The hygienist makes 60,000$ per year, of which the government will rob $20,000 "at source." This leaves her with $40,000 per year, or a bit over $3,300 net per month.

The dentists makes well over $500,000. Of course, it's considered business income, so it is taxed at 8% maximum (if it is taxed at all). He can of course pay himself a dividend, which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary), and then at half the rate that lady's income. With a huge tax credit and really no deduction.

Someone said OP is a leaf, so we'll go with that. OP also said "dividend," so we'll assume the practice is incorporated as a professional cooptation. OP's claims don't seem correct.

• The dentist makes over $500,000. No. The practice makes $500k. Then it has to pay all the employee salaries (including that hygienist) and corporate taxes. Apparently those are 9% federal + provincial. So the practice is already taxed at 9-24%. "Maximum 8%" is BS. But they can deduct business expenses.
• Pays himself a $60k dividend. Okay, so he went with a dividend in place of a salary. A salary would have been deductible as a business expense on the corporate tax. The dividend is not. It's coming out of funds already taxed at 9-24%. He's then personally taxed at the dividend rate. It seems this has multiple schemes, but depending on province, it's then taxed at a dividend rate. At the highest levels of personal income, that's an additional 40-48%
• If it were instead payed as a salary, it would be deductible on the cooperate taxes, but the personal income tax would be at a higher rate. Up to 54% in some regions for the highest earners.

Basically, the reason the dividends are taxed at a lower rate is because they were already subject to corporate tax. Salary is taxed harder on the individual but deductible from the corporates tax as a business expense. Sounds like it's roughly a balance in total tax contributions. Another possible benefit to the dividend is maybe no forced contribution to the mandatory retirement program (because the shareholder/employee distinction? I'm not going to go that deep down the rabbit hole.

which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary)

True, but slightly misleading. In some provinces, with NO other income, with the right type of dividend, within specific value limits, then yes. Also, that's after corporate taxes, so even in the "not-taxed" case it's been taxed by the feds and the province once already.

This is based on very brief reading, so I'm not 100%.
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/businesses/topics/corporations/corporation-tax-rates.html

The normal cooperate tax rate is 38% + whatever the province sticks on top of that. Canadians are being raped in taxes. But for a Canadian-controlled private business, qualifying for a small business deduction, then it drops to of 9%-12.2% up to the $500k OP precisely chose as an example. After that it jumps substantially. Same with the number they picked for the $60k dividend.

The hygienist makes 60,000$ per year, of which the government will rob $20,000 "at source." This leaves her with $40,000 per year, or a bit over $3,300 net per month.

The dentists makes well over $500,000. Of course, it's considered business income, so it is taxed at 8% maximum (if it is taxed at all). He can of course pay himself a dividend, which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary), and then at half the rate that lady's income. With a huge tax credit and really no deduction.

Someone said OP is a leaf, so we'll go with that. OP also said "dividend," so we'll assume the practice is incorporated as a professional cooptation. OP's claims don't seem correct.

• The dentist makes over $500,000. No. The practice makes $500k. Then it has to pay all the employee salaries (including that hygienist) and corporate taxes. Apparently those are 9% federal + provincial. So the practice is already taxed at 9-24%. "Maximum 8%" is BS. But they can deduct business expenses.
• Pays himself a $60k dividend. Okay, so he went with a dividend in place of a salary. A salary would have been deductible as a business expense on the corporate tax. The dividend is not. It's coming out of funds already taxed at 9-24%. He's then personally taxed at the dividend rate. It seems this has multiple schemes, but depending on province, it's then taxed at a dividend rate. At the highest levels of personal income, that's an additional 40-48%
• If it were instead payed as a salary, it would be deductible on the cooperate taxes, but the personal income tax would be at a higher rate. Up to 54% in some regions for the highest earners.

Basically, the reason the dividends are taxed at a lower rate is because they were already subject to corporate tax. Salary is taxed harder on the individual but deductible from the corporates tax as a business expense. Sounds like it's roughly a balance in total tax contributions. Another possible benefit to the dividend is maybe no forced contribution to the mandatory retirement program (because the shareholder/employee distinction? I'm not going to go that deep down the rabbit hole.

which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary)

True, but slightly misleading. In some provinces, with NO other income, with the right type of dividend, then yes. Also, that's after corporate taxes, so even in the "not-taxed" case it's been taxed by the feds and the province once already.

This is based on very brief reading, so I'm not 100%.
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/businesses/topics/corporations/corporation-tax-rates.html

The normal cooperate tax rate is 38% + whatever the province sticks on top of that. Canadians are being raped in taxes. But for a Canadian-controlled private business, qualifying for a small business deduction, then it drops to of 9%-12.2% up to the $500k OP precisely chose as an example. After that it jumps substantially. Same with the number they picked for the $60k dividend.

The hygienist makes 60,000$ per year, of which the government will rob $20,000 "at source." This leaves her with $40,000 per year, or a bit over $3,300 net per month.

The dentists makes well over $500,000. Of course, it's considered business income, so it is taxed at 8% maximum (if it is taxed at all). He can of course pay himself a dividend, which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary), and then at half the rate that lady's income. With a huge tax credit and really no deduction.

Someone said OP is a leaf, so we'll go with that. OP also said "dividend," so we'll assume the practice is incorporated as a professional cooptation. OP's claims don't seem correct.

• The dentist makes over $500,000. No. The practice makes $500k. Then it has to pay all the employee salaries (including that hygienist) and corporate taxes. Apparently those are 9% federal + provincial. So the practice is already taxed at 9-24%. "Maximum 8%" is BS. But they can deduct business expenses.
• Pays himself a $60k dividend. Okay, so he went with a dividend in place of a salary. A salary would have been deductible as a business expense on the corporate tax. The dividend is not. It's coming out of funds already taxed at 9-24%. He's then personally taxed at the dividend rate. It seems this has multiple schemes, but depending on province, it's then taxed at a dividend rate. At the highest levels of personal income, that's an additional 40-48%
• If it were instead payed as a salary, it would be deductible on the cooperate taxes, but the personal income tax would be at a higher rate. Up to 54% in some regions for the highest earners.

Basically, the reason the dividends are taxed at a lower rate is because they were already subject to corporate tax. Salary is taxed harder on the individual but deductible from the corporates tax as a business expense. Sounds like it's roughly a balance in total tax contributions. Another possible benefit to the dividend is maybe no forced contribution to the mandatory retirement program (because the shareholder/employee distinction? I'm not going to go that deep down the rabbit hole.

which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary)

True, but slightly misleading. In some provinces, with NO other income, with the right type of dividend, then yes. Also, that's after corporate taxes, so even in the "not-taxed" case it's been taxed by the feds and the province once already.

This is based on very brief reading, so I'm not 100%.
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/businesses/topics/corporations/corporation-tax-rates.html

The normal cooperate tax rate is 38% + whatever the province sticks on top of that. Canadians are being raped in taxes. But for a Canadian-controlled private business, qualifying for a small business deduction, then it drops to of 9%-12.2% up to the $500k OP percisely chose as an example. After that it jumps substantially. Same with the number they picked for the $60k dividend.

The hygienist makes 60,000$ per year, of which the government will rob $20,000 "at source." This leaves her with $40,000 per year, or a bit over $3,300 net per month.

The dentists makes well over $500,000. Of course, it's considered business income, so it is taxed at 8% maximum (if it is taxed at all). He can of course pay himself a dividend, which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary), and then at half the rate that lady's income. With a huge tax credit and really no deduction.

Someone said OP is a leaf, so we'll go with that. OP also said "dividend," so we'll assume the practice is incorporated as a professional cooptation. OP's claims don't seem correct.

• The dentist makes over $500,000. No. The practice makes $500k. Then it has to pay all the employee salaries (including that hygienist) and corporate taxes. Apparently those are 9% federal + provincial. So the practice is already taxed at 9-24%. "Maximum 8%" is BS. But they can deduct business expenses.
• Pays himself a $60k dividend. Okay, so he went with a dividend in place of a salary. A salary would have been deductible as a business expense on the corporate tax. The dividend is not. It's coming out of funds already taxed at 9-24%. He's then personally taxed at the dividend rate. It seems this has multiple schemes, but depending on province, it's then taxed at a dividend rate. At the highest levels of personal income, that's an additional 40-48%
• If it were instead payed as a salary, it would be deductible on the cooperate taxes, but the personal income tax would be at a higher rate. Up to 54% in some regions for the highest earners.

Basically, the reason the dividends are taxed at a lower rate is because they were already subject to corporate tax. Salary is taxed harder on the individual but deductible from the corporates tax as a business expense. Sounds like it's roughly a balance in total tax contributions. Another possible benefit to the dividend is maybe no forced contribution to the mandatory retirement program (because the shareholder/employee distinction? I'm not going to go that deep down the rabbit hole.

which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary)

True, but slightly misleading. In some provinces, with NO other income, with the right type of dividend, then yes. Also, that's after corporate taxes, so even in the "not-taxed" case it's been taxed by the feds and the province once already.

This is based on very brief reading, so I'm not 100%.
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/businesses/topics/corporations/corporation-tax-rates.html

The normal cooperate tax rate is 38% + whatever the province sticks on top of that. Canadians are being raped in taxes. But for a Canadian-controlled private business, qualifying for a small business deduction, then it drops to of 9%-12% up to the $500k OP conveniently chose as an example. After that it jumps substantially. Same with the number they picked for the $60k dividend.

The hygienist makes 60,000$ per year, of which the government will rob $20,000 "at source." This leaves her with $40,000 per year, or a bit over $3,300 net per month.

The dentists makes well over $500,000. Of course, it's considered business income, so it is taxed at 8% maximum (if it is taxed at all). He can of course pay himself a dividend, which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary), and then at half the rate that lady's income. With a huge tax credit and really no deduction.

Someone said OP is a leaf, so we'll go with that. OP also said "dividend," so we'll assume the practice is incorporated as a professional cooptation. OP's claims don't seem correct.

• The dentist makes over $500,000. No. The practice makes $500k. Then it has to pay all the employee salaries (including that hygienist) and corporate taxes. Apparently those are 9% federal + provincial. So the practice is already taxed at 9-24%. "Maximum 8%" is BS. But they can deduct business expenses.
• Pays himself a $60k dividend. Okay, so he went with a dividend in place of a salary. A salary would have been deductible as a business expense on the corporate tax. The dividend is not. It's coming out of funds already taxed at 9-24%. He's then personally taxed at the dividend rate. It seems this has multiple schemes, but depending on province, it's then taxed at a dividend rate. At the highest levels of personal income, that's an additional 40-48%
• If it were instead payed as a salary, it would be deductible on the cooperate taxes, but the personal income tax would be at a higher rate. Up to 54% in some regions for the highest earners.

Basically, the reason the dividends are taxed at a lower rate is because they were already subject to corporate tax. Salary is taxed harder on the individual but deductible from the corporates tax as a business expense. Sounds like it's roughly a balance in total tax contributions. The only real benefit to the dividend is maybe no forced contribution to the mandatory retirement program (because the shareholder/employee distinction? I'm not going to go that deep down the rabbit hole.

which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary)

True, but slightly misleading. In some provinces, with NO other income, with the right type of dividend, then yes. Also, that's after corporate taxes, so even in the "not-taxed" case it's been taxed by the feds and the province once already.

This is based on very brief reading, so I'm not 100%.
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/businesses/topics/corporations/corporation-tax-rates.html

The normal cooperate tax rate is 38% + whatever the province sticks on top of that. Canadians are being raped in taxes. But for a Canadian-controlled private business, qualifying for a small business deduction, then it drops to of 9%-12% up to the $500k OP conveniently chose as an example. After that it jumps substantially. Same with the number they picked for the $60k dividend.

The hygienist makes 60,000$ per year, of which the government will rob $20,000 "at source." This leaves her with $40,000 per year, or a bit over $3,300 net per month.

The dentists makes well over $500,000. Of course, it's considered business income, so it is taxed at 8% maximum (if it is taxed at all). He can of course pay himself a dividend, which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary), and then at half the rate that lady's income. With a huge tax credit and really no deduction.

Someone said OP is a leaf, so we'll go with that. OP also said "dividend," so we'll assume the practice is incorporated as a professional cooptation. OP's claims don't seem correct.

• The dentist makes over $500,000. No. The practice makes $500k. Then it has to pay all the employee salaries (including that hygienist) and corporate taxes. Apparently those are 9% federal + provincial. So the practice is already taxed at 9-24%. "Maximum 8%" is BS. But they can deduct business expenses.
• Pays himself a $60k dividend. Okay, so he went with a dividend in place of a salary. A salary would have been deductible as a business expense on the corporate tax. The dividend is not. It's coming out of funds already taxed at 20-24%. He's then personally taxed at the dividend rate. It seems this has multiple schemes, but depending on province, it's then taxed at a dividend rate. At the highest levels of personal income, that's an additional 40-48%
• If it were instead payed as a salary, it would be deductible on the cooperate taxes, but the personal income tax would be at a higher rate. Up to 54% in some regions for the highest earners.

Basically, the reason the dividends are taxed at a lower rate is because they were already subject to corporate tax. Salary is taxed harder on the individual but deductible from the corporates tax as a business expense. Sounds like it's roughly a balance in total tax contributions. The only real benefit to the dividend is maybe no forced contribution to the mandatory retirement program (because the shareholder/employee distinction? I'm not going to go that deep down the rabbit hole.

which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary)

True, but slightly misleading. In some provinces, with NO other income, with the right type of dividend, then yes. Also, that's after corporate taxes, so even in the "not-taxed" case it's been taxed by the feds and the province once already.

This is based on very brief reading, so I'm not 100%.
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/businesses/topics/corporations/corporation-tax-rates.html

The normal cooperate tax rate is 38% + whatever the province sticks on top of that. Canadians are being raped in taxes. But for a Canadian-controlled private business, qualifying for a small business deduction, then it drops to of 9%-12% up to the $500k OP conveniently chose as an example. After that it jumps substantially. Same with the number they picked for the $60k dividend.

The hygienist makes 60,000$ per year, of which the government will rob $20,000 "at source." This leaves her with $40,000 per year, or a bit over $3,300 net per month.

The dentists makes well over $500,000. Of course, it's considered business income, so it is taxed at 8% maximum (if it is taxed at all). He can of course pay himself a dividend, which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary), and then at half the rate that lady's income. With a huge tax credit and really no deduction.

Someone said OP is a leaf, so we'll go with that. OP also said "dividend," so we'll assume the practice is incorporated as a professional cooptation. OP's claims don't seem correct.

• The dentist makes over $500,000. No. The practice makes $500k. Then it has to pay all the employee salaries (including that hygienist) and corporate taxes. Apparently those are 9% federal + 11-15% local depending on province. So the practice is already taxed at 20-24% But they can deduct business expenses.
• Pays himself a $60k dividend. Okay, so he went with a dividend in place of a salary. A salary would have been deductible as a business expense on the corporate tax. The dividend is not. It's coming out of funds already taxed at 20-24%. He's then personally taxed at the dividend rate. It seems this has multiple schemes, but depending on province, it's then taxed at a dividend rate. At the highest levels of personal income, that's an additional 40-48%
• If it were instead payed as a salary, it would be deductible on the cooperate taxes, but the personal income tax would be at a higher rate. Up to 54% in some regions for the highest earners.

Basically, the reason the dividends are taxed at a lower rate is because they were already subject to corporate tax. Salary is taxed harder on the individual but deductible from the corporates tax as a business expense. Sounds like it's roughly a balance in total tax contributions. The only real benefit to the dividend is maybe no forced contribution to the mandatory retirement program (because the shareholder/employee distinction? I'm not going to go that deep down the rabbit hole.

which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary)

True, but slightly misleading. In some provinces, with NO other income, with the right type of dividend, then yes. Also, that's after corporate taxes, so even in the "not-taxed" case it's been taxed by the feds and the province once already.

This is based on very brief reading, so I'm not 100%.
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/businesses/topics/corporations/corporation-tax-rates.html

The normal cooperate tax rate is 38% + whatever the province sticks on top of that. Canadians are being raped in taxes. But for a Canadian-controlled private business, qualifying for a small business deduction, then it drops to of 9%-12% up to the $500k OP conveniently chose as an example. After that it jumps substantially. Same with the number they picked for the $60k dividend.

The hygienist makes 60,000$ per year, of which the government will rob $20,000 "at source." This leaves her with $40,000 per year, or a bit over $3,300 net per month.

The dentists makes well over $500,000. Of course, it's considered business income, so it is taxed at 8% maximum (if it is taxed at all). He can of course pay himself a dividend, which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary), and then at half the rate that lady's income. With a huge tax credit and really no deduction.

Someone said OP is a leaf, so we'll go with that. OP also said "dividend," so we'll assume the practice is incorporated as a professional cooptation. OP's claims don't seem correct.

• The dentist makes over $500,000. No. The practice makes $500k. Then it has to pay all the employee salaries (including that hygienist) and corporate taxes. Apparently those are 9% federal + 11-15% local depending on province. So the practice is already taxed at 20-24% But they can deduct business expenses.
• Pays himself a $60k dividend. Okay, so he went with a dividend in place of a salary. A salary would have been deductible as a business expense on the corporate tax. The dividend is not. It's coming out of funds already taxed at 20-24%. He's then personally taxed at the dividend rate. It seems this has multiple schemes, but depending on province, it's then taxed at a dividend rate. At the highest levels of personal income, that's an additional 40-48%
• If it were instead payed as a salary, it would be deductible on the cooperate taxes, but the personal income tax would be at a higher rate. Up to 54% in some regions for the highest earners.

Basically, the reason the dividends are taxed at a lower rate is because they were already subject to corporate tax. Salary is taxed harder on the individual but deductible from the corporates tax as a business expense. Sounds like it's roughly a balance in total tax contributions. The only real benefit to the dividend is maybe no forced contribution to the mandatory retirement program (because the shareholder/employee distinction? I'm not going to go that deep down the rabbit hole.

which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary)

True, but slightly misleading. In some provinces, with NO other income, with the right type of dividend, then yes. Also, that's after corporate taxes, so even in the "not-taxed" case it's already been taxed by the feds and the province.

This is based on very brief reading, so I'm not 100%.
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/businesses/topics/corporations/corporation-tax-rates.html

The normal cooperate tax rate is 38% + whatever the province sticks on top of that. Canadians are being raped in taxes. But for a Canadian-controlled private business, qualifying for a small business deduction, then it drops to of 9%-12% up to the $500k OP conveniently chose as an example. After that it jumps substantially. Same with the number they picked for the $60k dividend.

The hygienist makes 60,000$ per year, of which the government will rob $20,000 "at source." This leaves her with $40,000 per year, or a bit over $3,300 net per month.

The dentists makes well over $500,000. Of course, it's considered business income, so it is taxed at 8% maximum (if it is taxed at all). He can of course pay himself a dividend, which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary), and then at half the rate that lady's income. With a huge tax credit and really no deduction.

Someone said OP is a leaf, so we'll go with that. OP also said "dividend," so we'll assume the practice is incorporated as a professional cooptation. OP's claims don't seem correct.

• The dentist makes over $500,000. No. The practice makes $500k. Then it has to pay all the employee salaries (including that hygienist) and corporate taxes. Apparently those are 9% federal + 11-15% local depending on province. So the practice is already taxed at 20-24% But they can deduct business expenses.
• Pays himself a $60k dividend. Okay, so he went with a dividend in place of a salary. A salary would have been deductible as a business expense on the corporate tax. The dividend is not. It's coming out of funds already taxed at 20-24%. He's then personally taxed at the dividend rate. It seems this has multiple schemes, but depending on province, it's then taxed at a dividend rate. At the highest levels of personal income, that's an additional 40-48%
• If it were instead payed as a salary, it would be deductible on the cooperate taxes, but the personal income tax would be at a higher rate. Up to 54% in some regions for the highest earners.

Basically, the reason the dividends are taxed at a lower rate is because they were already subject to corporate tax. Salary is taxed harder on the individual but deductible from the corporates tax as a business expense. Sounds like it's roughly a balance in total tax contributions. The only real benefit to the dividend is maybe no forced contribution to the mandatory retirement program (because the shareholder/employee distinction? I'm not going to go that deep down the rabbit hole.

which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary)

True, but slightly misleading. In some provinces, with NO other income, with the right type of dividend, then yes. Also, that's after corporate taxes, so even in the "not-taxed" case it's been taxed 20%+ already.

This is based on very brief reading, so I'm not 100%.
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/businesses/topics/corporations/corporation-tax-rates.html

The normal cooperate tax rate is 38% + whatever the province sticks on top of that. Canadians are being raped in taxes. But for a Canadian-controlled private business, qualifying for a small business deduction, then it drops to of 9%-12% up to the $500k OP conveniently chose as an example. After that it jumps substantially. Same with the number they picked for the $60k dividend.

The hygienist makes 60,000$ per year, of which the government will rob $20,000 "at source." This leaves her with $40,000 per year, or a bit over $3,300 net per month.

The dentists makes well over $500,000. Of course, it's considered business income, so it is taxed at 8% maximum (if it is taxed at all). He can of course pay himself a dividend, which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary), and then at half the rate that lady's income. With a huge tax credit and really no deduction.

Someone said OP is a leaf, so we'll go with that. OP also said "dividend," so we'll assume the practice is incorporated as a professional cooptation. OP's claims don't seem correct.

• The dentist makes over $500,000. No. The practice makes $500k. Then it has to pay all the employee salaries (including that hygienist) and corporate taxes. Apparently those are 9% federal + 11-15% local depending on province. So the practice is already taxed at 20-24% But they can deduct business expenses.
• Pays himself a $60k dividend. Okay, so he went with a dividend in place of a salary. A salary would have been deductible as a business expense on the corporate tax. The dividend is not. It's coming out of funds already taxed at 20-24%. He's then personally taxed at the dividend rate. It seems this has multiple schemes, but depending on province, it's then taxed at a dividend rate. At the highest levels of personal income, that's an additional 40-48%
• If it were instead payed as a salary, it would be deductible on the cooperate taxes, but the personal income tax would be at a higher rate. Up to 54% in some regions for the highest earners.

Basically, the reason the dividends are taxed at a lower rate is because they were already subject to corporate tax. Salary is taxed harder on the individual but deductible from the corporates tax as a business expense. Sounds like it's roughly a balance in total tax contributions. The only real benefit to the dividend is maybe no forced contribution to the mandatory retirement program (because the shareholder/employee distinction? I'm not going to go that deep down the rabbit hole.

which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary)

True, but slightly misleading. In some provinces, with NO other income, with the right type of dividend, then yes. Also, that's after corporate taxes, so even in the "not-taxed" case it's been taxed 20%+ already.

This is based on very brief reading, so I'm not 100%.
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/businesses/topics/corporations/corporation-tax-rates.html

The normal cooperate tax rate is 38% + whatever the province sticks on top of that. Canadians are being raped in taxes. But for a Canadian-controlled private business, qualifying for a small business deduction, then it drops to of 9%-12% up to the $500k OP conveniently chose as an example. After that it jumps substantially.

The hygienist makes 60,000$ per year, of which the government will rob $20,000 "at source." This leaves her with $40,000 per year, or a bit over $3,300 net per month.

The dentists makes well over $500,000. Of course, it's considered business income, so it is taxed at 8% maximum (if it is taxed at all). He can of course pay himself a dividend, which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary), and then at half the rate that lady's income. With a huge tax credit and really no deduction.

Someone said OP is a leaf, so we'll go with that. OP also said "dividend," so we'll assume the practice is incorporated as a professional cooptation. OP's claims don't seem correct.

• The dentist makes over $500,000. No. The practice makes $500k. Then it has to pay all the employee salaries (including that hygienist) and corporate taxes. Apparently those are 9% federal + 11-15% local depending on province. So the practice is already taxed at 20-24% But they can deduct business expenses.
• Pays himself a $60k dividend. Okay, so he went with a dividend in place of a salary. A salary would have been deductible as a business expense on the corporate tax. The dividend is not. It's coming out of funds already taxed at 20-24%. He's then personally taxed at the dividend rate. It seems this has multiple schemes, but depending on province, it's then taxed at a dividend rate. At the highest levels of personal income, that's an additional 40-48%
• If it were instead payed as a salary, it would be deductible on the cooperate taxes, but the personal income tax would be at a higher rate. Up to 54% in some regions for the highest earners.

Basically, the reason the dividends are taxed at a lower rate is because they were already subject to corporate tax. Salary is taxed harder on the individual but deductible from the corporates tax as a business expense. Sounds like it's roughly a balance in total tax contributions. The only real benefit to the dividend is maybe no forced contribution to the mandatory retirement program (because the shareholder/employee distinction? I'm not going to go that deep down the rabbit hole.

which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary)

True, but slightly misleading. In some provinces, with NO other income, with the right type of dividend, then yes. Also, that's after corporate taxes, so even in the "not-taxed" case it's been taxed 20%+ already.

This is based on very brief reading, so I'm not 100%. It sounds like the OP was cherry picking the situation.
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/businesses/topics/corporations/corporation-tax-rates.html

The normal cooperate tax rate is 38% + whatever the province sticks on top of that. Canadians are being raped in taxes. But for a Canadian-controlled private business, qualifying for a small business deduction, then it drops to of 9%-12% up to the $500k OP conveniently chose as an example. After that it jumps substantially.

The hygienist makes 60,000$ per year, of which the government will rob $20,000 "at source." This leaves her with $40,000 per year, or a bit over $3,300 net per month.

The dentists makes well over $500,000. Of course, it's considered business income, so it is taxed at 8% maximum (if it is taxed at all). He can of course pay himself a dividend, which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary), and then at half the rate that lady's income. With a huge tax credit and really no deduction.

Someone said OP is a leaf, so we'll go with that. OP also said "dividend," so we'll assume the practice is incorporated as a professional cooptation. OP's claims don't seem correct.

• The dentist makes over $500,000. No. The practice makes $500k. Then it has to pay all the employee salaries (including that hygienist) and corporate taxes. Apparently those are 9% federal + 11-15% local depending on province. So the practice is already taxed at 20-24% But they can deduct business expenses.
• Pays himself a $60k dividend. Okay, so he went with a dividend in place of a salary. A salary would have been deductible as a business expense on the corporate tax. The dividend is not. It's coming out of funds already taxed at 20-24%. He's then personally taxed at the dividend rate. It seems this has multiple schemes, but depending on province, it's then taxed at a dividend rate. At the highest levels of personal income, that's an additional 40-48%
• If it were instead payed as a salary, it would be deductible on the cooperate taxes, but the personal income tax would be at a higher rate. Up to 54% in some regions for the highest earners.

Basically, the reason the dividends are taxed at a lower rate is because they were already subject to corporate tax. Salary is taxed harder on the individual but deductible from the corporates tax as a business expense. Sounds like it's roughly a balance in total tax contributions. The only real benefit to the dividend is maybe no forced contribution to the mandatory retirement program (because the shareholder/employee distinction? I'm not going to go that deep down the rabbit hole.

which is not-taxed for the first $60,000 (our lady's whole salary)

True, but slightly misleading. In some provinces, with NO other income, with the right type of dividend, then yes. Also, that's after corporate taxes, so even in the "not-taxed" case it's been taxed 20%+ already.

This is based on very brief reading, so I'm not 100%. But I'd love to see where OP got the "business are taxed at 8% or not at all total," part.