Canadian Law of Work Forum (CLWF)
  • Home
  • About
    • Professor David Doorey
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Submissions
  • Student Blog Initiative
  • Home
  • About
    • Professor David Doorey
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Submissions
  • Student Blog Initiative
Canadian Law of Work Forum (CLWF)
Law of Work Archive

Do Corporate Tax Cuts Create Jobs?

by David Doorey April 7, 2011
written by David Doorey April 7, 2011

Federal elections are usually less interesting from a workplace law perspective than provincial elections for the simple fact that 90% of workers are governed by provincial law in Canada. That makes workplace law a less important factor in political debates at the Federal level. But occasionally employment-related issues rise to the service in Federal campaigns. This year, that issue relates to the competing claims of politicians about the benefits and harms of corporate tax cuts on employment levels. This debate demonstrates yet again how economics is used and misused by politicians in support of political platforms, a theme I have discussed over and over again over the years.
Canada’s major newspapers have weighed in on the corporate tax debate in recent days:
Here is a Toronto Star piece.
Here is the National Post piece.
And here is a Globe and Mail piece, and another Globe column by Jeffrey Simpson.
If anything is clear from these stories, it is that there is considerable doubt among economists that corporate tax cuts create jobs or even cause employers to invest more in their Canadian operations.  Jeffrey Simpson of the Globe notes that, according to the OECD (hardly a left-wing bastion), there is no discernible  link between corporate tax rates and unemployment levels in the advanced economic countries.
So why do the Conservatives keep telling everyone that the Canadian economy will crumble unless corporations are given even more of break on taxes?
The Conservatives are promising to cut corporate tax rates even lower than the current rate of 16.5%, which is way down from 28% in 1990. The Conservatives insist that there is a direct link between a corporate tax cut and the number of jobs created, even though unlike the Liberals, they are not interested in attaching the tax cuts to actual job creation. In other words, under the Tory plan, corporations get the tax cuts even if they substantially reduce Canadian employment levels. “We will not raise taxes on growth”, said the Tory Finance Minister when asked about the benefit of continuing to cut corporate taxes year after year. Meanwhile, both the NDP and the Liberals have promised to stop the corporate tax cuts and use the increased revenues to pay for more services. Neither party accepts the Tory claims that tax cuts = job growth.
So, do corporate tax cuts increase employment?
The Tories’ claim that they do is based on the basic assumption that tax cuts give employers more cash, which will translate into more hiring. Does this make sense to you? This could happen.    If employers need more employees, but they are unable to hire more due to a lack the cash, then a tax cut could enable those hirings. Of course, many employers don’t hire more people because they don’t need more people. They prefer to have as few employees as possible to perform the work needed, so that there is more money for profits, executive pay, and shareholders. So there is no reason whatsoever to believe that tax cuts will cause employers to hire more people. There are a myriad of other things employers might do with the extra money other than hire more workers, and no reason to believe hiring is even high on that list.  The odds of a tax cut leading an employer to hire more Canadian workers is no greater than, and probably less than, the odds of that employer using the extra money to add to savings, pay higher executive bonuses, or buy a new machine for their factory in Texas or Mexico.  Moreover, there are myriad factors that influence whether employers hire more workers that are completely unrelated to tax rates, so that it is virtually impossible to “prove” a linkage between tax cuts and hiring levels.
Its possible that if Canada lowered its tax rates to almost nothing, that some companies might decide to build new factories here.  But good luck proving that tax cuts are driving all sorts of businesses to flock to Canada.  If Canada’s tax rates were WAY higher than other Western economically advanced countries’, then the tax rate could certainly be a factor in where a company invests.  But Canada is already extremely competitive in terms of international corporate tax rates, so we are only talking about making it marginally lower.  Canada already offers a significant benefit to employers through our publicly funded health care system (paid for by taxes, by the way).  In other countries employers burden health care costs themselves.  And there will always be countries with lower taxes and lower wage workers than Canada for businesses that make investment decisions based on costs.  In other words, the Conservative argument that corporate tax cuts will lead to more Canadian jobs is an argument based on faith and hope, not science or even sound economics.
The two studies referred to in the newspaper clippings suggest that in fact employers do not use money saved in tax cuts to either hire new workers or invest in new machinery or equipment. Instead, the money appears to go into savings, which do not benefit you or I at all. We know also that income inequality and poverty in Canada have been growing at alarming rates (according to the OECD) over the same period that corporate tax rates have been falling. Tax cuts are not free–we all pay for them in cuts to public services, which effects our quality of life.
So, what lesson for my students? As always, the lesson is the same: Doubt any economic argument used to justify employment-related policies. The Tory assertion that corporate tax cuts “create jobs in Canada” or “improve productivity” is a not a fact, it is an assertion only, and a highly dubious one at that when the “evidence” is reviewed.

6 comments
0
FacebookTwitterLinkedinEmail
David Doorey

Professor Doorey is an Associate Professor of Work Law and Industrial Relations at York University. He is the Director of the School of HRM at York and Director of Osgoode Hall Law School’s executive LLM Program in Labour and Employment Law and on the Advisory Board of the Osgoode Certificate program in Labour Law. He is a Senior Research Associate at Harvard Law School’s Labor and Worklife Program and a member of the International Advisory Committee on Harvard University’s Clean Slate Project, which is re-imaging labor law for the 21st century

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

previous post
City of Toronto Violates ESA, Ordered to Pay Employees $5 Million in Back Wages
next post
Carasco v. U. of Windsor: Professor Moon Stays, Other Intervenors Tossed

You may also like

A Cross Country Update on the Card-Check versus...

October 3, 2018

A Successful Strike Vote is All That Stands...

September 16, 2018

Unifor Posts Photos of Replacement Workers as Gander...

September 10, 2018

A Wrongful Dismissal Case and the Absence of...

August 29, 2018

China Said to Quickly Withdraw Approval for New...

August 27, 2018

The Latest Hot E-Commerce Idea in China: The...

August 27, 2018

The Trump Administration Just Did Something Unambiguously Good...

August 27, 2018

Unstable Situations Require Police In Riot Gear Face...

August 27, 2018

Trump’s War on the Justice System Threatens to...

August 27, 2018

Putin Invites Trump to Moscow for Second Meeting...

August 27, 2018

Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 218 other subscribers

Follow Us On Social Media

Twitter

Latest Tweets

CLWFFollow

CLWF
Retweet on TwitterCLWF Retweeted
RSandillRicha Sandill@RSandill·
8h

@SCLSclinic and I were so fortunate to represent this client last year. I am thrilled that this decision brings more clarity for family status accommodations rights amidst a pandemic that has tested parents, caregivers, and families like never before. https://twitter.com/CanLawWorkForum/status/1364605259071561730

CLWF@CanLawWorkForum

New from @RSandill (counsel for applicant), discussing important new "family status" discrimination decision from OHRT:

"Kovintharajah v. Paragon Linen & Laundry: When Failure to Accommodate Child Care Needs is “Family Status” Discrimination"

https://lawofwork.ca/13360-2/

Reply on Twitter 1364627677785821185Retweet on Twitter 13646276777858211851Like on Twitter 13646276777858211852Twitter 1364627677785821185
Retweet on TwitterCLWF Retweeted
TheLawofWorkDavid J. Doorey@TheLawofWork·
8h

Here's my latest in @jacobinmag.

If Ontario's labor laws applied in Alabama, the Amazon vote would have been held months ago so workers could get back to their jobs. Instead, the NLRA permits Amazon to conduct a months' long onslaught of anti-union propaganda. https://twitter.com/jacobinmag/status/1364613560425275392

Jacobin@jacobinmag

Amazon workers in Alabama are voting on whether to unionize, but the company is bombarding them with anti-union propaganda. In Canada, by contrast, votes are held quickly, making it harder for companies to stack the deck — a model that can work in the US. http://jacobinmag.com/2021/02/amazon-alabama-canada-labor-law-union-vote

Reply on Twitter 1364623976174092316Retweet on Twitter 13646239761740923168Like on Twitter 136462397617409231613Twitter 1364623976174092316
CanLawWorkForumCLWF@CanLawWorkForum·
10h

New from @RSandill (counsel for applicant), discussing important new "family status" discrimination decision from OHRT:

"Kovintharajah v. Paragon Linen & Laundry: When Failure to Accommodate Child Care Needs is “Family Status” Discrimination"

https://lawofwork.ca/13360-2/

Reply on Twitter 1364605259071561730Retweet on Twitter 13646052590715617304Like on Twitter 13646052590715617304Twitter 1364605259071561730
Load More...

Categories

  • Alberta
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Australia
  • British Columbia
  • Charter of Rights and Freedoms
  • Childcare
  • Class Action
  • Collective Bargaining
  • Common Law of Employment
  • Comparative Work Law
  • competition law
  • construction
  • COVID-19
  • Diversity
  • Employee Classification
  • Employment Insurance
  • Employment Regulation
  • Europe
  • Financial Industry
  • Fissured Work
  • Freedom of Association
  • frustration of contract
  • Gig Work
  • Health and Safety
  • Health Care
  • Human Rights
  • Immigration
  • Interest Arbitration
  • International Law
  • Labour Arbitration
  • Labour Economics
  • Law of Work Archive
  • Legal Profession
  • Manitoba
  • Migrant Workers
  • Minimum Wage
  • Nova Scotia
  • OLRB
  • Ontario
  • Pension Bankruptcy
  • Privacy
  • Public Sector
  • Quebec
  • Real Life Pleadings
  • Saskatchewan
  • Scholarship
  • Strikes and Lockouts
  • Student Post
  • Supreme Court of Canada
  • technology
  • Transnational Law
  • Uncategorized
  • Unions and Collective Bargaining
  • United States
  • Videos
  • Women and Work
  • Wrongful Dismissal
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive
Menu
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive

2020. Canadian Law of Work Forum. All Rights Reserved.