July 9, 1940

NAT

John Ritchie MacNicol

National Government

Mr. MacNICOL:

In addition to that she has to keep up her home, where she has lived for some forty years, paying $250 in municipal taxes. She pays $18 for water and $100 for repairs of one kind or another. She keeps a janitor or a man who comes in to cut the grass and fire the boiler and do odd jobs; she pays him $60 a year. She needs a charwoman to come in every week to clean up, and that will cost her $48. Probably she is not so well as not to require a doctor occasionally, and her medical expenses are about $100 a year. It costs S200 to heat the house, $24 for electricity, $30 for telephone and $30 for gas. If I have added these items correctly, including the additional amount paid in respect of national defence tax, it makes a total of $960. That leaves the poor lady something like

Income War Tax Act

$540. She has a daughter with her who is not very well and so does not work. One of the sons has not worked for quite a while and needs the odd dollar she can spare to help keep his family. How is that poor woman going to live? She maintains that she is a married woman, having raised a family and kept house for forty years. How can the minister justify classifying her as a single woman? To me it looks unfair. Why is she not classed as a married woman and given an exemption of $1,500 a year instead of $750 a year?

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Permalink
LIB

James Lorimer Ilsley (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. ILSLEY:

She is single, therefore

unmarried.

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Permalink
NAT
?

An hon. MEMBER:

How do we know?

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Permalink
NAT
LIB

James Lorimer Ilsley (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. ILSLEY:

Is the hon. gentleman suggesting that widows should be held to be married taxpayers?

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Permalink
NAT

John Ritchie MacNicol

National Government

Mr. MacNICOL:

It looks to me to be most unfair. The case I have stated is typical of thousands upon thousands, not only of women but of men too.

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Permalink
LIB

James Lorimer Ilsley (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. ILSLEY:

I thought the hon. member was asking what might be called a legal point, that is, why a widow should be classified as an unmarried person within the meaning of the Income War Tax Act. Without being overconfident of my opinion, I would suggest that the proper interpretation of the act would be to classify a widow as an unmarried person.

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Permalink
NAT

John Ritchie MacNicol

National Government

Mr. MacNICOL:

Of course she cannot

figure out how she can be classified as a single person, either, after having raised a family and lived with her husband for forty years.

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Permalink
SC

Robert Fair

Social Credit

Mr. FAIR:

It looks as though this is a chance for widows and widowers to get together and improve their status.

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Permalink
NAT

Douglas Gooderham Ross

National Government

Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):

Last evening I asked the minister with respect to the remuneration of dollar a year men, and he said he would give me a more accurate answer. May I have that answer before we get some place where it cannot be given?

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Permalink
LIB

Thomas Vien (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

The CHAIRMAN:

I believe the hon. gentleman raised the question as to allowances for expenses. That would come under a subsequent section.

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Permalink
NAT

Richard Burpee Hanson (Leader of the Official Opposition)

National Government

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

Which one?

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Permalink
LIB

Thomas Vien (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

The CHAIRMAN:

In respect of allowances, ft certainly does not relate to exemptions of $2,000 or $1,500.

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Permalink
LIB

James Lorimer Ilsley (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. ILSLEY:

I should have no objection to answering at this stage, but I am not quite ready. I should like to answer the question a little later, if the hon. member does not mind.

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Permalink
NAT

Resolution agreed to. 5. That the statutory exemptions of all other persons except corporations, be reduced from $1,000 to $750. Resolution agreed to.


LIB

James Lorimer Ilsley (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. ILSLEY:

I move that the said resolutions be amended by adding thereto as resolution 5A the following resolution:

5A. That section 5 of the said act be amended by adding thereto the following paragraph:

"(ee) $400 for each child maintained by the taxpayer in Canada under a cooperate plan sponsored by the governments of the United Kingdom, Canada, and/or its provinces for the evacuation of children from the United Kingdom; provided that the tax benefit obtained as a result of the exemption shall not in any case exceed the amount of the tax benefit received by a married person in receipt of a net income of $5,000."

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Permalink
NAT

Harry Rutherford Jackman

National Government

Mr. JACKMAN:

May I ask the minister what he means by "a cooperative plan"? If you take a guest child because you know the parents in the old country, does that not qualify you also for the exemption? Or does that limit the working of this exemption?

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Permalink
LIB

James Lorimer Ilsley (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. ILSLEY:

Yes, it does. What I may call private arrangements do not qualify the taxpayer for exemption under this amendment.

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Permalink

July 9, 1940