Child Care – A Taxing Issue?

While child care policy has been the subject of many governmental inquiries and much lobbying activity during the past twenty years. little substantive progress has been made towards implementing comprehensive state funding for child care. State funding of child care in Canada is currently primarily limited to the federal income tax system. It is provided through section 63 of the Income Tax Act, which allows a limited deduction to be made from earned income. The author reviews the current deduction for child care and examines its limitations. She also demonstrates how the income tax system as a whole discriminates against women, particularly against women with lower incomes. This discrimination within the taxation context reinforces the overall invisibility and devaluation of child care. The system fails to ameliorate the continuing disproportionate impact that the child care provision has on Canadian women. The author discusses the 1993 Supreme Court of Canada decision in Symes, which drew further attention to this issue. The appellant taxpayer did not succeed in her attempt to claim child care expenses as a business expense deduction beyond the restricted child care deduction. A five-judge majority of the Supreme Court held that section 63 of the Income Tax Act is a comprehensive provision that precludes the additional deduction of child care costs. The author uses Symes to illustrate some of the negative consequences of using the tax system to subsidize child care, but concludes that despite these limitations, there is a role for the tax system to play. The author believes that, in the face of judicial and political reality, the tax system will remain the primary source of government funding. It is argued that the tax system could, and should, use a fairer and more efficient subsidy than that which is now provided. A framework is proposed for a new child care tax subsidy intended to replace the current deduction: a refundable tax credit, an accelerated capital cost allowance for expenditures on child care facilities, and zero-rating of child care for the purposes of the Goods and Services Tax. Given the recent political withdrawal from a more.comprehensive federal child care policy, a tax provision that is as equitable as possible may be the most effective mechanism for improving the affordability and accessibility of child care services in Canada

Women, Tax and Social Programs: The Gendered Impact of Funding Social Programs Through the Tax System

This study examines the impact on women of funding social programs through the tax system. It does so using the framework of tax expenditure analysis, which allows one to view any departure from the normative tax system (i.e., those basic rules, such as the tax rate and the tax unit, that comprise the revenue-raising part of the system) as a spending measure. The analysis also takes into account the socio-economic realities of women’s lives and concludes that many tax measures that are subsidies in respect of social programs do not benefit women to the same extent that they benefit men. Tax measures explored include the child care expense deduction, the Canada Child Tax Benefit, tax subsidies for retirement saving, the disability tax credit and tax relief for caregivers. The conclusion is that in many instances women have less access to these tax subsidies and, often, the amount they receive is less than the amount that men receive. The study concludes with a list of issues that should be considered by those involved in the tax policy process in order to ensure that women are not disadvantaged in comparison to men when tax subsidies are used to fund social programs

Tax and the Family: The Gendered Impact of Rules that Take Spousal Status into Account for Tax Purposes

This chapter deals with the gendered impact of tax rules that take spousal status into account. The analysis is in three parts: (1) a review of some recent developments leading to the inclusion of same-sex couples as common law partners for tax purposes in Canada; (2) a consideration of the government’s political interest in taking familial or spousal relationships into account for tax purposes; and (3) a review of particular tax rules taking spousal status into account. After asking whether these tax rules can continue to be justified, the author concludes that we should consider eliminating all reference to spousal and common law relationships from Canada’s Income Tax Act (ITA). For example, some rules have a gendered impact, one that frequently discriminates without good reason against women and in favour of men. Others are inherently flawed and poorly targeted so that they do not achieve their policy goals. Some rules can be critiqued on the basis that they are simply part of the neo-liberal privatization agenda that encourages individuals to rely on the private family for their economic security and they exclude those not in spousal or common law relationships from a variety of important benefits delivered by the tax system

(In)Visible Inequalities: Women, Tax and Poverty

The issue of the impact of the Income Tax Act on women has been the focus of two recent section 15 Charter challenges heard by the Supreme Court of Canada. In Symes v. Canada the majority of the Court found that the non-deductibility as a business expense of child care expenses was not discriminatory on the basis of sex and in Thibaudeau v. Canada the majority held that the requirement that child support payments be included in income did not discriminate on the basis of family status. Given that the tax system is used to deliver financial subsidies for many social and economic programs, access to those subsidies by women and minorities is a key issue in considering the fairness of the system. This article examines the impact of the tax system on women and demonstrates that the tax system is replete with examples of unequal treatment of women compared to men. While recognising that any form of categorisation is problematic, the author focuses the inequalities faced by four groups of women; poor women, elderly women, lesbians and mothers. In light of Symes and Thibaudeau, the author considers the effectiveness of the Charter as a tool by which to redress these inequalities and discusses why a Charter challenge is unlikely to succeed. Further, the author concludes that even if changes are made to the tax system, it may never be an effective tool by which to deliver social programs in a fair manner. It may be time to shift the focus from a litigation based strategy to redress the inequalities discussed in the article to an approach that focuses more on the political sphere

What’s Sex Got to Do with it? Tax and the ‘Family’

In this paper the author analyses the taxation rules that recognise spousal and family relationships. She notes that even though we file income tax returns as individuals, the federal Income Tax Act recognises spousal and familial relationships for many different purposes, thereby undermining the integrity of the principle of the individual as the tax unit. She observes that Parliament has responded over the years to the ever-changing demographics of “family” life in Canada by amending references in the Act to spousal and other family relationships. For example, the meaning of “spouse” has been expanded to become more inclusive. Most recently, with Bill C-23 the Act would be amended to treat lesbian and gay couples in the same manner as heterosexual common-law couples. In spite of the many changes made, however, a fundamental policy question remains to be considered: is it appropriate for income tax laws to be concerned with spousal and other family relationships? The author tackles this question by examining whether any of the rules that are based on spousal or familial relationships could be removed from the Act and whether those that should remain ought to be reconfigured to make them more fair in their application. Her enquiry takes into account the underlying purposes of the tax system and the basic tenets of tax policy enquiry, as well as examining the impact of the respective tax provisions on different taxpayers from an “equality” perspective. The paper tracks the legislative history of some of the key tax rules involving spousal and family relationships. It classifies and critiques each rule by reference to the tax policy rationales behind the rule. Among the rules considered are the attribution rules, which are intended to stop income splitting between spouses and between adults and minor children. The author concludes that more empirical research is needed on the potential consequences of eliminating these rules before a recommendation to retain or repeal them can be made. The author does recommend the repeal of rules based on dependency, including the spousal tax credit and the ability to transfer unused tax credits to a spouse. Provisions based on economic mutuality are also assessed, both those that result in less or more tax payable by the taxpayer. The author finds that some of these rules should be retained because they do serve valid objectives, however others such as the inclusion/deduction system for spousal support payments are indefensible. This paper provides the first comprehensive review of the federal tax rules that take spousal and family relationships into account. Other scholarly analyses of tax rules related to spousal and family relationships have framed the issue in terms of whether spouses should be taxed as individuals or as a joint unit. However, this paper explores the more fundamental question – whether it is appropriate to recognise spousal and family relationships for any purpose in the Act – and the author finds that in many instances, but not all, rules taking these relationships into account cannot be justified and should be removed from the Act

From Same-Sex to No Sex ?: Trends Towards Recognition of (Same-Sex) Relationships in Canada

This article questions the terms on which groups that have traditionally been treated as other in modern societies (e.g. lesbians and gay men) are eventually included into the dominant system. It also reveals why the terms of this inclusion may result in the diminishing of the radical potential of the othered group in relation to social transformation. In turn, the dominant system may be reinforced even as it extends its citizenship to those who did not formerly belong. In this article, we explore this perplexing difficulty through a case study of the trends towards legal recognition of same-sex partnerships in Canada. We seek also to broaden the terms of the debate about recognition, which often focuses on marriage, particularly in the United States. The question arises whether there is space in the current political climate to discuss whether or not marriage was the key political goal of the lesbian/gay community. Many strong voices have been raised against the obviousness of the strategy of seeking inclusion within the family or marriage, and the implications of this strategy. Many of those voices have been lesbians and lesbian feminists. It is our view that this closing down of space for discussion of strategies that do not focus on marriage or spousal recognition as an end in itself is problematic. Drawing on critical literature on the family, we work from a position that recognizes that marriage, and perhaps family law itself, has a history that is deeply interconnected with relations of oppression both within families and within society. We should all be familiar with, and keep in mind, the ways in which marriage has operated to reproduce women\u27s dependency and inequality. Furthermore, in Canada, marriage has provided a mechanism for the imposition of patriarchal and oppressive norms on Aboriginal communities, with particular consequences for Aboriginal women. Even the family law reforms of the past three decades, which have sought to ameliorate women\u27s status within marriage and their economic inequality at marriage breakdown, are arguably stop-gap measures that camouflage the continuing negative consequences of marriage for many women. Why, then, we ask, is not just spousal recognition, but also marriage, so clearly back on the political agenda for gays and lesbians, not only in the United States, where common law relationships have not received as much legal recognition, but also in Canada where they have? What political dilemmas does this development pose for critical thinkers and lesbians and gay men who are committed to social justice? Our goals in this article are threefold: 1. To describe the recent multi-fold Canadian developments, mainly in relation to recognition of same-sex partners as spouses. These have taken a somewhat different trajectory than the American ones and may accordingly raise somewhat different questions. 2. To identify and question the terms on which these developments are occurring, and what tends to be left out of the discussion. In this part, we focus on the neo-liberal political climate of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries; this in turn leads to the privatizing and individualizing consequences of legal recognition of intimate relationships. 3. To play on our own ambivalence about spousal recognition strategies in order to open new avenues of thought

Feminism, Law, and Public Policy: Family Feuds and Taxing Times

This article offers a retrospective analysis of feminist research on tax and family law and developments in these fields since the early 1980s. We identify the sometimes contradictory trends-both in legislation and in case law-that raise questions about the influence that feminist research has had on these areas of law. We then flag some ongoing challenges confronting feminists engaged in law reform efforts. Some common themes will emerge, but notable differences are also evident in the ways that feminist thought has played out in tax and family law

Feminism, Law, and Public Policy: Family Feuds and Taxing Times

This article offers a retrospective analysis of feminist research on tax and family law and developments in these fields since the early 1980s. We identify the sometimes contradictory trends-both in legislation and in case law-that raise questions about the influence that feminist research has had on these areas of law. We then flag some ongoing challenges confronting feminists engaged in law reform efforts. Some common themes will emerge, but notable differences are also evident in the ways that feminist thought has played out in tax and family law

Losing the Feminist Voice? Debates on the Legal Recognition of Same Sex Partnerships in Canada

Over the last decade, legal recognition of same-sex relationships in Canada has accelerated. By and large, same-sex cohabitants are now recognised in the same manner as opposite-sex cohabitants, and same-sex marriage was legalised in 2005. Without diminishing the struggle that lesbians and gay men have endured to secure this somewhat revolutionary legal recognition, this article troubles its narrative of progress. In particular, we investigate the terms on which recent legal struggles have advanced, as well as the ways in which resistance to the legal recognition has been expressed and dealt with. We argue that to the extent that feminist critiques of marriage, familial ideology, and the privatisation of economic responsibility are marginalised, conservative and heteronormative discourses on marriage and family are reinforced. Our case studies include two pivotal moments in the quest for legislative recognition of same-sex relationships: the Hearings of the Canadian House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights on Bill C-23, The Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act, in 2000 and the hearings on Same-Sex Marriage in 2003. We find that the debates operated within a narrow paradigm that bolstered many existing hierarchies and exacerbated conditions for those who are economically disadvantaged