Next NDP leader needs a strong corporate tax plan

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support for as little as $5 per month!

Image: Flickr/Jeff Djevdet​

NDP leadership debates have so far been characterized by "violent agreement" on most issues. The main point of clash has been whether Old Age Security should be a universal benefit for all seniors or be phased out sooner for high-income seniors to redirect more support to the least fortunate. That clash has distracted from the more fundamental need for a fiscal plan to significantly improve social supports for seniors and other Canadians.

As we approach the second-last NDP leadership debate this weekend, let's recognize that all candidates support a combination of universal and means-tested benefits. Social democracy aims to reduce inequality by improving the overall benefit package. The last federal NDP platform featured substantial improvements such as childcare and pharmacare.

New Democrats were unable to campaign effectively on those progressive proposals because our platform lacked the revenues to pay for them. The key errors in 2015 were pledging to balance the budget immediately while restoring only two percentage points of corporate tax, edging the federal rate from 15 per cent up to just 17 per cent.

Fortunately, three of four leadership candidates committed months ago to strong corporate tax plans. The NDP would restore a federal rate of 19 per cent with Guy Caron, 19.5 per cent with Jagmeet Singh and 21 per cent with Niki Ashton.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates that each percentage point of federal corporate income tax collects $1.7 billion. Even allowing for a corresponding increase in the dividend tax credit and some behavioural response from corporations, the proposed rate increases would raise annual revenues by between $6 billion and $9 billion.

Liberal and Conservative corporate tax cuts -- from a federal rate of 29 per cent in 2000 to 15 per cent since 2012 -- have failed to boost business investment as a share of the economy. Instead, they have helped Canada's private non-financial corporations nearly quadruple their cash holdings from $130 billion in 2000 to $485 billion today. Our economy would be stronger if we at least partially reversed these tax breaks to reinvest some of this idle money in needed public services and infrastructure.

Yet a purported front-runner in the leadership race, Charlie Angus, has not proposed to change the corporate tax rate. His only specific revenue proposal is to increase the top personal tax rate by three percentage points on incomes over $250,000.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates that each percentage point of personal income tax over $200,000 collects $0.5 billion. Angus' call for an additional three per cent of an even more rarified income stratum could increase annual revenues by about a billion dollars -- a fraction of what should be raised on the corporate side and not nearly enough to meaningfully improve universal or targeted social supports.

Of course, taxing the highest incomes is an important way to fight growing inequality and the other NDP leadership candidates have also proposed to do so. But in terms of federal revenues, higher top personal income tax rates are no substitute for a higher general corporate tax rate.

With NDP members casting our leadership ballots next month, Angus needs to tell us how he would pay for any significant increase in social benefits. Would he run larger budget deficits than the Liberal government is already running? Does he have some other plan to raise revenue?

In the last federal election, Liberals overtook the NDP as the progressive alternative to Conservatives because the NDP did not put forward a fiscal plan to pay for ambitious improvements to public services and income supports. Our next leader must not repeat this mistake.

Erin Weir is the New Democratic MP for Regina–Lewvan.

Image: Flickr/Jeff Djevdet​

Like this article? rabble is reader-supported journalism. 

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable. has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.