Rahim Jaffer when he was an MP in Alberta. Photograph by Shaughn Butts/Canwest News Service
Try as I might, I can’t quite wrap my head around this Jane Taber entry about Rahim Jaffer. I mean, on the surface it sounds absolutely dreadful, of course, but the headline doesn’t particularly fit the content, does it?
The headline reads: First a plea bargain, now a tax break for Rahim Jaffer
The article goes on to say that even after Rahim Jaffer got his little $500 break on what was, in actuality, a bust for drunk driving while speeding and in possession of cocaine, the former MP is eligible to write off his $500 charitable donation on his taxes.
But insofar as I can see from Taber’s article, nothing of the sort has been done. Yet.
What Mr.Jaffer did do is make a gesture of good faith by submitting a voluntary donation of $500 to the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. So he was playing with the optics of trying to compensate for the negative public perception that he got off easy, by reaching a little deeper into his wallet. It was something he was, however, under no obligation to do.
Since the donation was voluntary, Taber writes, it means that Mr. Jaffer is eligible for a tax receipt.
Well, whoopee. Those are the rules of charitable donations. This is more a case of logical deduction than it is a piece of journalism.
According to Canadian Taxpayers Federation federal director Kevin Gaudet, if Mr. Jaffer claims the $500 donation on his taxes, it should reduce his declared income by about $145.
But until we see evidence that Mr.Jaffer is claiming the donation on his taxes, this is nothing but an observation, and an assumption that he will engage in this future unethical act. Since he made the donation in order to symbolically acknowledge wrong-doing, it would, of course, not look so good to use that donation to get the tiny tax break for 2011. But unless Taber has a time machine, the only thing Mr.Jaffer is guilty of is being unpopular.
Maybe Jane Taber should fess up about all her charitable donations that she is going to get a tax break for. What a non-issue from a really lefty reporter.
Jane Taber is feeding her following of Harper Haters. She is in a competition with Kady O Malley in fabricating stories to bash the conservatives with. They have a following of Harper Haters and the G+M and CBC appear to be encouraging these women to push the boundaries of truth.
We have to stop clicking on their stories, as CBC and CTV are counting.
Fife, Clark and Travers were over the top last night in CPC bashing on PEE PEE. Set the bar pretty high for themselves.
BTW, in looking at Travers’ nose, it looks like Iggy must have must have stopped suddenly.
If it is a melanoma, I apologize.
Taber has become the queen of Harper-haters, but she should watch her back, as Kady is younger and more photogenic – their upcoming thrash match will be fun to see – journalism is now the victim, as the pummelling and piling on continues
I consider her a gossip columnists, she doesn’t seem to adhere to any professional standards? What’s next from MSM demanding that Conservative people should be devoid of tax deductions?
First of all, donating to a charity will NEVER lower one’s declared income by a penny. Charitable donations fall under the ‘non-refundable tax credits’ and vary by province. These cause a reduction in taxes payable, NOT income.
Federally (Schedule 1), a donation of $500 gives a credit of $117.00 calculated as 15% of the first $200 plus 29% of the remainder above $200. So you get $30 credit for the first $200 and $87 for the remaining $300 for a total non-refundable tax credit of $117. Provincially, it depends very much on the province. Alberta gives a credit of 10% on the first $200 and 21% for donations above that amount. B C’s percentages are 5.06 and 14.7 respectively.
Secondly, Mr Jaffer may not be the one to declare this donation; it may be his wife. Because the first $200 donation in a given year gets a lower tax credit than the amounts above that (Alberta – 25% vs 50%), it is generally advantageous for a couple to pool their charitable receipts so one person gets the whole credit. So it may be Ms Guergis who reaps the benefit of this donation.
Setting aside the general stupidity of the article, is behoves Ms Taber to get her facts straight. And I’m not impressed that someone from the Canadian Taxpayers’ Association is so ignorant, either.
GarfieldNo Gravatar says:
March 18, 2010 at 3:18 am
Fife, Clark and Travers were over the top last night in CPC bashing on PEE PEE. Set the bar pretty high for themselves.
Actually it struck me as odd how much Robert Fife appeared to disagree with Travesty and actually defend the Conservatives. In fact, he sounded so miserable doing it that I think he might have been following orders, just to make it look like a ‘balanced’ discussion. Strange…
What a non-story.
Why is anyone focusing on a tax receipt for a donation rather than finding out who screwed up so badly that the crown ends up handing down a mere $500 fine after a man is caught driving while impaired and in possession of cocaine?
A globe and mail columnist should know better.