Group items tagged

The surplus narrowed in February, on lower exports of crude petroleum and cars, from a revised $382-million, Statistics Canada said Tuesday. Economists polled by Bloomberg had expected a surplus of $500-million.

Both imports and exports fell. Exports tumbled 4.9 per cent after four straight months of growth while imports slid 4 per cent.

Import volumes, meanwhile, fell 4.3 per cent while prices rose 0.2 per cent. Again, most of the drop was due to lower volumes in autos and energy. Exports to the United States fell 3.5 per cent after four months in a row of growth. Imports fell 6.1 per cent, leaving the surplus at $4.6-billion. Exports to countries other than the United States fell 8.5 per cent amid lower shipments of precious metals to the European Union. Energy exports fell 8 per cent, led by a drop in crude “reflecting higher inventories in the United States,” the agency said. That follows a 71-per-cent increase in crude exports from September to January.

even the government’s own report shows that Canadian imports (of both goods and services) from the EU will increase by twice as much as Canadian exports to the EU, substantially widening the existing bilateral trade deficit.

exports grew less rapidly with FTA partners than with non-FTA partners, but imports grew quicker with FTA partners than with non-FTA partners. 

In the real world, free trade agreements (not surprisingly) tend to make existing trade imbalances even worse: this is true throughout economics, where deregulation generally tends to exacerbate the imbalances and unevenness of market outcomes.

Three scenarios are presented: one in which tariffs are mutually eliminated; one in which EU-Canada trade expands in line with the historical experience of Canada’s previous FTAs; and one in which tariff elimination is combined with the appreciation of Canada’s currency (versus the euro) which has been experienced in fact since the two parties launched free trade negotiations.  In every case, the bilateral trade balance worsens significantly (and in the third scenario, it worsens dramatically – since the higher Canadian dollar reduces Canadian exports, even as imports from the EU are surging).  Based on average employment intensity across 23 goods-producing industries, the simulations suggest an incremental loss of between 28,000 jobs (in the first scenario) and 150,000 jobs (in the third).  Direct losses in Canadian GDP range between 0.56 percent in the first scenario, and almost 3 percent in the third.

A free trade agreement with the EU will exacerbate Canada’s existing large bilateral deficit, at the expense of output and employment in many important sectors of the economy. 

Bottom line: Despite genuinely booming imports, trade flows still kept dragging down America’s growth and employment performance, and still kept boosting the country’s debt burden.  Do these trends really deserve the label “recovery”?

Indeed, the gap between richer and poorer regions is likely to widen in many countries as the public-spending axe falls. Nowhere will this effect be more striking than in Britain. Cities in the north and Wales are much more dependent on public-sector jobs and welfare benefits than cities in the south.

Putting in place restrictions on executive bonuses, taxing financial transactions and corporate profits does little to mitigate the flawed incentives that have led to exuberant financial booms. A genuine solution would consist of eliminating bailout guarantees to the banking sector, thus reducing the existing incentives for gambling with other people’s money.

the rise of cheap imports from countries such as China and new forms of large-scale retailing, epitomized by Wal-Mart and Sears, which have given the low-income groups access to goods that previously were enjoyed only by the rich. In terms of the actual material conditions of living, developed countries appear to be more equal than ever before.

growth of executive remuneration in the financial industry cannot be dissociated from a cozy relationship that has long existed between policymakers and bankers

And food-importing countries that secured supplies, quickly started to hoard them in anticipation that more food exporters would decide to keep their crops at home.

“to maintain social stability and promote economic development”.

We will not give in to Opposition demands to impose

This reckless policy would lead to continuing deficits and higher taxes on all Canadians. It would stall our recovery, kill hundreds of thousands of jobs and set families back.

We need to keep protecting and creating jobs now

Keeping taxes low A key part of that foundation is low taxes.

Our tax cuts are also helping employers to invest, grow and create jobs.

Our government will take further action to encourage them to expand and create jobs.

The Hiring Credit for Small Business will provide a one-year EI break for some 525,000 Canadian small businesses

Expanding international trade Beyond this, we will promote new export opportunities for all Canadian businesses

We will provide greater financial security for Canadians, and practical help to make ends meet.

Canada’s rate (at this moment, 27 per cent).

As Canada trimmed, the world trimmed, too: 75 countries aggressively cut corporate tax rates in the past decade. China’s corporate tax rate is 20 per cent – discounted to 15 per cent for companies that invest in strategically important industries.

combined federal-provincial statutory tax rate of 25 per cent, won’t

The “Bowles-Simpson Plan,” proposed by President Barack Obama’s commission on fiscal reform, suggests a federal rate of 28 per cent. The Wyden-Gregg Plan, proposed by Democratic and Republican legislators, suggests 24 per cent. The China-OECD Plan, advanced by the non-partisan U.S. Tax Foundation, suggests 20 per cent

These rates are federal rates and don’t include corporate rates levied by the states: nominally, on average, 6.6 per cent; in fact, on average, 4.2 per cent. Thus a U.S. federal rate of 20 per cent (the China-OECD Plan) would produce a comprehensive “America rate” of 24.2 per cent

Canada’s goal assumed an “America rate” of 39.3 per cent: a competitive advantage for Canada of 14.3 percentage points.

when you add the federal rate and the average provincial rate (19 plus 12.5), you have a “Canada rate” of 31.5 per cent – the fourth-highest rate in the world: and twice as high as China’s most competitive rate.

The Conservative government took a lot of heat for incrementally lowering Canada’s corporate tax rate.