Article content continued

5. “Conduct a gender-based analysis on finalized proposals, to ensure any changes to the tax system promote gender equity.” The document goes on to note that 83 per cent of the “passive investment” income that is a main target of Finance’s proposed tax changes is earned by corporation owners making more than $250,000 a year, 70 per cent of whom are men.

The only fair thing is equal taxes for people with equal incomes, whatever their age, colour, gender

That sounds ominous! Finance seems to be saying tougher rules on passive investment are OK, not just because they hit people making over $250,000 a year — who are above middle class and therefore not the government’s favoured constituency — but also because disproportionate numbers of “the rich” are men. Not only does the government want a class war — the bottom and middle against the top — it also wants a gender war, women against men.

What policy guidance will a gender-based analysis give? If a tax increase disproportionately hits men, it’s OK? If a tax cut disproportionately benefits men, it’s not OK? If that’s the case, be warned: There won’t ever be tax cuts at the top end of the income distribution, or at least not for a long time, since for now and probably for another decade or two men do still make most of the top income, even if many more women have high incomes than used to.

But how does a tax system that hits men disproportionately “promote gender equity”? It may promote gender income equality, by lowering men’s after-tax income and raising women’s (although, since many men live with a woman and vice versa, and since most couples share incomes, it may not even do that). But it has nothing to do with equity.

I’m afraid that, on these issues, I’m shamelessly 20th-century. The only fair thing is equal taxes for people with equal incomes, whatever their age, colour, gender, industry, preferred corporate form, astrological sign — you name it. If there are legal, regulatory or social impediments to certain groups earning as much as they’d like, by all means work to eliminate those. But don’t start using the tax system as a corrective, and deliberately shift the tax burden from one social group to another. Bringing race, gender and so on into the tax system: What a sad way to celebrate Canada’s 150th.