2023 UCP Alberta election

[Remius]

It seems straight forward to me. Effective date X, a retiree gets two pension cheques; one from the CPP for 'before time' contributions and one for APP after.

The can seed the APP from the sovereign wealth Heritage Fund. Oh, wait . . .

The QPP and CPP have a sharing agreement. If eligible for both you can only apply for one. I would assume the same thing would exist with an APP.

 

[Blackadder1916]

How does the current CPP/QPP division work? If someone has worked in various provinces including Quebec, have they contributed to both? Is the pension you’re paid dependent on the province you worked in or the one you live in? If you move between Quebec and rest of Canada while a pensioner does it switch?

The best information seems to come from the Quebec government. It depends on where you're living when you apply for pension.

---

Retraite Québec - You worked outside Québec

You worked elsewhere in Canada​

You probably contributed to the Canada Pension Plan. Retraite Québec will take into account contributions made to both plans in determining entitlement to benefits and in calculating the amounts to be paid.

Where must you apply for your retirement pension?​

• If you live in Québec, you must file an application for your pension under the Québec Pension Plan with Retraite Québec. (you get QPP)
• If you live in another province, you should contact Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC). You may also contact this agency by telephone at 1 800 622-6332. (you get CPP)
• If you are living outside Canada, you retain all of the benefits you accumulated under both plans and you can file an application for your pension with the agency that administers the plan in your last province of residence in Canada. (if last province was Quebec QPP, all other provinces CPP)

 

[Kirkhill]

It seems straight forward to me. Effective date X, a retiree gets two pension cheques; one from the CPP for 'before time' contributions and one for APP after.

The can seed the APP from the sovereign wealth Heritage Fund. Oh, wait . . .

But that's not the rules as written. And the rules must be followed....

Danielle has got herself a big stick for the next round of Federal Provincial negotiations.

 

[Halifax Tar]

But that's not the rules as written. And the rules must be followed....

Danielle has got herself a big stick for the next round of Federal Provincial negotiations.

I think this is going to have much of central and eastern Canada up in arms and panicking if the numbers are to be believed in how much of the CPP Alberta makes up...

 

[Good2Golf]

Perhaps that’s not a bad thing.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I think this is going to have much of central and eastern Canada up in arms and panicking if the numbers are to be believed in how much of the CPP Alberta makes up...

I read the CPP Act. Part 1 describes how a Province can opt out and set up a Provincial Plan. The Feds have to comply, if a Province is serious.

As for how much of the CPP a particular Province might be entitled to, it has no bearing on what is actually in the CPP at a given moment. The way I read it, the key words are that the Province is entitled to enough funds to establish a plan that offers broadly similar benefits to its residents. Depending on the Markets and demographics on the date in question, that could be a little or a lot. I assume any CPP shortfalls after a division is made would have to be made up by increased contribution rates by the remaining plan members or by the Federal Treasury (taxpayers).

 

[IKnowNothing]

I think this is going to have much of central and eastern Canada up in arms and panicking if the numbers are to be believed in how much of the CPP Alberta makes up...

Are BC, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba now Central and Eastern Canada?

No one will panic, the adults in the room will categorically reject a formula that would result in greater than 100% of the assets needing to be divided if every province would withdraw- which they will threaten to do.

The real question is whether trying to sell blatant nonsense helps or hurts Smith win over the majority of Albertans. Over promise/ under deliver isn't generally a great recipe for success.

Or is the long game to convince them that they really are entitled to that and use the inevitable "Haha, no" to drive a further wedge for a sovereignty push?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Are BC, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba now Central and Eastern Canada?

No one will panic, the adults in the room will categorically reject a formula that would result in greater than 100% of the assets needing to be divided if every province would withdraw.

The real question is whether trying to sell blatant nonsense helps or hurts Smith win over the majority of Albertans. Over promise/ under deliver isn't generally a great recipe for success.

Or is the long game to convince them that they really are entitled to that and use the inevitable "Haha, no" to drive a further wedge for a sovereignty push?

See my post above yours. Once again- read the CPP Act, Part 1. It has nothing to do with how much is in the fund at any given moment. A withdrawing Province is entitled to whatever is required to set up an equivalent fund, with equivalent benefits. The Feds have to comply.

 

[Good2Golf]

Are BC, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba now Central and Eastern Canada?

No one will panic, the adults in the room will categorically reject a formula that would result in greater than 100% of the assets needing to be divided if every province would withdraw.

The real question is whether trying to sell blatant nonsense helps or hurts Smith win over the majority of Albertans. Over promise/ under deliver isn't generally a great recipe for success.

Or is the long game to convince them that they really are entitled to that and use the inevitable "Haha, no" to drive a further wedge for a sovereignty push?

Have you read the Canadian Pension Plan Act?

Perhaps you should, so as to be more informed.

https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-8/214565/rsc-1985-c-c-8.html

Edit to add specific link pointing to the section where a Province can establish its own plan:

https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-c-8/214565/rsc-1985-c-c-8.html#sec3

Application and Operation of Act​

Definitions

• 
  3 (1) In this Act,
  province providing a comprehensive pension plan means a province prescribed by a regulation made on the recommendation of the Minister of Employment and Social Development for the purposes of this Act as a province
  • (a) the government of which has, on or before May 3, 1965, signified the intention of that province to provide for the establishment and operation in that province, in lieu of the operation therein of this Act, of a plan of old age pensions and supplementary benefits providing for the making of contributions thereunder commencing with the year 1966 and providing for the payment of benefits thereunder comparable to those provided by this Act, or
  • (b) the government of which has, at any time after May 3, 1965, given notice in writing to the Minister of Employment and Social Development of the intention of that province to provide
    • (i) for the establishment and operation in that province, in lieu of the operation therein of this Act, of a plan of old age pensions and supplementary benefits providing for the making of contributions thereunder commencing with the third year following the year in which the notice was given and providing for the payment of benefits thereunder comparable to those then provided by this Act or by any provincial pension plan other than that plan, and
    • (ii) for the assumption under that plan of all obligations and liabilities accrued or accruing to the first day of that third year with respect to the payment of benefits under this Act attributable to contributions made under this Act in respect of employment in that province or in respect of self-employed earnings of persons resident in that province; (province instituant un régime général de pensions)
  • provincial pension plan means a plan of old age pensions and supplementary benefits for the establishment and operation of which provision has been made as described in paragraph (a) or (b) of the definition province providing a comprehensive pension plan under a law of a province providing a comprehensive pension plan. (régime provincial de pensions)
• Prescription of province after notice given
  (2) Notwithstanding anything in subsection (1), where, not later than twelve months before the first day of the third year following the year in which notice in writing as described in paragraph (b) of the definition province providing a comprehensive pension plan in subsection (1) was given to the Minister of Employment and Social Development by the government of a province, the legislature of the province has provided by law for the establishment and operation in that province of a plan of old age pensions and supplementary benefits as described in that paragraph and for the assumption under that plan of all obligations and liabilities accrued or accruing as described in that paragraph, the Governor in Council shall, by regulation made on the recommendation of the Minister of Employment and Social Development for the purposes of this Act, prescribe that province as a province described in that paragraph.
• Effective date of prescription
  (3) Any regulation made pursuant to subsection (2) becomes effective on the first day of the third year following the year in which the notice referred to in that subsection was given to the Minister of Employment and Social Development.
  • R.S., 1985, c. C-8, s. 3
  • 1996, c. 11, s. 95
  • 2005, c. 35, s. 67
  • 2012, c. 19, s. 694
  • 2013, c. 40, s. 238

 

[IKnowNothing]

See my post above yours. Once again- read the CPP Act, Part 1. It has nothing to do with how much is in the fund at any given moment. A withdrawing Province is entitled to whatever is required to set up an equivalent fund, with equivalent benefits. The Feds have to comply.

A- would you define a fund promising to pay greater benefits with reduced premiums as "equivalent"?
B- Acts can be changed.

 

[Rifleman62]

Today, the Alberta government released a report detailing just how Alberta plans to exit the Canada Pension Plan — which would have ripple effects on all Canadians. The proposal would amount to Alberta removing more than $330 billion — or almost sixty percent — of the Canada Pension Plan’s assets.

Why does AB have 60% of the CPP?

 

[Kirkhill]

A- would you define a fund promising to pay greater benefits with reduced premiums as "equivalent"?
B- Acts can be changed.

And thus the reason that all constitutions fail...

Everything is negotiable in the moment.

 

[Kirkhill]

I find it interesting that most of the commentary by the accountants on the CPP say that the plan is stable for 75 years.

That doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement. Nor does it say that the plan is fully funded against all exigencies, such as all the provinces deciding to collapse the plan and set up their own schemes.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

A- would you define a fund promising to pay greater benefits with reduced premiums as "equivalent"?
B- Acts can be changed.

Read Part 1 of the Act and judge for yourself.

I doubt any Federal Government can retroactively legislate their way out of this. It was a feature of how the fund was established in 1965. Quebec got treated fairly when it opted out. Can you imagine the blowback if Alberta did not?

Perhaps, just perhaps, we did not have a Federal Government that was specifically hostile to the major industry in Alberta, we would not be in this looming mess. But, hey- Liberals got to Liberal…

 

[Good2Golf]

Can you imagine the blowback if Alberta did not?

Some Canadians:

 

[IKnowNothing]

Read Part 1 of the Act and judge for yourself.

I doubt any Federal Government can retroactively legislate their way out of this. It was a feature of how the fund was established in 1965. Quebec got treated fairly when it opted out. Can you imagine the blowback if Alberta did not?

I have. I have also read this- particularly section 4.2 on page 14.

The Smith proposed asset transfer is the most generous calculation of the most most generous interpretation of the applicable section. It is in no way an authoritative or binding view. It will not stand. Alberta can leave the CPP if it wants. If it does so it will likely, and justifiably, take an outsized (based on population) percentage of assets with it. But it will be no where near 54%.


Quebec didn't take any assets with them, they were separate from the beginning.

 

[Good2Golf]

I have. I have also read this- particularly section 4.2 on page 14.

The Smith proposed asset transfer is the most generous calculation of the most most generous interpretation of the applicable section. It is in no way an authoritative or binding view. It will not stand. Alberta can leave the CPP if it wants. If it does so it will likely, and justifiably, take an outsized (based on population) percentage of assets with it. But it will be no where near 54%.


Quebec didn't take any assets with them, they were separate from the beginning.

Even at a very conservative 20% transfer, that Tombe notes on p.17 of his paper, the APP would still be indefinitely sustainable and at a proportionately lower contribution rate (8.3%) than CPP (9.5%) for equivalent benefits.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I have. I have also read this- particularly section 4.2 on page 14.

The Smith proposed asset transfer is the most generous calculation of the most most generous interpretation of the applicable section. It is in no way an authoritative or binding view. It will not stand. Alberta can leave the CPP if it wants. If it does so it will likely, and justifiably, take an outsized (based on population) percentage of assets with it. But it will be no where near 54%.


Quebec didn't take any assets with them, they were separate from the beginning.

It may or may not stand depending on the assets within CPP on the day of a hypothetical transfer. The issue is that Alberta (or any other Province) is entitled to establish a fund with broadly similar benefits. That the Feds did not properly fund the CPP for an eventuality that some or all Provinces might want to opt out, is not Alberta’s problem, according to the Act.

Good point about Quebec opting out up front. Thank-you.

 

[dapaterson]

Like most other federal pension plans, CPP is a mix of invested assets and government commitments to pay, as most were set up as pay as you go until being amended to start investing, mostly in the 2000 timeframe.

Pensions run on multi generational timelines; change takes multiple generations to work through the systems.

 

[IKnowNothing]

It may or may not stand depending on the assets within CPP on the day of a hypothetical transfer. The issue is that Alberta (or any other Province) is entitled to establish a fund with broadly similar benefits. That the Feds did not properly fund the CPP for an eventuality that some or all Provinces might want to opt out, is not Alberta’s problem, according to the Act.

Which, as has been pointed out, can be done, and done easily- with 20% of the fund- a number calculated using the same sections of the act but with a more nuanced interpretation that takes into account reforms that have happened since it was written.