Canada has implemented a new tax savings from December to February for some things like taxable groceries, crafts, and gaming physical media. I wanted to get a new Xbox controller and found the best price at Walmart for $55 a week ago. The tax holiday starts today and I now see that the $55 has increased to $62 and change, which is about how much tax I should be saving. Great to see this thinly veiled attempt to help Canadians ( /s - win votes) is just going to be extra profit in the corporations’ pockets.

  • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 day ago

    This is exactly what the “Taxation is theft” morons don’t understand. They think if the government no longer takes their cut, everybody will just have X amount of money more, and the market won’t just swallow that up without giving you a single thing in return.

    • Pavel Chichikov@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      that’s the thing that pisses me off: the tax often increases the perception of how much people are willing to spend. even if you remove or decrease the tax, the companies just inflate the price to fatten their margins. Rule #1 of capitalism: the consumer always loses.

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    Is that legal? (Am American - idk about Canadian legal strictures around that, but it definitely feels like it’d run afoul of some sort of consumer protection legislation or something like that)

  • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I am just really glad none of the crap I sell is included. The list and logistics to comply with this “holiday” is insane.

    Lets say you run a liquor store:

    • Beer, cider, sake and wine are now not taxed
    • But wine, cider and sake over 22.9% is still taxed
    • Spirit coolers and premixed alcoholic beverages are now not taxed
    • Spirit coolers and premixed alcoholic beverages over 7% are still taxed
    • Gift boxes/baskets are taxed
    • Unless those boxes/baskets have more then 90% the value in beverages that meet the tax holiday requirements

    This is not even opening the other categories (Oh don’t even think about child car seat/strollers). The cost of this program on stores and taxpayers (the cost of it is payed by the lack of tax and also the tax collected being diverted to this program) is not worth the 5% off some people will see (since most places will just up the price 5%).

    Edit: and as the radio just pointed out this is a tax break on mostly luxury goods so it only really helps the people who don’t need the help. (the example given was a dinner party would be 5% cheaper but a single parent’s heat is not).

    • UmeU@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      It would cost thousands in labor to set up temporary tax rates based on alcohol content. Most systems have tax rates which apply to product categories, not alcohol content. Liquor store pos systems in the US, at least in my state, typically don’t even store the abv in the price book, which would make this taxation virtually impossible to comply with.

      • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Yeap, this is Canada where stuff like this is rolled out in a month or so and businesses are just told to comply.

        (Oh and those examples are from the Canada.ca official list not hyperbole)

        Edit: it also comes with a friendly threat!

        "Make a reasonable effort to comply

        Businesses who make reasonable efforts to comply with the legislation will not be the focus of our compliance actions.

        We will be focusing on situations where businesses willfully and egregiously refuse to comply with the temporary measures, such as a business that collects the GST/HST and does not remit it to the CRA."

        • UmeU@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Crazy, they’re basically saying, ‘we know this is impossible so just do your best, as long as you remit everything you collect then it doesn’t really matter what/how you collect’.

          This is very unfair to the small business because inevitably there will be some customers who will be pissed off when the store doesn’t collect properly, and small business won’t even come close to doing it correctly.

          Making temporary short term massive changes to taxation is a very dumb idea. Canada must be drinking uncle Sam’s koolaid to be acting this foolish.

          • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            18 hours ago

            Most people don’t even care and did not know this even started, its just another failed attempt of the current government to gain support.

            This one is extra silly, but the silver lining is that it has got people of drastically different political viewpoints something to agree on. You could have a talk show with the most rabid pundits from opposite sides discuss this and the only arguments would be what the worst part of this plan is.

            There is also another component to this as well, everyone is supposed to get $250 in the mail (or direct deposit). And that’s also just bad tax policy that has been made fun of in the past. On top of that they have not managed to actually pass legislation or even figured out how to do this at this point. Oh and the post office is still on strike.

    • Nik282000@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      The time that product spends on the shelves of a Canadian Tire is just a layover before its permanent move to a landfill. They are Coors quality at Heineken prices.

      • Mushroomm@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        I bought a Husqvarna chainsaw from Canadian tire and it was garbage. I thought I was getting the same one my buddy got (he got his at the local kubota). Turns out Husqvarna just licenses out their name for the right price. It was a garbage chainsaw with orange plastic and the sticker was even upside down.

  • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    148
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Kroger (grocery store) is doing the same thing this week. They’re doing a 20% off “holiday bonus” discount on a one per-customer basis (20% off your entire order). The catch? Every item in the store is at least 20% more expensive than it was last week.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 days ago

      I don’t buy soda often but fuck I’m tired of their soda sales. Buy 2 get 1 free on 12 packs. (9.99) A piece. Then 1 week out of the month or so they are buy 2 get 3 free. Still 9.99 a 12 pack.
      So that’s:

      9.99 for 12 cans. (.83 cents per can) 19.98 for 36 cans (.56 cents per can) 19.98 for 60 cans (.33 cents per can)

      I really don’t need 60 cans of soda, but I don’t want to pay .83 cents per can. So all it’s done is make me stop buying soda all together for the most part.

      It can’t be coke doing it either, because it goes for “all Coke, Pepsi, and Dr. Pepper products”

      • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        As someone who somehow managed to never get hooked on drinking soda, it baffles me how expensive soda is

  • Kichae@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    2 days ago

    Seems like an opportunity to use this in attack PP’s tax-cut rhetoric, and to attack the oft-repeated talking points from business that tax increases will be passed on to consumers.

    Tax cuts are eaten by businesses, so long as the businesses believe that people will continue to buy. Tax increases will also be eaten by businesses, so long as the businesses believe that people will refuse to buy at a higher price. It’s all being taken by or from shareholders.

    It’s a shame no political entities will actually touch this with anything more pointed or useful than “that’s appalling!”

    • Wispy2891@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 days ago

      In Italy when the government reduced vat on ebooks from 22% to 4% not a single publisher passed the savings to the customer and they even increased the prices

    • nexusband@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      Name one. Price hikes are not illegal in any country in Europe. Changing prices after selling and other shady stuff is illegal in most European countries on the other hand, but this is not it. If the 55 were on sale before, a “sale” price can be axed as most see fit. This screams coincidence and bad luck to me.

      • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        It should be illegal for any store to increase prices by more than 0.5% per month for any product in my opinion.

        Even if massive inflation hits they can still increase prices by 6% after a year, but they at least won’t be able to immediately increase prices by 10-20% after taxes are lessened or a month before a sale is supposed to start.

        • wolfpack86@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          All this will do is create a black market full of scalpers who are incentivized to buy the entire stock of a good if the market is willing to pay significantly more.

        • desktop_user
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          whatbif it’s a cash only store that wants all post-tax price to be integers or integers + quarters?

    • masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      That’s not really relevant. A break in sales tax that just targets consumer necessities should be a progressive tax.

      The problem is that a lack of competition in this country means that grocers can raise their prices with no fear of losing customers

      • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        It doesn’t matter how much competition there is of they’re all going to do it anyway.

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          It does. Competition is literally the only mechanism that drives greedy actors to lower prices or improve their service. Without competition they hoarde.

            • masterspace@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              No I didn’t, price control laws don’t work. Companies will find another way of maximizing profits and screwing you.

              • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                “only the market can fix this”

                Gestures broadly at the market

                Multiple competitors just results in them all agreeing to raise prices when taxes are lowered.

                Out of curiosity, how do you propose increasing the number of competitors? Or is this a situation of “gee, that would be nice. Oh well, I guess nothing can be done.”?

                • masterspace@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Multiple competitors just results in them all agreeing to raise prices when taxes are lowered.

                  Price signalling happens in situations with low competition, in a healthy, competitive market, if you raises prices someone will undercut you to take your business.

                  Out of curiosity, how do you propose increasing the number of competitors? Or is this a situation of “gee, that would be nice. Oh well, I guess nothing can be done.”?

                  You literally just break up grocery store companies and stop them from merging in the future. The solution is not complicated.

  • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    3 days ago

    Reminds me when Alberta reduced the tax on gas, and within a few weeks consumers were paying the same amount again

    • Chip_Rat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      2 days ago

      Ontario did this too. Took a few weeks tops, and now we pay the same as we always have, except none of the money goes to our roads, just to big oil.

      Thanks Ford.

      • whoisearth@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 days ago

        I laugh because he keeps extending it too and I sure and shit bet he will extend it again so the next government to come in has a poison pill in killing his gas rebate effectively raising the price of gas drastically overnight.

        This is 100% intentional by the OPC. Bunch of fuckwits.

    • Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 days ago

      Betcha you get reminded again when Canada sweeps the cons in because cArBOn tax and then we pay the same by Monday for everything.

  • vortic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    3 days ago

    I don’t say any of this to say that I think what Walmart is doing here is ethical, onky to say that it is logical from their standpoint if they assume there won’t be any blowback.

    Companies charge what they think they can get for a product. The tax is part of the price. If they think an item will sell for $5.26 including tax, it is reasonable for them to think it will still sell for $5.26 if the item isn’t taxed.

    That isn’t to say this is nice on their part, but the current system doesn’t incentivise them to be nice. It incentivises profit.

    It does seem like they took the easy route to gain more profit. It is likely that, in the a absence of tax, their profit would be maximized by a price that is somewhere between the old pre-tax price and the old post-tax price.

    • CascadianGiraffe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Working behind the scenes with retail pricing (not Walmart) I can say this is 100% how it works.

      Also have been given a sheet listing all of my department’s products that were below a specific profit margin. Told that we had a sale coming in 2 weeks so make sure to raise prices on those before then so that I didn’t have a drop in my overall department sales. If the customers noticed and asked, we were to inform them the ‘sale’ was to offset the price hike that just happened because we were looking out for them.

    • eezeebee@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      3 days ago

      Yeah, I shouldn’t have been surprised. This is normal psychopathic behaviour for a corporation.

  • Windex007@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    3 days ago

    Might be betraying my age here, but do you remember when GST was 7%? EXACTLY the same thing happened.

    GST breaks strictly pad the revenues of business AT THE COST of funds to the public purse. Does a fat fucking zero to the wallets of consumers.

  • SkyNTP@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    3 days ago

    All prices are set based on what consumers are willing to pay.

    The only way prices ever go down is by exercising a decision not to buy something or to go somewhere for an item.

    It will not come from the government, unless the government mandates a specific rate.

    • IzzyScissor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      3 days ago

      They could also provide the cheaper alternative, generating revenue for the government, providing goods at a discount and forcing corporations to match prices.

      Like that’ll happen, though.

    • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      This is why sales tax is silly unless it’s purposefully punitive. Like with cigarettes.

      If they want to give back to consumers, then literally give money to consumers.

      • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        I think it depends on the area. Places like Florida did well with sales taxes because they have large amounts of tourism. So they can have no state income tax, and no tax on groceries, yet make enough in taxes to do everything else they need. That said, sales tax is 6% from the state, and areas boost it based on other needs. .5% for teachers and .5% for local infrastructure was what I grew up with.

        Now living in Tennessee taxes are 10% and they charge it on groceries here… which kind of sucks. I wish stores would just include the tax on the sticker. When running on a budget I really don’t want to be saying 6.99 okay that’s 7.69 in my head and have to keep track while figuring out what I can afford to eat that week.