Just so we're clear: Here's my disclosure on income splitting

If you are reading this blog and you scroll down the column on the right side, you will see a section titled “Disclosure and Fine Print”. I believe it is important for journalists to be upfront with their readers and viewers about potential blind spots or potential conflicts of interest. In my experience — working in the newsrooms of Global National, Postmedia, CTV National News, The Globe and Mail, National Post, the Hamilton Spectator and, now, Sun Media — those who report the news are not setting out to seek an angle that will benefit them or their pals.

So even though there’s never been (so far as I know) some scandal where a Canadian journalist was abusing his or her position to feather his or her nest, I’ve had this “disclosure” statement at my blog for years now.

But because income splitting looks to be a potential significant issue in the upcoming 2015 general election campaign, I feel that I should be upfront with readers and viewers and provide this additional disclosure.

In the 2011 election campaign, the Harper Conservatives promised that, when the budget was balanced, they would amend income tax regulations so that families could “split” their income at tax time in order to cut down on their tax bill. In a family where there was a child under the age of 18, a spouse would be allowed, under the Harper scheme, to transfer up to $50,000 of income to the lower-earning spouse. Presumably, this would have the effect of moving the higher-earning spouse into a lower-tax bracket. This scheme works so long as the lower-earning spouse stays in the same tax bracket or, at least, does not move into a higher tax bracket than the transferring spouse. (For details on what the Conservatives promise, see page 26 here, under “Family Tax Cut”).

Conservatives argued this policy was a matter of tax fairness. Opponents of this plan argue that this plan inappropriately benefits a small number of wealthy Canadians while having no positive policy outcome (and may, in fact, have negative policy outcomes). The left-leaning Broadbent Institute concludes:

Two out of three families targeted by the Conservative income splitting plan would receive less than $500 while fewer than 4% of such families – some of the wealthiest in Canada – would be eligible for a benefit in excess of $5,000, a new study by the Broadbent Institute has found.

Today, the office of Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau issued this statement:

The Conservatives’ income splitting plan favours the wealthy, encourages women to leave the workforce, is bad for growth, and is bad for the middle class.

If Harper brings in this income-splitting scheme next spring, Trudeau will undo it if he forms a government next fall.

So here’s my disclosure: I have two children under the age of 18 and while I’m out working to pay the mortgage, my wife is working hard at home, unpaid, managing our household and looking after our children. And, as I am paid a good salary by my employer, the scheme proposed by the Harper government would, if I read it correctly, benefit my family significantly.  In that respect, I am in the same boat as, according the Broadbent Institute’s work, of at least half-a-million Canadian tax filers (see Table 3 on page 9 here)

I disclose this with this vow: Because I have a personal interest in seeing this policy become the law of the land, I will have to work harder – when I report on the debate over income splitting — to demonstrate to viewers and readers that I am reporting accurately  the arguments of the Broadbent Institute, Liberal leader Justin Trudeau or whoever is taking issue with this policy and doing so with the same enthusiasm I might show when reporting the views of those who support income splitting. I promise to ask tough questions of all sides on this debate and to ask questions from the perspective of different stakeholders. And I expect readers and followers to challenge me if they believe I’m not living up to this vow. I wouldn’t have it any other way, in fact.

And I provide this caveat: I am very keen on politicians following through on campaign promises. And so even if I was not in a position to benefit from the Harper income splitting scheme, I would have tough questions for the Harper government if it chose not to fulfill a concrete, detailed campaign promise. Harper promised in 2011 to do this when he balanced the budget. He’s about to balance the budget. I don’t see that he has much choice on this. But both the Liberals and the NDP made no such promise and they may have other plans for the revenue that would otherwise have been foregone on this Harper tax break. I look forward to reporting to my readers and viewers what they would do instead with that money.

In any event: Now you know. And a reader or viewer armed with more information about those who are reporting on or analyzing federal political news is the kind of reader or viewer I’m interesting in working for.