See text below.
EXCERPTS
Re: 'In a quandary over child care' (editorial, March 23)
I take issue with one point in this otherwise excellent editorial about Prime Minister Stephen Harper's plans to cancel the child care agreements with the provinces and replace them with a per-child payment to families with kids under six.
The amount is not a tax credit. It is taxable income and because it's income, not only is it taxed, but it severely affects other refundable credits such as the Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB), the GST credit, and the Ontario Child Care Supplement for Working Families. It also results in higher OHIP premiums.
A study done by the Caledon Institute of Social Policy during the election should raise a red flag. That study showed that for an average family earning $36,000, the proposed return of the Family Allowance -- which is what this really is -- would not mean $1,200 a year. It would only be $388 after other amounts were clawed back. That's $32.33 a month.
…
I would prefer to see the current agreements respected. If Harper does not want to do that, there is a simple way to pay out the money -- and he does not have to create a separate system.
He can simply enhance the currently existing [Canadian Child Tax Benefit], the program that replaced the Family Allowance during the 1990s and has proven to work. By adding $1,200 to the base amount, he would bring the maximum payout per year for children under seven -- not six -- to $4,626 starting this July.
…
There are ways to help out children. Making the "Choice in Child Care" amount taxable as Harper wants punishes our kids, it does not help them.
- reprinted from the Hamilton Spectator