The Conservatives’ income-splitting plan came into effect this year. It allows the shifting of income, for tax purposes, from a spouse paying a higher tax rate to a spouse in the same household paying a lower rate.

Spouses with children under 18 years old can transfer up to $50,000 to the lower-earning spouse, to obtain a tax credit of up to $2,000.

The Star asked three Canadian families with children to tell us what impact income-splitting is having on them.

Burnaby, B.C., parents of two, Daren and Linda Hancott

Occupation Daren: Owns a consulting company

Occupation Linda: Finance-related job at a local college

Annual family income: About $90,000

One of the key reasons Daren Hancott supports income splitting can be boiled down to a simple notion: “If you make a promise you should keep it,” he says.

Hancott, 49, of Burnaby, B.C., and wife Linda, 51, expect to receive about $600 in tax savings under the Conservative government plan, because their youngest son Garrett is 15.

Dyllan is 18 and doesn’t qualify.

Hancott has heard the argument that income splitting benefits only about 15 per cent of households in Canada — but that doesn’t faze him.

“Fifteen per cent is better than no benefit (for anyone),” he says. “It was a promise that was made, and when you make public promises, you should keep them, regardless of the percentage of the population.”

Hancott, who owns a consulting company, and Linda, who has a finance-related job at a college, are middle-income, with yearly household earnings of about $90,000. So income splitting works for them. (Darren makes the larger amount).

They’ve owned their comfortable four bedroom, detached home for about 14 years, and pay “manageable but high” property tax. Their boys take part in sports that include swimming and martial arts.

Linda was a stay-at-home mom for 15 years, looking after the boys and running the household. She recently returned to the workforce.

Daren argues that given “we’re still paying way too much tax as a society,” income splitting is welcome tax relief.

“You’re taxed on everything from gas, to . . . vehicles you buy, people mowing your lawn, PST, GST.”

“Good moms and dads will look after their families better than the government will,” Hancott insists, adding, “The government is not a good steward of our money.”

Maybe in the next budget, the federal government can do more for lower income families regarding tax relief, Hancott says.

As for their tax savings from income-splitting, Hancott says perhaps it will enable him and his wife to invest more money in an education fund for Garrett’s future studies, or maybe help him with a down payment on a condo when he’s older.

Ottawa parents of two, Andy and Mary Pedersen.

Occupation Andy: Spokesperson for the National Union of Public and General Employees

Occupation Mary: Writer for television programs

Annual family income: $170,000

When Andy Pedersen and his wife, Mary, filed their taxes this year they realized they qualified for the new federal income splitting benefit — but they refused it.

That decision meant they had to pay about $1,600 more in taxes, but they stuck by their choice because they find the income-splitting plan “irksome” and unfair.

The couple believes taxes are a good thing because they pay for important services that benefit all Canadians.

Andy, 43, made more than $120,000 last year in his job as a spokesperson for the National Union of Public and General Employees.

Mary, also 43, is a writer for television programs and made $50,000 last year.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

They have two children, Matilda, 7, and Max, 8.

Filing their taxes on their home computer using a Canada Revenue certified program this year, the couple was surprised to discover they qualify for income splitting.

“We inputted our information. (The tax filing program) asked us if we wanted to claim income splitting. We typed in the answer ‘yes’ to see what would happen. It showed us owing $900,” Andy explained.

“Then I typed in ‘no’ to see what would happen, and it said we owed $2,500 in taxes for 2014,” he added.

In explaining their decision, both Andy and Mary say they think of themselves as “quite progressive.”

There’s a pervasive belief that government is too expensive, that spending is out of control and has to be cut back significantly, says Pedersen. But, quoting figures from Chartered Professional Accountants of Canada, Pedersen counters that when it comes to corporate taxes and income taxes on high-wage earners, rates have been cut almost in half since the early 1980s.

“We pay less tax than the generation before did. Still we have taxes. When Mary and I realized we were eligible for another tax break — we claim child care expenses and other tax breaks — but this we thought sounded so incredibly irksome because it benefitted so few people,” Pedersen said.

“You have to be making serious coin to take advantage of this (benefit) and we didn’t feel good about it. We didn’t want to reinforce the notion that paying less taxes is always good,” he added. “That was easy for us to decide.”

Andy reached out via Facebook to encourage other Canadians to follow what he and his wife did, but so far there have been no takers.

The couple plans to continue to turn down income splitting for as long as it’s around.

Oshawa parents of one, Jesse Cullen and Savanah Watters

Occupation Jesse: President of student association

Occupation Savanah: Part-time server at a restaurant

Annual family income: About $48,000

Parents Jesse Cullen and Savanah Watters earn too little to see a major benefit from income splitting.

Jesse makes $33,000 a year as the president of the student association at his college in Oshawa, and Savanah, his partner, makes about $10,000 to $15,000 as a part-time server in a local restaurant.

“We’re relatively in the same tax bracket, so there’s no benefit for either one of us to shift their income to the other one,” says Cullen, 30.

Because they’re students, they can’t apply for income splitting even if they wanted to — but the policy still bothers Cullen.

Cullen says from his point of view, the foregone revenue from income splitting “would be better directed at increased health care spending, more money for social transfers to provinces, or developing a national child care program.”

He and Savanah share a total of $90,000 in student debt, and have their daughter Raelyn, 3, in a subsidized daycare spot.

“Basically what they (the federal government) have done is masquerade their tax policy as social policy.”

He calls income splitting a throwback to a certain type of nuclear family.

“It encourages or incentivizes the type of traditional 1950s family, which is the Tory base at the end of the day,” Cullen says.

“The spouse — typically a woman — who stays at home with the kids. That’s (the type of family) that disproportionately benefits from this.”

Read more about: