I did the calculation as to the amount that can be earned tax-free, last night, after doing some preliminary work on my income tax (due Apr. 30). Single taxpayer (so no additional credit for low-income spouse) under 65 can earn $49,850. before being required to pay $1.00 of income tax - but he will be required to pay $600.00 provincial health care levy. But - must be wealthy, have only one source of income ... and can't work. The federal credit still has some extra value, so if the "taxpayer" could live in a province taxed at a lower rate, or lower threshold, the tax-free level could be somewhat higher. As it could be with a low-income spouse, or if the person gives to charity or makes political contributions. True also for medical costs, but the threshold is higher, due to an automatic escalator that affects the basic income. At 65 Canadian residents, with some years of residency requirements, become eligible for about $5,400. Old Age Security. But if their earnings are over about $55,000, it is partly clawed back, with full clawback at about $85,000. And this becomes harder hit by that automatic escalator in the income that qualifies for the tax-free status. Also, it screws up the tax-free suituation, but the benefit still works, it just means that the manager of the money deosn't escape tax-free. There's an age credit that kicks in at age 65, as well ... but this is hit harder by the automatic escalator, as well. There's a fuller description of this situation elsewhere on this forum, re Canadians earning $40,000. income tax-free. Plus I posted one about it over on "Money Saving Tips" earlier today. Hope you all have a trouble-free weekend (i.e., your taxes were done earlier ... or you have conned someone else into doing them!). ole joyful

Available again this year (for 2010, not 2002, this time) ... limits about $25,000. single and $35,000. married. I was pleased with myself last year, in having arranged my affairs (via substantial charitable and some political contributions) ... ... to reduce my Federal tax load to zero. And the provincial liability was low, possibly nil, till I got down to the recently-initiated Health Levy and had to pay a few hundred for that. But I should not complain ... as I made substantial use of the healthcare services, for nil or minimal cost, during this past year. And I used to say that we should all be willing to pay a portion of the cost of running the country ... ... and then light fires under our legislators when we believed them to be running it/them improperly! At least ... we can do that, most of the time, without getting banged on the head for our trouble. Or locked up. ole joyful

Just moving it back up a bit. Some who might find it useful may not have seen it earlier. That amount that a single person can earn without being liable to pay one cent of income tax claimed above is incorrect. The correct figure was $46,345.00. in 2006 ... if solely dividends on Canadian stocks, with no other income, no income tax is payable by a single taxpayer. Have yourselves a lovely late?-winter weekend, everyone. ole joyful

frmrsdghtr - you summed it up perfectly. We live in Ontario and are under 65 - not by much, but still, under 65, which does make a difference (joyfulguy - you are over 65 so would benefit from many things that we do not). OHIP (the Ontario Health Plan) is about to cut many services (eyes - and I don't mean "normal" eye care) - I mean for people like my husband who has had a vitrectomy and cataract surgery. People who are diabetics often have major eye problems etc. and this will affect them - and not all are obese. My husband's eyes are bad enough that one of his eye specialists (he has 3) has been able to run his quarterly eye tests through OHIP, but at his May 8 appointment he was told that he would not be able to do this any longer - and his office plan won't cover it. My husband pays high premiums for family coverage (just the two of us) - yet has deductibles of $1,250 for EACH of medical and dental - so we basically pay for everything due to the deductibles - and since he has only one prescription for eye drops and I have one prescription we are not your "normal" Cdns. Even his office health care provider remarked that for people paying such high premiums we had very few claims (well, they wouldn't pay for his vitrectomy rehab equipment, nothing towards his sleep apnea dental appliance, his office dental plan does not cover specialists (and his regular dentist - an oral surgeon, no longer does root canals) plus there is the deductible problem. Back in the day your GP could zap a wart - now you need to be referred to a derm (heck, I could do it). I had several moles develop suddenly on my neck last year - it took over 6 months to get a derm appointment - and that was with a different derm - first one was going to be 9 months - and both required referrals from my GP. Yet, if I wanted to have something cosmetic done, I could have been seen next day. I have searched the OHIP site but little has been posted yet. The news showed the cost of the glaucoma test being $63.00 with OHIP paying the doctors $25.00 - but that must be for the cost of the equipment, because my husband pays over $200 for each test, so I think they need to get the facts straight. Fees to radiologists are being cut back which will affect mammograms (techs do the mammos but they are read by the radiologist so I guess backlog will come into play, and EKGs. Certain heart tests are being cut as well. I know that if you need a lower back X-Ray it will have to be seriously justified by your doctor. Every time I am supposed to have a bone density test (despite confirming day before) I arrive and am told that I can't have it for another year or two - but I am welcome to pay for it. I fully expect to never be able to get one again! According to my pharmacist, retired people post 65 can have their prescriptions covered, but they must take Generic pills. I can't take Generics - it isn't the meds factor, it is the non-medicinal ingredients I am allergic to - as are many others - and many seniors are paying the substantial difference themselves. My husband recently had a discussion with a N.Y. taxi driver who told him how lucky he was to live in Canada where dental, medical and vision (even glasses) are 100% paid for. My husband tried to set him straight - but the guy didn't believe him. I have had the same discussions in the U.S. and people think I am wrong. As if, I live here. My husband's cousin had to travel from Ontario to the Mayo Clinic to be diagosed with ALS (no one saw that one coming). She had been falling down for well over a year and it was going to take her another year to be seen by a specialist - so they paid to go to Mayo - and this was the horrible result. She is 54 years old. I know what the cost was to go to the Mayo Clinic and I think they could have bought a house in Michigan for less. If we need an MRI we can get it much more quickly in the U.S. - but we have to pay for it. Same with tests for prostate cancer etc. Is our health care better than what you have in the U.S. - DEFINITELY. Is it the health care that people think we have - NO. And let's not forget that we pay very high taxes and do not enjoy the many deductions that Americans have. There would have to be some give and take for the Americans to have our plans. Of course people who work for the government or are represented by strong unions (teachers, postal workers etc.) have excellent pension plans and retirement benefits. The average person working in private business does not. That would be us. If we take out private plans such as Blue Cross the costs are high - much like in the U.S. - and coverage is minimal - not to mention that everything seems to be pre-existing. When you read the list I don't think there is anything that the normal person hasn't experienced at least once in their respective lifetime. This is definitely not the time for my husband to be facing retirement - the economy is horrible - here as well - and we have been earning nil on our investment funds. But our banking laws are a lot better! Actually, the mail just arrived - bringing with it a letter from my husband's GP advising of the cost of this year's premium to cover non-insured services - I have the same with my doctor - it is about $100 - $125.00 for individual coverage. I am very happy with his doctor - for the first time they are offer fees for Individuals, COUPLES, or Families. There are many couples such as us who pay for people with several kids etc., yet we do not get one single tax break - period.