Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 76 - 90 of 656
Karen Hogan
View Karen Hogan Profile
Karen Hogan
2021-04-13 12:48
What we did find here was that the Canada Revenue Agency and the Department of Finance worked in really tight timelines to design a wage subsidy, one that's never been seen in Canada before. The goal of that subsidy was to try to maintain the employer-employee relationship, to keep individuals working and to allow businesses to be better prepared for the reboot of the economy.
The focus in this case, as well as for the Canada emergency response benefit, was on getting payments out in a timely way. The government chose what is known as an international best practice in emergency situations: to focus less on prepayment controls—which it typically would do to vet eligibility and applications—get money out in order to provide support, and focus on post-payment controls. That just underscores the importance of the post-payment work and why, for both of these programs, my office will go back and do audits to look at that post-payment work.
When they chose not to ask for those social insurance numbers in the example you asked about, it was for a few reasons. One reason that this decision highlighted was the fact that their IT systems had some weaknesses, and they couldn't handle some of the data and the cross-comparability. Another was a lack of timely tax information, in that they weren't able to vet revenues from the prior years beforehand since so many filers had not filed, for example, their GST returns, which would have provided evidence of revenues the year before in order to demonstrate a decline in revenues.
Really, the decision was made by the Canada Revenue Agency to prioritize support and to deal with all of these potential issues through post-payment verification work. They've noted that it will take several years to get through this work, and that is why we will be auditing it early on to make sure that it has some good controls and some good mechanisms in place.
View Len Webber Profile
CPC (AB)
I see.
Are you saying that the agency did not do any type of control at all with respect to these applications? They just basically gave what was asked for on the application?
Karen Hogan
View Karen Hogan Profile
Karen Hogan
2021-04-13 12:50
No, they did have some automated prepayment controls up front. Both the wage subsidy and the Canada emergency response benefit had a few up front, but not the typical stronger due diligence they would have done normally when handing out subsidy payments. It means there is the potential that some payments were made in error or to ineligible applicants, so those payments will have to be identified and then recovered.
View Brian Masse Profile
NDP (ON)
View Brian Masse Profile
2021-04-08 16:54
Some of the infrastructure projects over here, like the Gordie Howe bridge, are something I've been after since 1997.
At any rate, the U.S. has provisions to allow for access to minorities, women and others who are disenfranchised historically through the economic system, so that they get a portion or a carve-out. I guess you're saying the same type of thing in some respects. That wouldn't violate our policies because they're already doing it there.
Stuart Trew
View Stuart Trew Profile
Stuart Trew
2021-04-08 16:54
It wouldn't strictly. We didn't seek, within the GPA or the WTO, a carve-out for those policies like the U.S. has. We don't have a carve-out or set-asides for minority-owned businesses or women-owned businesses. I don't see that as a reason not to pursue them. I don't think we should be avoiding risks like that for good policy.
View Mario Simard Profile
BQ (QC)
View Mario Simard Profile
2021-03-26 13:54
My next question is for you, Dr. Godbout.
From the answer you gave to my colleague, Mr. Lefebvre, earlier, I understood that in other sectors there is a partnership research model whereby businesses are investing a third of the missing funding.
Is it true that it's harder to establish these kinds of partnerships in the critical minerals sector?
Jovette Godbout
View Jovette Godbout Profile
Jovette Godbout
2021-03-26 13:55
Yes, this Canadian model is envied around the world, because it allows industry to be involved in R & D. It also allows universities to conduct research that is applied to the sector in question.
In the critical and strategic minerals sector, at the moment there are no lithium mines or rare earth mines in operation, for example. This industry does not have the same financial means to support research. It is therefore true that we are not at all at the same level in terms of research capacity.
On top of that, since we live in a market-driven world and are competing not with each other but with countries that have a monopoly on the market for these substances, intellectual property and patents—in other words, confidentiality aspects of the research results—will be important issues to consider.
View Jack Harris Profile
NDP (NL)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Parsons, I have lots of questions for you but not very much time to ask them.
One very important one is that you make six recommendations regarding what companies should be required to publish with respect to their social media platforms, including publishing guidelines explaining the way they're subject to state mandate and surveillance, that they make their algorithms available for government audits, that they provide transparency reports, and so on.
Do we have the means to actually force companies to do those things in order to be able to operate in this country?
Christopher Parsons
View Christopher Parsons Profile
Christopher Parsons
2021-03-22 20:34
For some of them, we certainly do. As one example, I think we could compel Facebook and other companies to explain how they interact with perhaps Chinese companies as well as Canadian companies.
In other cases, I believe we would have to work with our allies—the United States, Europe and other jurisdictions—to put pressure on the companies and/or pass legislation in the countries out of which they operate.
View Jack Harris Profile
NDP (NL)
Is there any activity coordinated to do that work, or is that something you're recommending we should start to do? Is it happening already?
Christopher Parsons
View Christopher Parsons Profile
Christopher Parsons
2021-03-22 20:34
I think we're seeing pieces of that in the United States and the European Union, but it isn't something I would say is an agreed-upon position by respective governments. It's a place where Canada can participate with our closest allies to make movement on this.
View Jack Harris Profile
NDP (NL)
We'd better get cracking if we're going to have any control over this monster.
Christopher Parsons
View Christopher Parsons Profile
Christopher Parsons
2021-03-22 20:35
We certainly hope this will be something the government looks at.
Charles Milliard
View Charles Milliard Profile
Charles Milliard
2021-03-17 14:38
I'll do my best.
Happy St. Patrick's Day to everyone.
My name is Charles Milliard.
I am the CEO of the Fédération des chambres de commerce du Québec. The FCCQ is an organization that includes both 130 chambers of commerce from across Quebec and 1,100 member companies. We are the largest group of business people in Quebec and we represent all sectors of activity in Quebec.
Thank you for inviting us to testify before you today on Bill C-14, which is a follow-up to the economic statement that was introduced on November 30.
The FCCQ welcomed many of the measures that were presented in this budget update. These include the increase in the wage subsidy rate and its extension to March 13, and June 5 thereafter, as well as significant investments in infrastructure, particularly at major airports. This is noteworthy. However, today we want to focus our comments on the Canada emergency rent subsidy and add some editorial comments on the tourism and pharmaceutical industries.
The Government of Canada has a number of excellent programs in place that are having a major impact on the ability of individuals and businesses to weather the current crisis. These include the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance, CECRA, a program that was put in place quickly and addressed a real and very concrete problem, the difficulty for commercial tenants to pay their rent due to health-related restrictions.
However, problems arose very quickly, and we heard a lot about this at the federation, because it was the building owners who had to apply directly. This proved to be ill-suited to the crisis environment, which complicated the relationship between many tenants and landlords and therefore limited the appeal of the program.
For example, according to a survey conducted by Restaurants Canada, 20% of restaurant owners, or one in five, were not allowed by their landlords to defer rent during the first wave of COVID-19, a criterion that was required to qualify for the CECRA. This made it imperative to change the program. Fortunately, the new Canada emergency rent subsidy, or CERS, addresses this challenge by now providing financial assistance directly to the tenant company, up to and including a 90% subsidy rate. This is major and it was very much appreciated.
On the other hand, it seems unacceptable to us, at this time, to penalize businesses that have not been able to benefit from the CECRA because of its particular mechanics, even though they would have been entitled to it since March 2020. The federation therefore recommends that commercial tenants be allowed to receive the CERS for all months in which they would have been eligible for it since the beginning of the crisis and for which they did not receive the CECRA.
As we all know, government programs are rarely retroactive, and that's fine. However, we are in a more than exceptional situation. Let's be clear: thousands of entrepreneurs were eligible for the CECRA, but they were not able to benefit from the program for reasons that were totally beyond their control. In this case, for us, making the program retroactive would correct an injustice that has been experienced by far too many medium-sized business owners in Quebec and the rest of Canada.
On another note, the FCCQ also looks favourably on the assistance that was announced in the economic statement for the events and arts sector. I know that my colleagues the other witnesses will talk about this at length, so I won't go into detail. However, it should be remembered that the major Quebec and Canadian hotels have seen their clientele of international travellers and conventioneers virtually disappear since last March.
For us, this tourist accommodation sector is important and is still too often left out of the current crisis. For now, unfortunately, the assistance promised by Ottawa is limited to loans, when it is clear to us that hoteliers and tourism businesses still need direct and most concrete assistance, as does the cultural sector, for that matter.
I'll close by quickly talking to you about the pharmaceutical industry, because Bill C-14 is preventing and alleviating shortages of therapeutic products, including drugs and medical equipment, in Canada. This is a great opportunity to remind ourselves of the importance of the health and life sciences sector in Canada. Prior to the pandemic, the FCCQ had recommended a massive investment in this sector, and I believe that the federal government has a role to play, among other things, in the local production of manufacturers and, above all, in the rapid review of the proposed reform of the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board, the PMPRB. The crisis has revealed the importance of having a strong pharmaceutical industry in Canada, and I think you have an opportunity as parliamentarians to improve the situation at this time.
In conclusion, the federation recommends the passage of Bill C-14, while reiterating the importance of making the Canada emergency rent subsidy retroactive for contractors who were unable to obtain emergency assistance.
Thank you. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Marcel Groleau
View Marcel Groleau Profile
Marcel Groleau
2021-03-09 15:37
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, members of the committee.
My name is Marcel Groleau, and I am the general president of the Union des producteurs agricoles, or UPA. With me is Marc St-Roch, a specialist in agricultural taxation. He has the expertise to answer more technical questions.
The agriculture and agri-food sector is responsible for one in eight jobs, generating more than $112 billion in annual revenues and exporting more than $60 billion worth of products every year. The backbone of many rural areas, the sector is also vital to the food security of Canadians.
Some 98% of the country's farms are family owned and operated. That business model is a source of pride for Canadians. Family farming promotes sustainable growth, environmental stewardship and reinvestment in local economies.
The legal structure of farm operations has changed in recent years. According to the 2016 Census of Agriculture, the percentage of incorporated farms more than doubled in 20 years, going from 12% to 25%. As the number of farms dropped by approximately 83,000, the number of incorporated farm operations continued to grow in Canada, increasing from 32,700 to 48,600.
As has been pointed out, farmers are getting older: the average age of farm operators is now 55, seven and a half years older than the average age in 1991.
With rising asset values and, by extension, debt, farm operators have turned to incorporation to help finance investments, since corporate tax rates allow operators to pay back borrowed capital more quickly.
According to a 2017 study by the Business Development Bank of Canada, nearly 40% of small businesses will be transferred or sold by the end of 2022 as owners near retirement. More than $50 billion in agricultural assets is expected to change hands in the next decade.
Unfortunately, Canada's tax system treats the transfer of family businesses unfairly. Under the current rules, it is usually much more expensive for a farm owner to sell their business to a family member than to an unrelated buyer. By penalizing retiring farmers and young farmers hoping to take over the business, the tax rules put the country's family farms in financial jeopardy.
Pursuant to section 84.1 of the Income Tax Act, if, in order to finance the sale of a business, a person sells the shares of their corporation to a related party, the capital gain triggered by the sale is deemed a taxable dividend. That means the seller cannot claim the capital gains deduction in relation to a qualified farm property. Conversely, if the owner sells the corporation to a corporation controlled by an unrelated third party, the capital gain realized can be tax-exempt. That is unfair. Consequently, on a $500,000 gain, the taxable portion can vary by $225,000 when it should be tax-free in both cases.
In order to facilitate financing in relation to the sale of a family corporation between related persons and to allow sellers to take advantage of the capital gains deduction, the Quebec government amended its Taxation Act to include an exception to the application of the provincial provision corresponding to section 84.1 of the federal legislation. The Canadian government should follow Quebec's lead.
Canada's Income Tax Act is out of step with the realities and demographic pressures facing family farms. The UPA believes that Bill C-208 would help level the playing field by eliminating the significant costs that put farm and small business owners at a disadvantage when they wish to sell the business to a family member.
In addition, disputes arise from time to time, and as a result, owners of multi-family farms prefer to operate their businesses separately. Section 55 of the Income Tax Act sets out a mechanism whereby the assets of an incorporated business can be shared among the shareholders tax-free as long as the assets are distributed in a proportional manner.
However, the proportional distribution of assets may not be possible. Assets like farmland cannot be separated. In order for the value of the assets to be distributed equally, a shareholder exiting the business may receive more money instead of a corporation asset. In that case, if the assets of the corporation are not distributed equally, they may become taxable in the form of a non-tax-exempt capital gain.
When the business is transferred between related parties, the requirement for proportional distribution does not apply and the cash payment may not be taxable. However, under section 55 of the Income Tax Act, siblings are deemed to be unrelated for the purposes of the section. As everyone knows, these types of businesses are usually divided among siblings, meaning that section 55 penalizes parties when assets cannot be split proportionally, because it triggers taxes. As a result, the viability of each owner's business is undermined.
The UPA is of the view that the amendment in Bill C-208 to exclude transactions between siblings from the application of section 55 would also be appropriate in cases where the cash and other assets transferred to a shareholder exiting the business are invested in another farm operation. That way, the assets would still be invested in farming despite being split among separate businesses.
In conclusion, farm operations could continue to grow. They often support more than one household and are increasingly being incorporated for tax reasons and estate planning. In this new landscape, good tax planning is crucial for family farmers if family farms are to remain viable for future generations.
Thank you.
Results: 76 - 90 of 656 | Page: 6 of 44

|<
<
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data