Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Canada seeks to end Uber's tax advantage over taxi companies

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 185 posts

Re: Canada seeks to end Uber's tax advantage over taxi companies

#141

Post by dorfsmay »

thrill wrote: post #15
vkou wrote: post #7

The fact that they weren't paying GST is mind-boggling. The purpose of the exemption is to let someone running a tiny hobby business sell their products without having to deal with tax headaches. The purpose of the exemption was never to let a mega-corporation take the exemption of each employee, multiply it by the number of employees, and pretend that they don't need to pay tax. What next? A grocery store taking the…

Uber drivers are not employees. They are independent contractors. Uber, as part of their service, collects money from riders, giving both the rider and the driver a comfort factor as they don't have to deal with cash. As "hobby" businesses they each individually were enjoying the exemption. Now they will not - because we can't have "hobby" businesses causing discomfort to the well connected.

What are you talking about?

Uber is like a builder who hires contractors. The builder's revenue is >30 k CAD therefore they need to collect and remit GST.

If some of the contractors were to make less than 30 k per year, then they don't need to charge GST, regardless of who the builder is or the size of the projects they work on.

The "end user", the person paying for the house, deals with the builder, hence pays GST.

Re: Canada seeks to end Uber's tax advantage over taxi companies

#142

Post by MattRix »

LammyL wrote: post #129
run4yourlives2 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The consumer pays Uber. That is the point of sale. That is where the sales tax is collected. This isn't rocket science. To your - bad - analogy: If MS was selling templates created in word by you to a marketplace, you can bet that GST would be paid on them by the consumer to MS.

Yup. And if you, the template provider, had a GST number (you are a business or have sales over $30k), you would also be charging Microsoft the GST for the sale. It is not a problem for MS since they would just claim it back as an input tax credit and it would be net zero for them. Consumer pays GST to MS. MS pays GST to a GST collecting template provider. MS and template provider both pay GST to government, but MS g…

This is basically what happens on the Apple App Store, except that Apple submits the GST directly to the government on the behalf of the app creator. On paper it's the same as your example, it's just the GST money never actually goes into the account of the app creator.

Re: Canada seeks to end Uber's tax advantage over taxi companies

#143

Post by geoka9 »

aianus wrote: post #126
ghostly_s wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you like to point to any precedents for 'unburdened' cab markets which have resulted in better service?

Have you ever been to Bangkok? I can just pay $1, hop on the back of a moto idling outside the skytrain station, and off we go lanesplitting through traffic straight to my office 2km away. It's amazing and would be so illegal on so many levels in Canada (where I spend $1000/mo on transportation).

Why not get a moto then which would pay for itself within a month or two?

Re: Canada seeks to end Uber's tax advantage over taxi companies

#144

Post by tensor »

ghostly_s wrote: post #77
tensor wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean like this? http://www.itbusiness.ca/news/canadian-alternative-to-uber-l... Sadly it doesn't address any of the problems with cabs in Toronto. 1. Cabs won't take credit cards by claiming "the machine is broken" when it's not, presumably so that they can avoid reporting tips or fees, or they might just skim your card. 2. Cabs are too expensive. 3. Cabs might not even take you if they figure the ride isn't wort…

You may be shocked to learn these exact problems exist with cab companies everywhere in the US, too.

That's not too surprising. Though I will say that NYC cabs are pretty ok, at least I never have to worry about being able to pay with a credit card and they are actually cheaper than Toronto cabs, which really says something.

Re: Canada seeks to end Uber's tax advantage over taxi companies

#145

Post by problems »

prolly_a_moron wrote: post #72
problems wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uber is essentially just a matcher and payment processor that takes a cut, they don't own vehicles or employ drivers - will they only have to pay taxes on their cut?

> Uber is essentially just a matcher and payment processor that takes a cut, they don't own vehicles or employ drivers That's the story their PR spins. Luckily they don't make the laws. You think this idea of, "He's not my employee, he's a contractor!" as a way to avoid employer obligations is new ? That's a laugh, and it's the reason these laws exist.

But it's the truth - those Uber drivers don't get guaranteed work, they don't get hours, they don't get salary. Instead they find contracts via Uber and they keep their portion of the earnings. Just because Uber takes the payment makes them an employer? If Uber had the drivers take the payment and pay them out later would they not be an employer anymore?

Seems like the exact definition of a contractor to me. I don't know how else you could define it really.

Re: Canada seeks to end Uber's tax advantage over taxi companies

#146

Post by AndyNemmity »

charlesdm wrote: post #39
peeters wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it quacks like a duck, it gets taxed like a duck. Uber has made a business out of exploiting legal loopholes. They know it, their users know it, the politicians know it. It's just been a race to close them. I have no sympathy for Uber in this. They obviously provide a valuable service to people, so I'm sure they'll survive. Now they'll just be competing on an even playing field.

Sure. No problem. They've used loopholes for the last 4+ years, which is fine. Given they still have a massively superior service to taxi's, now let them compete.

They used to have a massively superior service to taxis, until taxi drivers started to work for Uber. The quality has dropped dramatically.

Re: Canada seeks to end Uber's tax advantage over taxi companies

#147

Post by foobar1962 »

madeofpalk wrote: post #53
thrill wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uber drivers are not employees. They are independent contractors. Uber, as part of their service, collects money from riders, giving both the rider and the driver a comfort factor as they don't have to deal with cash. As "hobby" businesses they each individually were enjoying the exemption. Now they will not - because we can't have "hobby" businesses causing discomfort to the well connected.

Naa, that's bullshit. I download the Uber app, Uber finds me a ride, Uber sets the price, Uber charges me, and I pay Uber. Uber should be collecting GST/sales tax. I don't understand how else you could look at it! Uber is essentially doing the same thing here in Australia and the courts are getting involved to make a ruling.

The Australian GST legislation specifies that taxi drivers MUST be registered for GST regardless of income.

Re: Canada seeks to end Uber's tax advantage over taxi companies

#149

Post by beedogs »

fernandotakai wrote: post #102
sekasi wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting that you call Uber 'surging' but cabbies doing the same 'scamming'. I understand what you're saying but they are quite comparable..

because taxi drivers cannot, at least where i live, by law, change their fare. uber/lyft told me (and i agreed by using their service) they would change the fare based on demand.

So, as long as they use the proper terminology, you're fine with being scammed.

Re: Canada seeks to end Uber's tax advantage over taxi companies

#150

Post by yazaddaruvala »

branchless wrote: post #24
vkou wrote: post #7

The fact that they weren't paying GST is mind-boggling. The purpose of the exemption is to let someone running a tiny hobby business sell their products without having to deal with tax headaches. The purpose of the exemption was never to let a mega-corporation take the exemption of each employee, multiply it by the number of employees, and pretend that they don't need to pay tax. What next? A grocery store taking the…

21st century capitalism: gaming the system rather than actual productivity improvements that make lives better.

Ok, you can fault Uber for TONs of things. Moral, financial, ethical, political, legal, but one thing they did indeed do is provide "actual productivity improvements that make lives better".

I am an Uber/Lyft user and my life has been drastically improved!

Post reply on HN