Vancouverite has come forward to claim $40M lotto jackpot
Lotto Max tickets are shown in Toronto on Monday, Feb. 26, 2018. THE CANADIAN PRESS
A Vancouver resident who beat the odds and hit a $40 million Lotto Max jackpot has come forward to claim the massive prize, according to the B.C. Lottery Corporation.
The person who bought the winning ticket for the May 23 draw will be introduced at a news conference Thursday.
The announcement that the $40-million ticket was sold in B.C. came hot on the heels of another enormous win in the province.
Surrey resident Justin Simporios claimed an $80 million prize in the May 9 draw, making him the winner of the largest jackpot ever by a single Canadian.
The odds of winning a Lotto Max jackpot are one in 33,294,800 per $5 play, according to BCLC.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
National Post
2 hours ago
- National Post
Randall Denley: Ontario's 'historic' spending under Ford sure isn't producing results
Article content The Ontario government's finances are a paradox. The PC government regularly boasts about 'historic' levels of spending, but faces constant complaints about underfunding, especially from the health-care, education and post-secondary sectors. Article content What's the real picture? Article content Article content In fact, budget figures show that revenue and spending have increased dramatically since Premier Doug Ford was first elected. In 2019–20, his first full-year budget, total government revenue was $156.1 billion. This year, it's projected to be $219.9 billion, a 41 per cent increase. Spending has gone up by about the same percentage, from $164.8 billion in 2019–20 to a projected $232.5 billion this year. Article content With such a large spending increase, it's hard to believe that anything could be underfunded, but discouragingly, that is the case. Article content Article content Ontario's per capita spending on health care is second lowest in the country. Per-student funding for Ontario universities is the lowest in Canada. The province does a bit better on public education, with the sixth highest per-student funding nationally. Article content Those are disappointing numbers. One would expect more from the country's biggest province. Article content It's not like the Ford government is restraining spending to balance the books. Far from it. That first Ford budget had a $9-billion deficit and the current one projects a deficit of $14.6 billion. Article content A new report card on this year's budget gives Finance Minister Peter Bethlenfalvy a grade of D- for his performance on the critical issues of debt, debt interest payments, spending increases and tax relief. Article content The Canadian Taxpayers Federation report notes that Bethlenfalvy's latest budget increases debt by $22 billion, and says that by the end of the budget year, debt will have reached $461 billion. That's about $28,472 per person, the second highest in the country. Net interest payments will cost Ontarians just over $1,000 per person this year, the fourth highest in the country. Spending is up 7.9 per cent, third highest among provinces. Article content Article content The only moderately bright note in the taxpayers' report card was tax relief, where the Ford government finally made permanent a longstanding 5.7 cent per litre gas tax cut. Article content Article content Unfortunately, that cut is not typical of the Ford government's performance on taxes. Promises made in 2018 to cut corporate taxes and personal income taxes remain unfulfilled. Ontario's combined federal/provincial top marginal tax rate of 53.53 per cent is the third highest of any jurisdiction in Canada or the U.S. Article content Here, at least, there is some reassuring news. The health, education and post-secondary sectors have all benefited substantially from the increased tax take. In 2019–20, health spending was $63.7 billion. In 2025–26, it is projected to be $91.1 billion. Comparing the same two time periods, education has gone from $30.2 billion to $41 billion and post-secondary spending will rise from $10.5 billion to $13 billion.
National Post
2 hours ago
- National Post
Colby Cosh: Taxing away the Stanley Cup
The other day a U.S. news network emailed me to see if I wanted to do a radio interview about Canada's Stanley Cup drought, which, as you all know, has just had its 32nd birthday; I presume somebody has done the decent thing and gone out and bought it a nice terry-cloth bathrobe or perhaps a stylish quarter-zip. I begged off from the request, citing pathological gloom, and resumed staring at the ceiling, an activity I intend to resume after I've written a few hundred words here. Nice to be back, by the way: please don't ask how my little Oiler-fan break went. Article content Article content The email brought a thought I've often had back to the surface of my mind, like a hunk of strawberry in a smoothie. People often blame high Canadian taxation for our Stanley Cup crisis; in a league bound by a collectively bargained salary cap, U.S. states with low income taxes have an obvious advantage in attracting free-agent players, an advantage generally accompanied by nicer weather, prettier golf courses and other features of American economics and culture. Article content Article content Article content There can't be any doubt that this is a real contributing factor to the ongoing drought, although when I look at the roster of the victorious Florida Panthers I don't see the cruel talon of the taxman. Honesty requires me to report that Florida's just effing full of tough, capable players that other teams, mostly Canadian ones, flat-out gave up on and dealt away. Article content But this reminds you that the tax burden influences every level of a competitive business that is even a little bit complicated. When it comes to the effects of onerous Canadian taxes, it's relatively easy to see that a free-agent player facing near-equal contract offers is likely to be tempted by the lower-tax jurisdiction. And the thought that keeps recurring to me is: 'We could fix that part. We could fix it easily. We could fix it overnight.' Article content I'm frankly amazed that some banzai backbencher with ambitions hasn't picked up this flag — advocating a large, explicit tax cut for NHL players in Canada, with the stated goal of giving Canadian teams a positive advantage in contesting the Cup (which, you will surely recall, is morally and lawfully the property of the Canadian people and not the National Hockey League). Article content Oh, sure, our governments would be forgoing some tax revenue from a particular category of rich people that we have decided we want to encourage, reward and retain; I suppose we can't countenance that sort of thing, except when it comes to, say, the inclusion rate on capital-gains taxes paid by corporations and trusts. If a government wanted to give more favourable tax treatment to professional hockey players, it could probably do so in a shrewdly disguised way. But it might be smarter to do it openly: declare that we're not going to fight for the Cup with one hand tied behind our backs.
Globe and Mail
2 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Do you need $1.54-million to retire, or is it $2.1-million?
Please, no more polls from financial companies about how much money people imagine they need to save for retirement. These polls reflect pure uninformed guesswork. One recent poll cited an average $1.54-million, while another said $1.02-million. In another poll, the average response from millennials was $2.1-million. The purpose of these polls is to get media attention for the financial companies that sponsor them and initiate discussions on retirement issues. OK, here goes. Generalizing about how much people need to retire is a sure way to turn people off of retirement planning. If you're struggling to save, it's unhelpful to hear a consensus that it takes a seven-figure amount. There's an emerging capitulation theme in personal finance today - 'I'll never buy a home/retire, so why bother being disciplined with money?' Setting high bars for saving perpetuates this. Also, asking people how much they need to retire is pretty much pointless. The more relevant question is, how much do you see yourself spending in retirement? Once spending requirements are set, the next step is to project an individual's retirement income based on current and expected future saving, plus the Canada Pension Plan, Old Age Security and, for the fortunate minority, company pensions. Gaps between expected spending and projected retirement income can be handled. Maybe you ramp up retirement saving, or pare your expected future spending. Working longer can also help with any saving shortfalls, and so can upgrading your skills and seeking a higher-paying job. Another problem with those polls saying people think they need $1-million or more to retire is that they focus attention on investing, rather than planning. Yes, you have to put money aside and invest it for retirement. But planning is how you find out how much you need to invest over the years, and the right mix of stocks and bonds for your needs. What a lot of people hear when those retirement polls are published: 'You're not saving enough.' In personal finance, this kind of nagging rarely works. A better approach is personal empowerment, which means helping people find out where they stand and what they need to do going forward to reach their retirement goals. The federal government offers a very good free tool for getting this discussion going. It's called the Canadian Retirement Income Calculator and it does exactly what the name suggests. Plug in your retirement details and get an estimate of what your income might look like when you stop working. If you need more, there are lots of steps you can take.
