Harry Rutherford JACKMAN

JACKMAN, Harry Rutherford, LL.B.

Personal Data

Party
Progressive Conservative
Constituency
Rosedale (Ontario)
Birth Date
November 5, 1900
Deceased Date
November 22, 1979
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Jackman
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=5f9946d8-6285-42b5-8cf0-d207fcf461a7&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
lawyer, manager

Parliamentary Career

March 26, 1940 - April 16, 1945
NAT
  Rosedale (Ontario)
June 11, 1945 - April 30, 1949
PC
  Rosedale (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 536 of 538)


July 10, 1940

Mr. JACKMAN:

The $500 bonus comes in at the very end of the year. Properly speaking, the man earned $1,250 during both halves of the year.

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Full View Permalink

July 10, 1940

Mr. JACKMAN:

But it is properly spread over the whole year, and divided into two, in the application of this tax.

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Full View Permalink

July 10, 1940

Mr. JACKMAN:

It is earned as part of the year's effort,, but it is only payable at the end of the year.

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Full View Permalink

July 9, 1940

Mr. JACKMAN:

A great many of these annuities have been sold on the understanding that no income tax would be payable. A man could pay in only one dollar, as the minister has suggested, and then increase the annuity. If the clause stating that such annuity will be free from income tax does not appear in the contract itself, it certainly did appear in some of the printed matter produced by the agent when the annuity was sold. I am not holding a brief for any person who pays in a nominal sum in order to obtain a larger annuity later on, but the fact is that government agents did tell these people that if they took out small contracts they had the right to increase them up to a maximum of $1,200.

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Full View Permalink

July 9, 1940

Mr. JACKMAN:

It is virtually impossible under the exchange regulations in the old country to send money with these children for their support. It is hardly likely that the interests of Great Britain at present will admit of any large aggregate sum being sent out in support of the children. While in a few cases some provision may be made by English parents who have assets in this country, such cases will be proportionately so few in number as to be hardly worthy of consideration. Most of these children, probably ninety-five to ninety-nine per cent of them, will have to be supported by the people with whom they

Income War Tax Act

live in this country. University professors in Toronto have been organizing to bring out children of corresponding professors in the old country who -have no possible means of sending money out with them; it is entirely voluntary. Canada being a partner of the motherland in this war I think we should certainly do what we can, and the government should not prejudice the people who are good enough to pay out a substantial sum each year for the maintenance of these children until the war is over.

Will the minister clarify what he means by his reference to the exemption of $5,000 for a married couple? I do not understand that.

Topic:   INCOME WAR TAX ACT
Full View Permalink