360 Degrees Wealth Strategies & Solutions Inc

06/11/2026

“An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”

Getting advice in advance of a tax, legal or financial transaction is 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭 advice.

Getting advice how to attempt to fix the negative consequences of a transaction is not advice - it’s merely 𝘥𝘢𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭.

Clients that call their advisors before they make a decision typically have better outcomes while clients that call their advisors after the decision is done don’t have the advantage of proactive advice and run the risk of irreversible damage.

06/10/2026

The Bank of Canada just held its overnight rate at 2.25% — but this decision is less about confidence and more about being trapped between competing economic pressures.

Full commentary:

The Bank of Canada just held its overnight rate at 2.25% — but this...

06/10/2026

No surprises from the Bank of Canada this morning

06/09/2026

𝗖𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗻𝘀 𝗰𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗯𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗧𝗮𝘅 𝗙𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗱𝗼𝗺 𝗗𝗮𝘆 𝗼𝗻 𝗝𝘂𝗻𝗲 𝟵, 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟲

If the average Canadian family had to pay all of its taxes up front, every dollar earned from January 1 through June 8 would go to government. Only on June 9 would that family start working for itself.

That is the premise behind .

According to the The Fraser Institute’s 2026 Tax Freedom Day report, the average Canadian family will earn an estimated $166,790 in income and pay approximately $72,539 in total taxes. That is 43.5% of income.

The calculation includes:

* income taxes
* payroll taxes
* health taxes
* sales taxes
* property taxes
* profit taxes
* alcohol and to***co taxes
* fuel taxes
* motor vehicle licence fees
* carbon taxes
* import duties
* natural resource levies
* and other government charges

Tax Freedom Day is not an argument about whether any government service is good or bad, or a measurement of whether you personally receive value for what you pay. It’s not a reflection of the quality of the services provided, how much each person receives, or whether taxpayers get their money’s worth.

Those are questions each Canadian has to answer for themselves.

Tax Freedom Day asks one simple question:
How much of the year does the average family work for the total tax bill imposed by all levels of government? And that day this year is June 9.

This is why serious financial planning cannot ignore taxation.

Taxes are not some side issue, they are the largest lifetime expenses most Canadian families and estates will ever face.

Many people spend more time comparing grocery prices than understanding how tax policy affects their income, savings, business, retirement, estate, and future purchasing power.

The tax burden on Canadian families is substantial. The more a government spends, borrows, regulates, and promises, the more pressure eventually falls back on households, workers, consumers, business owners, and future taxpayers.

Tax Freedom Day should be a reminder that every dollar government spends must first come from someone who earned it.

Read the full Fraser Institute study here:

https://lnkd.in/ghi33MG8

06/06/2026

One of the least examined philosophical forces in mainstream politics is 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁. It is the human tendency to turn private disappointment into public theory, and then demand that society be reorganized around it.

Confronting one’s own failures can be a rude awakening. Realizing that our lack of success may be tied to our own shortcomings forces us to face truths we would rather avoid. Our pride often protects us from that recognition. And sometimes, the threat we are being protected from is not the outside world, but the painful discovery of our own undeveloped ability.

Ludwig von Mises understood this clearly. In 𝘓𝘪𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘮, he described the impulse to refuse to ascribe failure to “one’s own inadequacy,” and instead blame “the defectiveness of the social order.” That captures something deeper than economics: it captures the psychology of resentment as a political force.

In 𝘏𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯 𝘈𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, Mises explained that people act to remove felt uneasiness. We move toward what we believe will satisfy us and away from what we believe causes our discomfort. But that discomfort is often misdiagnosed. If my failure is not my responsibility, but society’s fault, then coercion begins to look like social justice. Greed and envy are no longer treated as defects of character, they are converted into political demands.

His protege Murray Rothbard took this a step further in 𝘈𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘮𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦. The state is not a voluntary association or a “lodge meeting.” It rests on coercion. Once resentment gains democratic legitimacy, people can vote to use the machinery of the state to take from others what they have not produced themselves. What would be plainly immoral if done privately is sanitized and justified when done politically.

This becomes a kind of psychological evasion: a revolt against reason, evidence, and personal accountability. Instead of examining the attitudes, skills, habits, and courage they have not yet developed, such people find it much easier to explain their failures by blaming someone else — or something else — for their condition. They become victims of abstract circumstance.

Looking inward is harder. It requires humility, discipline, and change. But to suggest that someone you have never met is responsible for your mistakes is factually indefensible. Once accountability is avoided, self-respect begins to erode. The individual preserves his pride by blaming society, then finds comfort among others who have made the same bargain.

Grievance becomes identity and a community is built around shared resentment. becomes the antidepressant, prescribed in liberal doses, for feelings of inadequacy and failure. And eventually, a personal failure to take responsibility becomes a political demand to reorder society.

That is the sophistry behind the appeal of : private inadequacy laundered into public grievance, wrapped in the promise that everyone’s needs can be met if only enough power is handed to the state and those who act in its name.

Mises Institute

06/04/2026

Double post today for

06/04/2026

Most Canadians understand that tax evasion is illegal. But fewer understand that a transaction can be 𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘩𝘯𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 legal and still be challenged under Canada’s General Anti-Avoidance Rule, commonly known as .

GAAR is not aimed at ordinary tax planning - Canadians are entitled to arrange their affairs in a tax-efficient way. But where a transaction produces a tax benefit through misuse or abuse of the Income Tax Act, Canada Revenue Agency - Agence du revenu du Canada may reassess the transaction and deny the benefit, plus apply the penalties under these rules.

Simply put, GAAR asks:
Did the transaction undertaken by the taxpayer merely follow the words of the law, or did it defeat the object, spirit, and purpose of the law?

A plan may technically fit inside the black-letter wording of a provision, but still be vulnerable to GAAR exposure if it exploits the Act in a way Parliament did not intend. This is especially relevant in complex planning involving corporate reorganizations, estate freezes, trust planning, shareholder transactions, and other tax-motivated structures.

The GAAR rules have also become much broader in recent years under changes to legislation. Bill C-59 received Royal Assent in June 2024, and was applicable to any transactions from January 1, 2024.

The amendments lowered the threshold of what transactions may be captured under GAAR. from a “primary purpose” test to a “one of the main purposes” test. Prior to 2024, if the “primary purpose” of a transaction was to confer a tax benefit, then that transaction could be captured under GAAR. With the updated wording in ss. 245(3), if “one of the main purposes” conferred a tax benefit, the transaction would be reviewed under these provisions.

A significant “lack of economic substance” can also be an important factor. For example, if the taxpayer’s real economic position has not meaningfully changed, but the tax result has improved, that may raise a red flag. A lack of economic substance does not automatically make a transaction abusive, but it may weigh against the taxpayer in the misuse-or-abuse analysis.

That does not mean every tax-motivated transaction is abusive, but it should make taxpayers engage with tax and legal advice where their actions may increase exposure to these broader definitions.

It’s not enough to say that, “the wording technically allows it.” But as the definitions have broadened, so should advice be broader to include whether or not a plan withstands scrutiny if reviewed with GAAR in mind - especially if the transaction is later reassessed, challenged, or tested in court.

This is why complex tax and financial planning should not be treated as a DIY exercise.

For business owners, incorporated professionals, and high-net-worth families, the issue is not simply whether a strategy reduces tax. The issue is whether the structure is legally coherent, commercially defensible, properly documented, and aligned with the purpose of the law.

Tax planning should be thoughtful, and aggressive planning brings with it a series of serious consequences.

*not tax, legal or financial planning advice. Seek qualified and certified professionals before contemplating any transaction.

06/03/2026

Most political scandals do not begin with an envelope of cash. More often, they begin when
society forgets the difference between legal compliance and public accountability.

This video examines Canada’s blind trust problem through the case of Mark Carney , his
disclosed financial interests, the Act, ethics screens, broad-class exclusions, and the larger question of whether Canada’s current accountability system is strong enough for the power concentrated in the Prime Minister’s Office.

This is not a claim that Carney broke the law. In fact, the deeper issue may be more serious:
what if the rules worked exactly as written — and still 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘦𝘯𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩?

Most political scandals do not begin with an envelope of cash. More...

06/02/2026

One of the questions Ludwig Von Mises answered in his writings was how people were attracted to as an economic model.

One of the reasons was that it made it easier to look outward rather than inward when confronting our own failures.

described the impulse to avoid thinking about our internal failures as refusing to ascribe failure to “one’s own inability,” - and instead blaming “the defectiveness of the social order” (𝘓𝘪𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘮, p. 16).

Seeking to blame a third-party becomes a kind of psychological evasion: a revolt against reason, evidence and personal accountability. Instead of examining the attitudes, skills, habits, and courage that one has not yet developed, such people find it much easier to explain their failures by blaming 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘰𝘯𝘦 else or 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 else for their condition.

They become victims of abstract circumstance. These circumstances demand political powers get involved to change and equalize outcomes.

Looking inward is harder. It requires humility, discipline, and change. But to suggest that someone you have never met is responsible for your mistakes is factually indefensible.

Once accountability is avoided, self-respect begins to erode. The individual preserves their pride by blaming society, then finds comfort among others who have made the same bargain.

Grievance becomes identity and a community is built around shared resentment. Socialism becomes the antidepressant, prescribed in “liberal” doses to sure feelings of inadequacy and failure. And eventually, something directly correlated to a personal failure becomes a political demand to reorder society.

That is the sophistry behind the appeal of : private inadequacy laundered into public grievance, wrapped in the promise that everyone’s needs can be met if only enough power is handed to the state and its actors.

Mises Institute

06/01/2026