Income splitting should be expanded

A version of this appeared in the National Post on March 30, 2015

March 30, 2015 | by Andrea Mrozek , Executive Director, Institute of Marriage and Family Canada
PDF:  Income splitting should be expanded


  1. Scholz, T. and Shaw, T. (2015, March 17). The Family Tax Cut. Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer. Retrieved from
  2. Ibid, p. 1.
  3. In 2012, 37% of working mothers in the United States thought full-time work was “ideal.” From
  4. “Higher income households representing only 24 per cent of the tax base claim 38 per cent of tuition fee and education cost credits. They also claim two-thirds of registered retirement deductions (although the principal and investment returns are fully taxed when cashed in). High-income households are also responsible for two-thirds of charitable donation tax credits.” Bazel, P. and Mintz, J. (2014, December 11). Income splitting not perfect, but it is a step in the right direction, National Post. Retrieved from
  5. Kozhaya, N. (2006, October). $7-a-day childcare. Are parents getting what they need? Montreal Economic Institute. Retrieved from
    Editorial. (2014, September 23). Change to Quebec’s $7-a-day daycare can’t come soon enough. Maclean’s. Retrieved from
  6. Broadbent Institute. (2014, June). The big split: Income splitting’s unequal distribution of benefits across Canada. Retrieved from
  7. “For the first time in 2006, there were more households comprised of couples without children (29.0%) than households comprised of couples with children (28.5%). This gap widened in 2011, with 29.5% of households comprised of couples without children and 26.5% comprised of couples with children.” Minister of Industry. (2012). Canadian households in 2011: Type and growth, p. 1. Retrieved from
  8. Kesselman, R. (2014, November6). The real problem with income splitting? It targets the wrong parents. Retrieved from