Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 241 - 255 of 150000
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
That's fine, Trevor. Thank you.
Mr. Maguire, you said that the government doesn't like Bill C-208. The minister made it clear that the Government of Canada is committed to facilitating genuine intergenerational share transfers, and it has raised some concerns with Bill C-208. Let's be absolutely clear on what's happening here.
We'll go now to Ms. Bendayan, and then Mr. Kelly will close it off.
View Rachel Bendayan Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I must say that I'm very pleased to see Mr. Maguire here. He certainly deserves the credit for bringing forward Bill C-208. As other members have also said, though, Monsieur Emmanuel Dubourg from the Liberal caucus also brought forward something very similar, as have the Bloc and the NDP over the course of the last many years.
Mr. Maguire, you also mentioned that this issue has been discussed and debated for the last 20 years. For 10 of them, there was a Conservative majority, during which time the Conservative government of the day could have brought forward these measures.
I have a few questions for Mr. McGowan.
Since this morning, people have been bringing up Quebec and the integrity measures in place there. I was wondering whether you were inspired by anything in particular. Also, could any of Quebec's rules be implemented countrywide?
Talk about that, if you would, Mr. McGowan.
Trevor McGowan
View Trevor McGowan Profile
Trevor McGowan
2021-07-20 15:52
Certainly, we've gone through the Quebec intergenerational business transfer rules. They provided a great source of inspiration for the work we're currently doing on them. Some of that is probably reflected in the bullets in the July 19 press release. It is certainly a made-in-Canada set of rules to deal with issues that are the same or similar to what we're talking about right now.
It's absolutely been an important source of inspiration. I mean, we've heard about technical questions relating to the Quebec rules and the impact of Bill C-208, but I'm not an expert on Quebec's provincial tax, so I can't really comment on that sort of thing.
View Rachel Bendayan Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you, Mr. McGowan.
As a proud Quebecker, I am always pleased when Quebec leads the way for the rest of the country. You mentioned the integrity measures, of course, but Quebec's child care system is another example.
If I may, Mr. Chair, I'd like to give the rest of my time to Ms. Dzerowicz.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
Ms. Dzerowicz.
View Julie Dzerowicz Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you.
I want to continue with my colleague's comment about how we very much care about the intergenerational issue. I want to put two things on the record and then ask my question.
First, in budget 2019, we said the following:
The Government understands the importance Canadian farmers, fishers and other business owners place on being able to pass their businesses on to their children. The Government will continue its outreach to farmers, fishers and other business owners throughout 2019 to develop new proposals to better accommodate intergenerational transfers of businesses while protecting the integrity and fairness of the tax system.
As well, the December 13, 2019, mandate letter for the Minister of Finance lists it as a top priority to work with the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food “on tax measures to facilitate the intergenerational transfer of farms”.
It is a huge issue for us; it has been an issue for us, and it continues to be an issue for us.
My question is with regard to something that I think you mentioned, Mr. McGowan. You said that a number of amendments are being looked at. I very much took to heart the presentations we had this morning, where we directly had representatives from the Canadian Federation of Agriculture and from the Fédération de la relève agricole du Québec.
As we're making some of those amendments, they very much asked for direct involvement in consultation with the grassroots, not just within the farming sector. I think our chair sort of expanded on that, saying that there are other stakeholder key groups that would want to provide input. The very clear message we heard this morning was that it's not a "one size fits all” in terms of addressing the tax loophole solutions.
I would like to inquire as to whether or not there will be some direct connections with these key stakeholders on the amendments that are being proposed.
Trevor McGowan
View Trevor McGowan Profile
Trevor McGowan
2021-07-20 15:56
I don't know that we can comment on the government's communications strategy beyond what was put out in the July 19 news release. I don't know that we have any details to share on that right now.
I don't know, Mio, if you have anything to add.
Miodrag Jovanovic
View Miodrag Jovanovic Profile
Miodrag Jovanovic
2021-07-20 15:56
I would just add that any stakeholder can decide to approach the Department of Finance. We would be very happy to sit with them and hear what they have to tell us. We don't need a formal consultation process to do that. We do that all the time. We never say no to a meeting with stakeholders.
A more informed discussion will obviously be coming once the draft legislative proposals are out for consultation, for sure, but that doesn't prevent stakeholders from getting in touch with the department.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
Thank you, all.
The last section goes to Mr. Kelly.
View Pat Kelly Profile
CPC (AB)
Thank you. I don't have a question. I know that we're down to just the last few minutes.
I move that the committee invite the Minister of Finance to appear within two weeks of passing this motion.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
It is an allowable motion and it is on the floor.
I don't see any discussion.
(Motion agreed to)
The Chair: All right. The request will go to the minister.
With that, on behalf of the committee, I want to thank the officials from Finance and from the law branch for appearing before the committee today. As we know, it is sometimes difficult to sort out where you guys are at from the political side of the coin. We appreciate your efforts in terms of appearing before the committee today.
As well, as I think was said by members earlier from probably all parties, we very much appreciate your efforts during the last year as we went through this pandemic. For your advice to government, your working day and night to assist Canadians in getting us through the pandemic, and your trying to leave us in a position where the economy can go forward, I sincerely thank you on behalf of the committee. Thank you for your efforts there and for your appearance today.
With that, the meeting is adjourned.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
We will call the meeting to order.
Welcome, everyone, to meeting number 59 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance. Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee is meeting to study the coming into force of Bill C-208, an act to amend the Income Tax Act (transfer of small business or family farm or fishing corporation).
Given the ongoing pandemic situation, and in light of the recommendations from health authorities to remain healthy and safe, all of us attending the meeting—it's the first time all of us have been in a committee room for 16 months—are to maintain the two-metre physical distancing. We must wear a mask when circulating in the room. It's highly recommended that a mask be worn at all times—though I don't think members can be expected to—and we must maintain proper hand hygiene by using the hand sanitizer at the room entrance.
I will try to enforce those measures, but I don't think enforcement will be necessary. I know there's only one staff per party allowed in the room. I thank members for their co-operation.
In our first hour of this session, by video we have with us Mr. Philippe Dufresne, the law clerk and parliamentary counsel, who has been before the committee a number of times, and Michel Bédard, deputy law clerk and parliamentary counsel, from the Office of the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel.
Welcome to both of you. I imagine you have an opening statement. There was considerable controversy. A number of us said that.... I think MPs believe Parliament is supreme. There was a little difference of opinion, I think, between us and the Department of Finance and maybe others.
We'll turn to you for an opening statement. Then we'll go to questions.
Philippe Dufresne
View Philippe Dufresne Profile
Philippe Dufresne
2021-07-20 10:05
Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the committee, for your invitation to appear today following the Department of Finance Canada's June 30 news release respecting Private Member's Bill C‑208, and the clarification issued by the government yesterday which replaced that June 30 news release.
As the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel for the House of Commons, I am pleased to be here today to address any questions that the committee may have on this matter. My office provides comprehensive legal and legislative services to the Speaker, the Board of Internal Economy, the House and its committees, members of Parliament and the House Administration.
As counsel to the House, its committees and members, we serve the interests of the legislative branch of government, and provide similar types of legal and legislative services to the House as the Department of Justice provides to the government.
I am accompanied by Michel Bédard, Deputy Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, Legal Services, and I hope that our answers will assist the committee.
Before turning to Bill C-208, I want to take a few moments to highlight the rules applicable to the coming into force of legislation. These same rules apply equally to legislation implementing tax measures.
Enacting new laws and amending existing ones is a process that culminates in a legislative text receiving royal assent. However, a distinction must be made between the date on which a legislative measure is enacted by Parliament and the date on which it comes into force. A bill becomes law after it has been passed by both Houses in the same form and has received royal assent, but its provisions will produce their effect and become enforceable only when they are brought into force.
The Interpretation Act, which applies to all federal legislation, contains the provisions governing the coming into force of statutes, including the timing of that coming into force. Generally, a statute will come into force either on the day of assent or on another date as provided by the legislation itself. The other date could be a specific day set out in the act, or the act could leave it to the government to determine the date of the coming into force by an order in council.
If no coming-into-force provision is included in an act, the default rule found in subsection 5(2) of the Interpretation Act applies, and the entire act comes into force on the day on which it receives royal assent.
I will now say a few specific words about the implementation of tax measures.
Governments will, from time to time, implement proposed legislative changes respecting taxation, for example for new capital gain inclusion rates or new GST rates, before their formal legislative enactment. The actions of taxpayers will then be influenced by the proposed measures—that are oftentimes already implemented administratively by the Canada Revenue Agency—in anticipation to the subsequent legislative enactment that would have retroactive effect to the date the proposed legislative changes were announced.
House of Commons Procedure and Practice summarizes this practice as follows:
It is the long‑standing practice of Canadian governments to put tax measures into effect as soon as the notices of the ways and means motions on which they are based are tabled in the House of Commons, with the result that taxes are collected as of the date of this notice, even though it may be months, if not years, before the implementing legislation is actually passed by Parliament.
Implementation of the tax measures often starts when their announcement is made, including by the tabling of a ways and means motion, but is always contingent on the tax measures being ultimately enacted by Parliament.
Bill C-208, an act to amend the Income Tax Act (transfer of small business or family farm or fishing corporation), received royal assent on June 29, 2021.
The bill does not contain a coming-into-force or a commencement provision, so, in accordance with subsection 5(2) of the Interpretation Act, the date of coming into force is the date of royal assent. This means that the new provisions apply as of that date, in this case, June 29, 2021.
There is nothing unusual about this. On June 30 the government proposed legislation to clarify that the Bill C-208 amendments to the Income Tax Act would apply at the beginning of the next taxation year, starting on January 1, 2022.
Yesterday, the government issued a new statement replacing the June 30 news release and affirming that as Bill C-208 has been passed by Parliament and has received royal assent, it has become a part of the Income Tax Act and that the changes contained in Bill C-208 now apply in law.
The government also clarified that it intends to bring forward amendments to the Income Tax Act that honour the spirit of Bill C-208 while safeguarding against any unintended tax-avoidance loopholes that may have been created by the bill.
Because the bill is now law, making any changes to it would require new legislation. Such new legislation could provide for any amendments to the Income Tax Act to apply retroactively, including applying to events that take place before the day on which the new legislation comes into force.
I would now be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
Thank you, Mr. Dufresne.
For the first round, we'll start with Mr. Kelly followed by Mr. Fragiskatos, Mr. Ste-Marie and Ms. Mathyssen.
Mr. Kelly.
View Pat Kelly Profile
CPC (AB)
Thank you so much, Mr. Dufresne, for appearing today and for the clarity you've brought to this issue. Let's just get right to it.
Bill C-208 became law on June 29. Is that correct?
Results: 241 - 255 of 150000 | Page: 17 of 10000

|<
<
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data