Let me preemptively say that I am PRO paying taxes. In fact, I did my taxes just yesterday and on both me and my partner’s meager income we only have to pay $377.86 in taxes for 2008. And we’ve used that and more in social services. I mean, I took the bus quite a few times and we’re both CBC fans, I even went to emergency for something minor because our city’s walk-in clinic is only open after 4pm.
But, I get wary when the Canadian Revenue Agency is out to get the “little people”. Those of us who barter services rather than exchange cash (ie. volunteering an hour a week for a gym pass), or work for cash like mowing lawns, doing someone’s taxes by donation, or receiving an honorarium for giving a presentation at a local high school. To the CRA this is the “underground” economy and it’s DESTROYING our communities. In this fancy YouTube video above their rationale is that the non-taxed economy destroys communities because communities rely on services provided by taxes. Not a variety of self-sustaining and community embracing economies like bartering or the gift economy.
The way I see it, though, is that if the government can justify paying me a wage at the social service agency I work for that keeps me so low on the tax bracket that I have to do work on the side in exchange for services then that’s what I have to do.
I think my friend put it succinctly when she came up with her own idea for the video above:
I want to submit a video to them with [new baby’s name] asking for the boob and me saying “wait a minute, let me get a receipt, revenue canada deserves a share of my labour.”
The attack on the “underground economy” brings up a lot of questions: Does this mean that a person’s parenting/home work is also now taxable? And what about that $50 I get from my grandparents every Christmas? Does that count too? And what happens when I report I made an extra $300 building websites for a poor student to get their work off the ground? Do you think they’ll actually put those tax dollars into my community in a better way than that $300 went to buying local honey or paying my roller derby dues?
Digg
Facebook
del.icio.us
four comments
This is silly. As if the real problem is small-scale bartering. I wonder if they made a video directed at corporate CEOs or millionaire heirs...
Posted by Alison M
March 5, 2009, 2:19 PM
the underground economy "messes up our national economy, our community and canadian familes"...good grief. sure, if big businesses and corporations are being shady with their taxes then yes, our public systems will suffer (and they do, how many times do we hear about the super wealthy evading taxes, big business getting undeserved tax breaks etc.).
look at the tax free savings accounts that harper recently put forward...sure, i love the idea of it and my partner and i are enjoying the benefits from it (what little person doesn't enjoy not paying taxes when they otherwise would have to). but here we have an example of the wealthy avoiding paying taxes (how many poor people can afford to put away $5000 a year tax-free?).
how can the CRA honestly believe that not paying taxes for mowing someone's lawn "mess up our community?" maybe we're doing a favour to an elderly person unable to otherwise do it/pay someone to do it. or give someone canned goods in exchange for a hair cut? to me this CREATES community since community is ultimately built on social relationships.
when times get tough (and as we can see, they're getting tougher every day) our relationships and our ability to depend on others is what will ultimately get us through. a single mom trading free lawn maintenance service to an elderly neighbour who provides free baby-sitting services may be the ONLY thing that makes it possible for her to participate in the formal economy at all!! (the 100 bucks a month that harper gives per child a year certainly does not cover child care costs).
gah!!
Posted by alex
March 5, 2009, 3:02 PM
Where does it stop, though? I mean, I know one of the end points of capitalism is to get us to think of everything we do, think, and feel as a product that can be bought and sold, but yeesh, I didn't think Revenue Canada was so intent on driving that idea home.
Okay, so I make my own sauerkraut, yogurt and sprouts, and give them away to my friends. Which could be thought of as undercutting the work of grocery stores and food producers, if you're totally set on making that absurd accusation. Which apparently they are. What about the time I spend talking about my problems with my friends, and helping them with their problems in turn? Am I taking valuable work away from therapists? When I have sex with someone, am I depriving sex-trade workers of revenue? Ah-HA. Think I just came up with a topic for my video entry.
Really though - it sounds like reductio ad absurdum, but this is seriously what they're asking us to contemplate. Well I for one will continue to give it away - sauerkraut AND booty. So there.
Posted by Anna
March 15, 2009, 12:53 PM
Is there somewhere where they actually give examples of what "the underground economy" is though? Because I couldn't find any on the CRA website, and they're not in the video. It's not obvious to me that they're addressing individuals who barter rather than, say, businesses who pay under the table. Which I think is a mixed scenario from a labour standpoint - it can benefit workers but it can also allow them to be exploited by their employers.
Anyway, it's maybe beside the point, because as everyone has already pointed out, it's basically obfuscation to blame anyone other than big business for undercutting or destabilizing the economy.
Posted by Anna
March 15, 2009, 5:29 PM
Leave a comment
This blog post is older than 90 days old. All comments submitted regarding this post will be automatically held for review by the editors before posting. Your comment will not appear on the site until it has been approved.
Our comment policy
Shameless prides itself on the diversity of opinions expressed by our writers, and we encourage and appreciate different points of view. Our intention at Shameless is to foster community and to maintain a safe and positive blogging environment; we do not consider it our duty to give a voice to anybody with an opinion.
Discussion on this site is moderated. We will delete comments that:
(We get to decide what's discriminatory, hateful, attacking, or inflammatory).
In some cases, we will cap off comments on a discussion when we feel they are spiralling out of control and fostering an unwelcoming space for bloggers and readers. Comments will be closed by the Web Editor, unless the post is by the Web Editor, in which case the Editor in Chief will close them.
If your comments repeatedly make the same point, they may be deleted. This also applies to comments made by multiple members of the same organization.
Your comments should be about the topic of the post, not its writer—although we certainly encourage praise for our writers, if you want to say something nice.