilks, CEO, ProFrac
Denzil West, CEO, Admiral Permian Operating
Bill Zartler, Founder and CEO, Solaris Oilfield Infrastructure
Additional signatories (email [email protected] to add yours):
Jimmy Brock, Executive Chairman, Core Natural Resources
Ted Williams, President and CEO, Rockport Energy Solutions LLC
To make sure as many politicians as possible see this letter, help us by sharing on Twitter/X and tagging your Congressmen! Congress is currently undecided about what to do about the IRA subsidies, so now is the moment to make your voice heard.
“Energy Talking Points by Alex Epstein” is my free Substack newsletter designed to give as many people as possible
access to concise, powerful, well-referenced talking points on the latest energy, environmental,
and climate issues from a pro-human, pro-energy perspective.
Business
Possible Criminal Charges for US Institute for Peace Officials who barricade office in effort to thwart DOGE
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By
The Department of Justice is exploring potential criminal charges against former U.S. Institute of Peace (USIP) officials who attempted to block the Trump administration’s leadership changes at the federally funded think tank Monday, a senior DOJ official told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
The official, who requested anonymity, told the DCNF the DOJ is examining whether certain USIP actions — such as the removal and destruction of internal and external door locks — created illegal fire hazards. The official also flagged the widespread distribution of internal flyers instructing USIP staff not to cooperate with incoming Trump administration officials as potentially obstructive conduct. The DCNF was the first to report on USIP’s internal flyer campaign and destruction of door locks.
“Eleven board members were lawfully removed, and remaining board members appointed Kenneth Jackson acting president,” Anna Kelly, White House deputy press secretary, previously told the DCNF. “Rogue bureaucrats will not be allowed to hold agencies hostage. The Trump administration will enforce the President’s executive authority and ensure his agencies remain accountable to the American people.”
The inquiry — which remains in its early stages, the official emphasized — follows a contentious standoff Monday after former USIP leadership tried to block the installation of Kenneth Jackson, who President Donald Trump appointed as the institute’s new president on March 14. The Trump administration determined the institute had failed to comply with a Feb. 19 executive order requiring federally funded organizations like USIP to scale operations down to their bare statutory minimums, triggering a leadership shakeup the institute attempted to resist.
USIP leadership began preparing for a confrontation weeks before the executive order was issued. A Feb. 6 internal document exclusively obtained by the DCNF outlined plans to deny building access to outside officials and reasserted the institute’s discretion over security systems and facilities. Flyers with the names and photos of Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) officials were posted throughout the building, instructing staff to report their presence and avoid conversation.
After Jackson and other DOGE officials arrived on March 14 with law enforcement and a copy of Trump’s order, they were turned away by USIP’s legal counsel, sources previously told the DCNF. Over the following weekend, USIP leadership escalated its resistance — terminating its private security firm, disabling internet and phone systems and resorting to walkie-talkie communication inside the building.
DOGE officials returned Monday to find the building locked down and staff barricaded on the fifth floor. USIP officials called the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), sources previously told the DCNF, who only later arrived at the request of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for D.C. after reports of obstruction by institute staff. MPD entered the fifth floor through emergency stairwells and removed former USIP President George Moose and other senior officials from the premises.
While a federal judge declined to issue a restraining order halting the leadership transition Wednesday, she sharply criticized DOGE’s cooperation with law enforcement, despite the circumstances surrounding USIP’s refusal to comply.
The DOJ official did not specify which individuals were under investigation or when a decision on charges might be made.
Chinese Narco Suspect Caught in Private Meeting with Trudeau, Investigated by DEA, Linked to Panama, Caribbean, Mexico – Police Sources
Doug Ford needs to ditch the net-zero pipedreams
Brookfield’s Deep Ties to Chinese Land, Loans, and Green Deals—And a Real Estate Tycoon With CCP Links—Raise Questions as Carney Takes Over from Trudeau
Flu Vaccine Exposed: The Shocking NIH Discovery They Don’t Want You to Know
-
Brownstone Institute1 day agoThe New Enthusiasm for Slaughter
-
Catherine Herridge1 day agoHow ‘Woke’ Broke The FBI
-
MxM News1 day ago“Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports” Executive Order doesn’t go far enough: Second place finisher
-
Business1 day agoA Look at Canada’s Import Tariffs
-
Energy2 days agoNext federal government should close widening gap between Canadian and U.S. energy policy
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day agoThe National Freakout Over The 4 Nations Drama Still Resonates
-
Carbon Tax1 day agoDon’t be fooled – He’s Still Carbon Tax Carney
-
Bjorn Lomborg1 day agoClimate change isn’t causing hunger