Mark Milke: Dumping triple-digit sales taxes on food would help consumers

    1 of 1 2 of 1

      In the recent speech from the throne, the federal government announced a variety of initiatives but the one that drew much attention was its ostensible consumer-friendly tack.

      On some consumer issues, the Conservative government has the right instincts, promoting competition within the cellphone sector for example, even if its approach to the upcoming wireless spectrum auction is flawed.

      In other places, the Harper government’s predisposition is counter-productive.

      For instance, ponder the federal government’s desire to micromanage how airlines double-book seats.

      This government desire to direct is daft. Consumers who don’t like the risk of an overbooked flight can choose airlines which don’t engage in the practice; others might well be fine with the chance they will be bumped. Those consumers will happily take the flight vouchers offered and usually worth several hundred dollars in exchange for the inconvenience. This is not a matter Ottawa needs to regulate.

      More critically, the speech from the throne will do little to put downward pressure on the costs of the basic necessities of life—dairy and poultry products, for example. Those are still “protected” by both a government-created cartel system and by extremely high tariffs (i.e. taxes). When applied to basic foodstuffs, it means above-market prices result. That hurts poorer Canadians the most.

      Before detailing the federal government’s blind spot, however, let’s put some matters in perspective, starting with consumer reactions to visible taxes: consumers hate them.

      Examples abound. In 1991, taxpayers became ornery over the introduction of the Goods and Services Tax, even though, as a tax the then seven percent GST was far superior to the 13.5 percent hidden manufacturers’ export tax it replaced. (The older tax acted as a tax on Canadian exports, rather counterproductive if you’re trying to sell Canadian-made items to foreign buyers.)

      More recently in British Columbia, 881,198 voters, or almost 55 percent of those who cast a ballot, turfed the Harmonized Sales Tax in a 2011 provincial referendum, despite the fact that the HST was superior in design and function to the two taxes it replaced.

      But compared to the battles over the GST and HST, whopping import tariffs (i.e., taxes) designed to keep competition low and food prices high rarely garner much public ire because, unlike the GST or HST, tariffs are not visible on your bill at the till.

      Just look at some hidden tariffs on imported dairy products: yogurt, 238 percent; milk, 241 percent; cheese, 246 percent; skim milk powder, 270 percent; ice cream, 277 percent, and butter, 299 percent.

      As part of the planned Canada-European Union free trade agreement, the government signalled its intent to let in more tariff-free cheese from Europe, but this is hardly a dramatic reform; poorer consumers are not likely to buy imported French specialty cheese, though this could change if the doors to imports were thrown wide-open and dairy prices dropped.

      A more necessary, but ignored, reform in the dairy sector would allow open competition across the Canada-U.S. border, and even between provinces. Right now, even internal entry into the dairy market is restricted and quotas on supply are imposed through the Canadian Dairy Commission, a Crown corporation which chairs the Canadian Milk Supply Management Committee. The latter body has the power to set restrictive quotas on dairy production.

      Federal legislation to allow such cartel-like powers was only passed in 1966 so it is not as if there is some constitutional right to a cartel in cheese and milk.

      To help consumers, especially those with the lowest incomes, the federal government doesn’t need to micro-manage airline tickets. Nor does it need to concern itself with whether a cellphone company charges two bucks for a paper bill. It could, instead, focus on the big picture and repeal legislation and policies that block new entrants into a market and thus restrict the supply of products and services to consumers, the effect of which is usually above-market higher prices.

      The Conservative government may well intend to help consumers, but the best way would be to start killing the triple-digit taxes on imported dairy products, whether from the European Union, the United States, or anywhere else.

      Mark Milke is a senior fellow at the Fraser Institute and author of Tax Me I’m Canadian: A Taxpayer’s Guide to Your Money and How Politicians Spend It. This column was distributed by Troy Media.

      Comments

      1 Comments

      huh

      Oct 25, 2013 at 12:51pm

      I thought to the Fraser Institute was discredited long ago. Not so apparently. Oh, right I forgot. Canada hasn't been dismantled enough by neoliberal race-to-the-bottom policies delivered with a populist framing. Rather than prescribe supply side interventions that only further serve to undermine labour and small farmers in this country, how about addressing the underlying issues of why people find food increasingly expensive -- things like stagnant and declining real wages, income inequality, inadequate social assistance rates, accessible and adequate EI, and persistent poverty. Oh that's right, the Fraser Institute isn't in the business of addressing the root causes of the problem. They're in the business of helping out their corporate friends with neoliberal policies coated in populist rhetoric -- and intervening in ways that only further produce and entrench socio-economic inequality. Perhaps it's time to stop syndicating content from these idiots.

      0 0Rating: 0