Taxed to Death - A summary of NDP’s new taxes

[misher]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

[citation needed]

https://vpfinance.ubc.ca/files/2018/...ing_Budget.pdf

Math below may be faulty as its been a while but I'll try my best.
UBC's operating budget shows government funding at $631 million and tuition at $667 million. About 25% of enrollment is international. International students pay about 6x more for tuition.

Assuming government funding increases with domestic enrollment (which is unlikely) this means that 75% of enrollment=631 million+(3/9)(667)=$853 million. International students therefore account for $445 million in funding.

853/3=$284.33 million.
445/284.33=156.5%
So each international student benefits UBC at least 56.5% more than a domestic student. This assumes the government would increase funding if more domestic students joined and doesn't include the revenue they also make from dormitories.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Certainly a posibility, as the article points out that is the "norm" in Canada:

...B.C. remains one of the few destinations in Canada in which international students are enrolled in public health care; Ontario, Quebec (with exceptions for some countries of origin), Manitoba, Prince Edward Island, Yukon and Northwest Territories – comprising 65% of international students with study permits in Canada – do not extend public health care insurance to international students. Only Saskatchewan and New Brunswick unconditionally enrol international students in public health care. Meanwhile, Alberta, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Nunavut provide health care for students in or beyond their second year of studies. These six other jurisdictions represent only 11.3% of the study permits currently issued in Canada while B.C. accounts for just under one quarter....

https://biv.com/article/2019/08/4000...th-care-system

That is odd, and I could have sworn that most international students in BC had UHIP style coverage mandated in their enrolment fees. Surprised it took this long for someone to realize this problem existed and close the loophole.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by theman23

That is odd, and I could have sworn that most international students in BC had UHIP style coverage mandated in their enrolment fees. Surprised it took this long for someone to realize this problem existed and close the loophole.

Probably had something to do with BC switching from user-pay MSP Premiums to making employers pay an Employer Health Tax.

[whatnext]

A December survey shows support for the Speculation Tax and Foreign Buyers Tax remains strong, even where you might not expect it:

Poll finds broad support for B.C. speculation, foreign-buyer’s taxes
By Mario Canseco | January 2, 2020, 6:00am

...One of the seemingly controversial decisions by the provincial government was the design and introduction of a “speculation tax” in specific urban areas targeting foreign and domestic homeowners who pay little or no income tax in British Columbia, and those who own second properties that are not long-term rentals.

In December, three in four British Columbians (76%) agreed with the speculation tax – an eight-point increase since we last looked at this issue in March 2019. Majorities in all five regions of the province are in favour of this decision, including 75% in Metro Vancouver, 76% in Vancouver Island, 78% in southern B.C., 80% in the Fraser Valley and 82% in Northern B.C.

There was some thought that the speculation tax would be popular with supporters of the BC NDP and the BC Green Party, and disheartening for those who voted for the BC Liberals. Our tracking work has shown that this is simply not true. While the level of agreement with the “speculation tax” is highest among BC NDP voters from 2017 (86%), it stands at 75% with those who supported either the BC Liberals or the BC Greens.

The foreign-buyer’s tax that was created by the BC Liberals and came into force in August 2016 also went through some changes once a new administration landed in Victoria. The current provincial government’s decision to increase the foreign-buyer’s tax from 15% to 20% is regarded as a positive move by 77% of British Columbians. The same proportion (77%) also endorses the expansion of this tax to areas located outside of Metro Vancouver....(bold mine)

https://biv.com/article/2020/01/poll...n-buyers-taxes