By CAMPBELL CLARK
The Harper government will launch a cross-country campaign to defend its corporate tax cuts, trooping out cabinet ministers and MPs across the country to counter Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff’s efforts to exploit the cuts as a potential election issue.
The political offensive was signalled to MPs in a memo from the Prime Minister’s Office on Sunday, but many of them, and especially a large part of the cabinet, have already been enlisted: On Wednesday, the biggest day of the campaign, 10 ministers will attend events to defend the cuts.
Many of the events will be held at businesses in various parts of the country, in an effort to convince Canadians that the corporate tax cuts are good for ordinary firms – not a gift for big banks, as Mr. Ignatieff asserts. Tory MPs across the country have been briefed with combative arguments to sell the cuts as good for “Main Street.”
“We will not sit back and let Mr. Ignatieff spread lies and misinformation about our tax cuts for job creators,” says a four-page memo sent to Conservative MPs and senators by Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s communications staff, a copy of which was obtained by The Globe and Mail.
full article http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-go-on-offensive-to-defend-corporate-tax-cuts/article1880416/

Ireland - 12.5%
Canada - 13-34%
Greece - 25%
Denmark - 25%
Iceland - 18/26%
China - 25%
Japan (highest) - 40.69%
Montenegro (lowest) - 9%
The only conclusion we can draw from this is that corporate tax rates alone are not an indication of whether or not a country is going to be economically successful or be able to provide decent services for their citizens. The entire picture has to be looked at. Saying that we are on the road to being poor like Ireland is as accurate as saying we are on the road to being as rich as Montenegro. Just like saying that raising the tax rate will put us on the road to being like Denmark when the exact same tax rate can show we are on the road to being like Greece.
Hmm. This is based on solid numbers, not supposition and wishes. What would Flaherty's response be to this?