stexx Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 Here's a quick example: Under PST: If a business were to spend $100 as operating costs, they would be charged $112. This includes $5 for GST and $7 for PST. If the same business sold services of $100, they would collect $105 after charging their customers GST (this assumes their services are not subject to PST). The $5 in GST collected must be remitted to the Receiver General but they would offset this with the $5 in GST paid on the operating costs. The result: negative $7. ($112 spent, $105 gained) Under HST: The operating expenses would still cost $112 (12% HST) but the business would charge its customer $112 on the $100 service. Under the HST system, the business would have to remit the $12 HST collected but would be allowed to offset it with the $12 in HST paid. No HST would be payable to the Receiver General. At the end of the day, the business would realize $100 in net sales (after remitting the $12 in HST) and have paid $100 net for operating expenses. The result: break even. While the consumer pays $7 more in this example, the business breaks even rather than operates at a loss. Going back to the first example, it is highly likely that the company will raise the cost of its product to not operate at a loss. Thus the HST simply makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 +1, couldnt have said it better myself. It is estimated that for a small business it will cost them between 3-5thousand a year from the swap from HST to PST. That is huge money for a small business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 Do you let your kids lie to you? No? Then why would you let your government? Yes the hst would have been better but some times you just have to do the right thing-even if it hurts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Vancouver Connection Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 the HST failed because the way it was brought in. no other reason. blame gordon campbell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russ Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 I bought food yesterday at BP, didn't even realize the few cents different at all to be honest... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rb4u Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 Do you let your kids lie to you? No? Then why would you let your government? Yes the hst would have been better but some times you just have to do the right thing-even if it hurts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harbinger Posted April 2, 2013 Author Share Posted April 2, 2013 This morning I think I'll go and support another restaurant and go get a little something. I'll also make sure I let them know the only reason I came today was because the crappy HST is gone and the fantastic Pst is back and will not be charged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockout Casualty Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 This morning I think I'll go and support another restaurant and go get a little something. I'll also make sure I let them know the only reason I came today was because the crappy HST is gone and the fantastic Pst is back and will not be charged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 This morning I think I'll go and support another restaurant and go get a little something. I'll also make sure I let them know the only reason I came today was because the crappy HST is gone and the fantastic Pst is back and will not be charged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 Sorry dude I don't want to give businesses tax breaks. I'm tired of rich people getting all the breaks. Prices never went down when the HST came in. Today I paid less for my food. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockout Casualty Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 How much did you pay for the gas to get there? Prices seemed to go up the past week around here....coincidence? Also this: "The consensus seems to be that returning to the PST/GST will cost the BC government some $3 billion and take at least 18 months. Additionally, the government will have to deal with these costs from a revenue stream that will be $800 million lower per annum than it was before, other things being equal." "Now that the shouts of triumph or despair are fading away, what does all this mean to ordinary British Columbians? On the tax front, it means that when the dust settles, they will be paying 12% combined GST/PST on most purchases rather than the 10% HST the Liberal government offered as a sweetener to retain the HST. Lower income people will also lose HST related rebates. However, it is likely that those citizens who have to hold down a job and earn a living will feel the most pain. The value added HST saved BC’s job producers billions of dollars, kept their costs competitive with other provinces in Canada and helped BC obtain and keep markets abroad. With the province returning to a high cost, less competitive state, this will result in disappearing jobs." Yeah, those 55% who voted it out were really smart cookies.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 Don't blame the voters, blame the provincial leadership and how they brought in the HST. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 Don't blame the voters, blame the provincial leadership and how they brought in the HST. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucklehead Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 Don't blame the voters, blame the provincial leadership and how they brought in the HST. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 Don't blame the voters, blame the provincial leadership and how they brought in the HST. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockout Casualty Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 Sorry - I blame the voters - they voted. I also blame the government for how they brought it in - should have been 10% from the get go. When I was getting ready to move back here and heard of this vote - all I thought (and others in Alberta as well) was just how much pot are people smoking out here anyways? Reminds me of the Monty Python sketch - Dennis Moore....Dum...dum...dum.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 So let me get this straight, the benefits are on the HST side, yet it's not a failure of provincial leadership to convey the benefits and convince the voters? Instead it's the fault of the opposition for making a stronger case? Like I said, some people make it sound like there is no provincial Liberal party that won some election in 2009. Our province isn't any different in the amount of sheep it has, that's an inherent quality of any populace. Look at Alberta, half the country is scratching their heads over how they can have all this oil wealth and unbalanced budgets, and still elect the same party for 40 years. BC election was held in May, when HST was not on the radar. HST was announced on July 23rd of same year. Then we learned HST was on the radar five months prior to the election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockout Casualty Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 Blame both. I'm at fault for voting against the HST. How it got brought in was wrong. How it made it's way out was stupid and wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 So let me get this straight, the benefits are on the HST side, yet it's not a failure of provincial leadership to convey the benefits and convince the voters? Instead it's the fault of the opposition for making a stronger case? Like I said, some people make it sound like there is no provincial Liberal party that won some election in 2009. Our province isn't any different in the amount of sheep it has, that's an inherent quality of any populace. Look at Alberta, half the country is scratching their heads over how they can have all this oil wealth and unbalanced budgets, and still elect the same party for 40 years. BC election was held in May, when HST was not on the radar. HST was announced on July 23rd of same year. Then we learned HST was on the radar five months prior to the election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockout Casualty Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 Ever hear the expression "You can lead a horse to the water..."? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.