Carleton University Journal of Legal Studies
62
Vol. III Issue 1
not subject to PST in the past. Now bearing the brunt of the HST Clark has stated that, “I can see the logic behind it – I understand the goal is to encourage investment by businesses in Ontario. It’s going to be beneficial overall…”10 Stuart Johnson of the Ontario Chamber of Commerce began advocating for the HST years ago in attempt to reduce the tax-burden on businesses that reduced Ontario’s ability to compete.11 Prior to the HST, each dollar invested in Ontario’s economy was taxed nearly 33 percent. Under the HST this is reduced to roughly 16 per cent, which is more consistent with international averages thus making Ontario globally attractive for investment.12 On a similar note, John Winter, the president and chief executive officer of the British Columbia Chamber of Commerce stated the following about the importance of the HST: It’s largely because of the simplicity of it, avoiding the cost of duplication of efforts. It ultimately avoids the congestion the [provincial sales tax] causes in the manufacturing cycle. We recognize that things like the PST are outdated, certainly inefficient and costly. The Maritime example has been very illustrative.13
Satinder Chera, the Ontario director of provincial affairs for the Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses, stated the following: “No one disputes the fact that one [sales tax] system is better than two systems…the question is how you get there.”14 It is this question that is central to the varying reaction of citizens in Ontario and British Columbia to the HST. It is evident that the HST is an adequate measure to improve provincial economies and that in the long run, it is beneficial to the inhabitants of these provinces. The measures used in