Latest news with #taxhike
CTV News
a day ago
- Business
- CTV News
Saskatoon forecasts 9.9% property tax increase in 2026
Watch WATCH: The City of Saskatoon could be facing one of its largest ever tax hikes next year.
CTV News
a day ago
- Business
- CTV News
City forecasts need for 9.9% property tax increase next year
The City of Saskatoon could be facing one of its largest ever tax hikes next year. City administration will present a report to the city's governance and priorities committee next week that forecasts property tax increases of 9.9 per cent in 2026 and 7.3 per cent in 2027. 'The city continues to face increasing costs from inflation and the needs of a growing city, and non-property tax revenue sources continue to not keep up with inflation and growth,' chief financial officer Clae Hack said Wednesday. The increases amount to $22 and $18 per month, respectively, for an average assessed home value of $397,000. Hack noted city councillors are likely to look for cuts, rather than approve such a sizeable hike, much like the previous council did in 2023 when the city lowered a $75 million dollar shortfall by $39 million. But Hack said the forecast is a reminder of the effects ongoing inflation and rapid population growth have had on city finances. 'There's definitely no silver bullet. There's not going to be one easy decision that doesn't impact anybody across the city. So, it's going to be a combination of various things,' Hack said about efforts to reduce the tax hike. The largest pressure on the city is the Saskatoon Police Service (SPS) budget, which accounts for more than one-third of the potential increase. The police operating budget is projecting increases of 10.4 per cent in 2026 and 6.4 per cent in 2027 over its existing budget, which Hack largely attributed to salary increases — part of binding arbitration over a new collective bargaining agreement. Without any other increases to expenses, the police budget alone would account for a 4.09 per cent increase to property taxes. 'They recently had an arbitration settlement come in. So, funding the results of that and then future collective bargaining estimates are a big part of their budget increase,' Hack said. Hack says phase-in expenses previously directed by council and maintaining existing service levels also impact the budget. The Link transit system, the new leisure centre planned for growing areas on the east side of the city and two new fire halls, among other expenses, will add approximately $7.5 million and $9.6 million in 2026 and 2027 respectively. Population growth and increasing inflation are also impacting revenue, as well as expenses. According to Statistics Canada, Saskatoon added 12,896 people in 2024. Newcomers to Saskatoon accounted for 42 per cent of the province's population growth last year. Even though the city has collected nearly 19 per cent more in property tax revenue since 2022, the value of the revenue can't keep up with expense pressures, making the city more reliant on property taxes. 'We're seeing things like our user fees or our government grants maybe not growing at the same pace of the expenses. So when you think about the property tax, not only does the property tax need to pick up its share of the expenditure pressures the city's facing, but it also needs to pick up the share of other revenues that aren't keeping pace,' Hack said. Inflation, while not as significant as in 2022 or 2023, is also a major factor. Hack says asphalt costs have risen by nearly 40 per cent in the last four years. Cement also costs 11.4 per cent more than it did last year and 30 per cent more than it did in 2020. Hack said administration hopes to present a 'refined' budget with a minimum one per cent reduction to the property tax increase by November. 'It's not ideal. Nobody would like a zero per cent property tax increase more than I would. But I think in our role, our main job, especially since everything that we do happens in the public, it's to provide the clear, transparent view of the needs facing the city,' Hack said. The largest property tax increase since at least 1987 was a 7.43 per cent increase in 2014, followed by a 6.04 per cent increase in 2024.
News.com.au
2 days ago
- Business
- News.com.au
‘Stop lying': Treasurer insists that PM will cop super tax slug
Treasurer Jim Chalmers has slammed reports that Anthony Albanese will escape Labor's proposed tax hike on superannuation accounts worth $3 million or more, urging critics to 'stop lying'. Labor's long-standing plan to tax multi-millionaires more on their super is designed to hit those with more than $3 million in their superannuation accounts. Having taken the policy to the federal election, the Albanese Government is now claiming an electoral mandate for the change but will need Senate support from the Greens or the Coalition to pass the change. The new tax will double the 15 per cent that all super fund members are currently taxed on their earnings but only for balances over $3 million. Because super is usually taxed at less than regular income, for example a wage or salary, it's an attractive way to accumulate wealth at lower rates of tax than investors otherwise could. For example, it allows wealthy Australians – most of whom have $6 million or more in super – to pile up property and other assets in their super funds far beyond what they need for retirement. What the super tax discounts costs the budget The super tax discounts cost the federal budget an estimated $50 billion in lost revenue each year allowing the rich to slash their tax bills. To rein in the tax breaks for the wealthy, Labor proposes a 30 per cent tax rate instead of 15 per cent on the earnings of those whose super balances are above $3 million. This rate would only apply to the proportion of earnings that are above $3 million, that is it would still not apply to the first $3 million in super. For example, a couple with $6 million in super will pay extra tax on $3 million of their super but not on $6 million. Failure to index $3 million But critics argue that the proposed super tax is problematic for two main reasons. First, it taxes unrealised gains, that means gains before the asset is sold. Secondly the $3 million threshold is not indexed. The failure to index the tax means that over time, for example 30 or 40 years, it could capture normal workers with higher taxes on their super. How it will impact the Prime Minister The third concern critics have raised is that for a small group of politicians who entered Parliament before 2004. This group includes the Prime Minister and former Opposition leader Peter Dutton. They won't be taxed on unrealised gains in the same way but only when they actually retire. The reason for that is that politicians including former MP Peter Dutton and the Prime Minister are in what is known as a 'defined benefit' retirement plan where they receive a fixed amount each year, rather than the 'defined contribution' retirement fund most people have in Australia. In other words, for most workers retirement income depends on how much they have contributed but under the old super scheme that's not how it works. Because defined benefits programs do not have 'earnings' in the same way as regular super funds, it is not straightforward to calculate the new tax. That's the reason why they are being treated differently in the legislation. Treasurer grilled on impact to PM's super 'Can you confirm that the tax on $3 million superannuation funds will only apply to the Prime Minister once he leaves office, that he won't pay any extra tax on his superannuation until he leaves office under your legislative proposal?,' Sky News reporter Reuben Spargo asked. 'I'm so pleased you asked me this question, because people have been lying about this,' Mr Chalmers replied. 'We've had people, I think shamefully, say that the Prime Minister or other senior politicians at the federal level, on defined benefits, are somehow exempt from this change. 'They are not. We made that clear, that they are included in the legislation we released in November 2023, and in the regulations we released, I think, in March of 2024 more than a year ago. 'It's been abundantly clear in black and white that the Prime Minister is included here, and people should stop lying about it. Now. 'To the substance of your question, which I do understand, you're making a more specific point about the calculation. 'We've been clear about how defined benefits would be treated since we announced the policy, just as the previous government did with their changes to super 'We apply commensurate treatment to defined benefit interests to ensure that there are equivalent tax outcomes and the same rules apply to everyone on defined benefit schemes without the constitutional exemption, including federal politicians.' However, Mr Chalmers went on to confirm that some politicians would be treated differently. 'Now when it comes to the deferred liability, which is a very specific kernel of your question, these deferred liabilities on defined benefits are consistent with the long standing approach taken in other areas of super, like the extra contributions tax for high income earners, tax liabilities are deferred until phase because members in those schemes can't access their super to pay tax debts until that point,' he said. 'It's a function of necessity that that's how that calculation is made, but we charge an interest rate on those liabilities to make sure that people don't receive an inappropriate advantage from the necessity of calculating and paying those liabilities on retirement. 'And so you have to be very careful with what some people, including, I think, some of the lower echelons of our political opponents, some of the things that they've said, and unfortunately, some of those things which have been reported as fact, have to be very careful here the fine benefits schemes like the Prime Ministers are in. They've been in all along. 'The calculation reflects the same sorts of ways it's been calculated in the past. And because the liability is paid on retirement as an interest rate applied to it to make sure that there's no inappropriate benefit, and I genuinely really appreciate the opportunity to clear all of that up because too much has been written about that which has been wrong.' Greens leader Larissa Waters weighs in In order to pass the legislation in the Senate, the Labor Party will need to seek the support of the Coalition or the Greens. Greens leader Larissa Waters told it wasn't a 'good look' for some politicians to be treated differently. 'It's not so much for the PM specifically, but a carve out for politicians crafted by politicians, it looks like self interest,'' she said. 'It's not a good look.' 'Look, there's a lot of banding about with the sense of mandate. They'll propose what they propose, we'll consider it. 'We'll try to make it better.'
Daily Mail
3 days ago
- Business
- Daily Mail
Karoline Leavitt's unsettling warning to Republican rebel holding up Trump's 'big beautiful bill'
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt is attacking members of the president's own party for their opposition to his 'big, beautiful bill.' During a Monday afternoon appearance on Fox News, Leavitt called out Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) who is presently a no vote on the GOP spending package which is soon headed to the Senate after it passed the House before Memorial Day. 'Well, anyone who votes against the one big, beautiful bill including Senator Rand Paul, will be voting for a tax hike of more than $4 trillion on the American people and their voters will know about it,' Leavitt warned. 'That is unacceptable to Republican voters and all voters across the country who elected this president in a Republican majority to get things done on Capitol Hill,' Leavitt continued. Paul was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 2010, long before Trump's foray into politics, and was reelected to a third term in 2022 during Joe Biden 's presidency. Paul is not up for election again until 2028. Kentucky 's other Senate seat is up as an open seat in the 2026 midterms election. The commonwealth's senior senator and former U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is not running for another term. Paul has been making his rounds on the Sunday shows in recent weeks, sharing his perspective against the GOP spending package during appearances on Face the Nation on CBS Fox News Sunday and Fox News Sunday. On Face the Nation, Paul told host Margaret Brennan that the math in the 'big, beautiful bill' 'doesn't really add up.' 'Well, the math doesn't really add up. One of the things this big and beautiful bill is, is it's a vehicle for increasing spending for the military and for the border. It's about $320 billion in new spending,' Paul said. Senator Paul then put those numbers into perspective, comparing the spending package with the funds anticipated to be saved by spending cuts pushed for by the Depart of Government Efficiency (DOGE). 'That's more than all the DOGE cuts that we found so far. So, the increase in spending put into this bill exceeds the DOGE cuts. When you look just at the border wall, they have $46.5 billion for the border wall.' He went one: 'Well, the current estimate from the CBP is $6.5 million per mile. So, if you did 1,000 miles, that's $6.5 billion, but they have $46 billion. So they've inflated the cost of the wall eight fold,' Paul continued. 'So, there's a lot of new spending that has to be counteracted. But essentially, this is a bill by the military industrial complex advocates who are padding the military budget. There's going to be a lot of extra money.' 'Look, the President has essentially stopped the border flow without- without new money and without any new legislation. So, I think they're asking for too much money. And in the end, the way you add it up to see if it actually is going to save money or add money, is how much debt are they going to borrow? 5 trillion over two years, an enormous amount' Paul concluded. A May 20th analysis from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the federal deficit would increase by $3.8 trillion due to tax changes. The American people, like the Great People of Kentucky, do not support Biden spending levels and $5T in new debt. Therefore, I will not. It's simple. — Rand Paul (@RandPaul) June 1, 2025 Speaking with Fox News Sunday host Shannon Bream on May 25th, Paul shared further reservations about the increase to the national debt, while also touting his past support for lowering taxes. 'You know, the bigger a bill, the more it includes, the more difficult it is to get everybody to agree to things. I supported the tax cuts in 2017. I support making them permanent. So, I support that part of the bill,' Paul noted. WATCH: @RandPaul explains why he's a no on the current House GOP's version of Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'. — Fox News Sunday (@FoxNewsSunday) May 25, 2025 'I support spending cuts. I think the cuts currently in the bill are wimpy and anemic, but I still would support the bill even with wimpy and anemic cuts if they weren't going to explode the debt,' Paul argued. Later in the conversation, Paul also warned that 'the deficit is a threat to our country. I think it's the greatest threat to our national security', adding that the United States brings in 'about $5 trillion in revenue', while spending $7 trillion.
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Weber County School District considering tax increase
WEBER COUNTY, Utah (ABC4) — The Weber County School District held a special meeting today, May 30, to consider possible future tax hikes. The district held a meeting on the topic this week — local officials saying they may need to raise taxes in order to maximize state funding. The district's business administrator highlighted the need to keep up with covering their expenses, including teacher salaries. 'I think to be prudent with making sure that we are keeping up with our expenses of the district as different things come up, you know, within capital and safety,' Weber County School District Business Administrator Brock Mitchell stated. 'And then our educators' salaries.' These tax hikes are not yet final, according to Mitchell. Local officials also said it's possible the tax increase could be enacted incrementally, instead of all at once. 'Every year, the county changes their rates, and what they're guaranteeing you is the same amount of tax revenue as the previous year, plus any new growth in the area,' Mitchell said. 'That's why these rates change, and they decrease — because as a district, we chose over time not to raise those rates and essentially stay with the new revenue that was generated because of the new growth in the county.' That's the reason there was no need, until two years ago, to raise tax rates, Mitchell said. The next meeting by the Weber County School District Board will take place on June 11, which will be a budget hearing. All meetings start at 6 p.m. and are located at the Weber School District Office, 5320 Adams Avenue Parkway, Ogden. A full list of upcoming meetings is available here. South Jordan man apprehended after fleeing from traffic stop, shelter in place order lifted Cedar City man arrested for allegedly sending sexual photos to officer posing as 12-year-old Charges filed against Utah man who allegedly messaged missing 15-year-old before her disappearance Weber County School District considering tax increase Hill Air Force Base's Mazer Chapel reopens after 2 years of renovations Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
