You might never have heard of Mayor Bloomberg of New York City or care about anything he might have said. In fact, the most you might ever see of NYC would be on a screen or through a window landing at or leaving JFK International.
But what if the Governor of NY State sought the Mayor’s counsel about some pesky Indians selling tobacco products just beyond reach of his taxmen? What if Bloomberg’s reply included these words: “get yourself a cowboy hat and a shotgun…”?
Are you a Status Indian living in Ontario? Have you bought anything there in the past two months off-reserve and paid sales tax?
If ‘yes’ on both fronts, beginning Sept. 1, you can submit your claim for a refund of the Ontario portion (8%) of the province’s new 13% Harmonized Sales Tax (HST). To claim it, you will need to produce receipts for purchases made between July 1, 2010 and Aug. 31, 2010.
Why? Well, as we laid out in a previous post, soon after the province announced they were going to implement the controversial new tax, First Nations who fell within Ontario’s borders rallied hard to preserve their tax immunity. The victory means that, beginning Sept. 1, any Indian with Status — be they from Ontario, Saskatchewan, the Yukon or wherever — will only have to pay the federal (5% GST) portion of the tax (at point-of-purchase) when buying goods and services in Ontario.
In the meantime, if you’re a Status Indian who bought something off-rez this month or last, you can submit any and all receipts for a refund, subject to the following list of eligible and ineligible items.
Here’s what’s eligible:
Here’s what’s not eligible:
The full list is here.
OK, so now that you know what can and can’t be claimed, how do you get your money?
Simply download and fill out this form (PDF format) and mail it to the following address with ALL eligible receipts (originals, so make and keep copies):
Ministry of Revenue
Refund Unit
2nd Floor, 1600 Champlain Avenue
Whitby ON
L1N 9B2
Be sure to include a photocopy of BOTH SIDES of your Certificate of Indian Status.
Then, beginning Sept. 1, you’ll be able to just get your exemption at the time of purchase (point-of-sale), with receipts no longer required .
Hope this helps! Let us know if you experience any hassle.
[ Image via Phillip ]
In this installment of our weekly Tuesday sitdown on STREETZ 104.7 FM, Rick Harp and THE WORD host Lady V discuss the website “BEAT NATION” – home of hip-hop Indigenous-style – and touch on a debate over the appropriateness of hip-hop being used to share Aboriginal cultures. Rick also talks about Australia’s Desert Art Centre which uses YouTube to showcase some amazing Aboriginal projects.
MI on STREETZ: Aug. 24, 2010
[audio:https://mediaindigena.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/MI-StreetzFM-Aug24-10.mp3|titles=MI-StreetzFM-Aug24-10]
Once again, Elouise Cobell’s land trust fight has been pushed back, this time to Oct. 15, 2010.
Uh-huh. In my ongoing account of the Cobell case (“War & Trust & the Waiting Game,” June 5, 2010; “How slow can it go?” Aug. 1, 2010), I’ve mentioned that there is opposition within Indian country (and among politicians on Capitol Hill) to the negotiated terms of settlement between government lawyers and Cobell’s legal team.
Count Kimberly Craven among those opposed. Craven cites the pitiable sum agreed to, she questions who (and who doesn’t) collect under the “deal” wrangled by Cobell, and she raises concerns over the possible threat of extinguishment for related rights.
For her part, Cobell (or her lawyers, according to some) has answered these criticisms— not always as thoroughly as one might hope, but she’s certainly not staying silent either.
The upshot is that, once again, here’s an issue where the battle is with the U.S. government, but the war ends up pitting one Native faction against another.
No-one, least of all Elouise Cobell, calls the land trust ‘deal’ an ideal resolution. Both she and her defenders posit an admittedly feeble refrain, “It’s better than nothing,” and frankly that’s what this all comes down to.
Here’s a sampling of conversation in Native circles about the settlement:
“It may seem unreasonable to many of you that Elouise may stand to receive more than the any other plaintiff but, remember, she also must repay $11 million in grants/loans that helped fund the lawsuit.” (Dakota)
“Honestly, this settlement is an insult. This is no reflection on the efforts of Ms. Cobell; it’s really an indictment on the government and its colonizing practices … they knew that the amount could never be calculated, but that it goes way beyond the $3 billion amount. We have a history of having to accept handouts from these people at their discretion, almost like beggars.” (Joseph Collins)
“I think $1.4 billion is a huge ‘slap in the face!’ … what about the mineral rights if and when the lands are reverted back to tribal lands?” (ritareplies)
Such commentary about whether “settling” for a particular solution is laudable or damnable is similar to discussion found elsewhere on mediaINDIGENA, viz., our poll asking whether it was “acceptable” or “offensive” to support a proposed law that went some ways (but not all the way) toward restoring the ability of Native women to pass Indian Status on to their children and grandchildren. Not unlike the Cobell settlement, this divisive issue also pits those leaning toward a small measure of advance against those who view the initiative as the first poison arrow that ultimately infects and undermines the value of everyone’s rights.
Are there flaws in Elouise Cobell’s fight? Yes. Are they worth putting up with? Hmmm. Well, is that not like asking “Do you opt in to Canada’s ‘settlement’ offer on residential school abuses — not to erase the wrong, but mainly to get some measure of peace — or is that selling out?”
Cobell’s team argues that there is an option to “opt out” of the settlement for those who want to fight another day. Critics reply the majority of people don’t understand that option, or that it’d be too difficult to pursue.
I note Elouise Cobell herself is saying she’s only ready to fight ’til mid-October:
“It is becoming more likely that Congress will not pass settlement legislation. Indeed it is unlikely for any settlement or judgment to be conditioned on political acceptance by Congress. … [Nevertheless,] we have gathered a massive amount of support from Members of Congress. I am informed that if we ever come to a vote in the Senate that we have sufficient votes to safely beat any filibuster. For this reason, I have carefully considered our options, consulted with scores of beneficiaries, listened to their concerns, and talked to our attorneys before making a decision to extend the agreement for what is likely to be the last time. I’m especially mindful of the fact that the vast majority of beneficiaries want this settlement to work because it is a fair deal.”
I don’t fault Kimberly Craven and others who see Elouise Cobell as selling Native people short. The way I see it, Cobell’s “short” is a lot taller than all other tangible efforts to date.
But ask yourself: If Cobell’s meagre $3 billion settlement is dropped, how much money is anyone going to see — and when?
Since launching our weekly segment on THE WORD on STREETZ-FM, North America’s first and only urban Aboriginal radio station, I’ve been keeping my eye out for related content on the Web.
And if you’re new to hip-hop Indigenous-style, or want a greater sense of how the music is part of a broader cultural movement, a good place to start is grunt gallery’s “BEAT NATION.” Sub-titled “hip-hop as indigenous culture,” the site is an excellent primer on how Aboriginal artists in Canada are re-interpreting and innovating hip-hop cultural forms as vehicles for “youth expression and creativity … and combin[ing] them with Aboriginal story, experience and aesthetics.”
This concrete creativity takes many forms, from the obvious musical to the visual and the textual. As co-curator Tania Willard writes,
Medicine beats and ancestral rhymes fuel indigenous hip hop, art and expression. Culture and identity are in a constant state of flux; new forms created today are becoming the culture of our grandchildren — hybridized, infused and mixed with older ‘traditions’. We continue to shift, grow and change. Whether the influences are hip hop or country music, the roots of the expression go back to cultural story, indigenous language, land and rights, and the spirit of our ancestors.
And this is by no means a movement restricted to Canada or even North America — Australia and New Zealand quickly come to mind as hot spots — so be sure to check back here for more sites documenting and distributing this increasingly global phenomenon.
[ Image via transmediale.de ]
