Finance committee  Under the Canada-U.S. treaty and indeed our other treaties, this information can only go to the revenue authorities, the IRS. It can only be used for the purpose of taxation and not for other purposes, subject to strict safeguards. It's also collected by our own revenue agency for transmission as opposed to having information being provided directly by Canadian taxpayers, financial institutions, to foreign authorities.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns  With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency’s (CRA) responses to the provisions of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regarding the Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR): (a) according to the government’s analysis, do the IRS provisions comply with the provisions of the Convention Between Canada and the United States of America With Respect to Taxes on Income and on Capital and its amending Protocol (2007); (b) are there Canadian exemptions to FBAR; (c) has Canada negotiated the FBAR provisions with United States Treasury Officials or the IRS, (i) at what time was the government made aware of these provisions, (ii) how long did it take for Canada to respond to the changes made by the IRS and the United States Treasury; (d) how will the government ensure that the CRA does not act on behalf of the IRS to collect revenues and penalties; (e) has Canada informed dual citizens about their tax obligations resulting from FBAR; (f) what was the number of exchanges of information between Canada and the United States of America this year and during the past ten years regarding FBAR, (i) has the CRA set internal deadlines to be able to respond to exchange of information requests in a timely manner, (ii) will Canada work to improve bilateral cooperation on this issue, (iii) has there been an increase of exchange of information requests at the CRA due to FBAR; (g) will the government lose revenue as a result of the implementation of FBAR; (h) what are the cost implications emanating from FBAR (i) for the government, (ii) for the CRA, (iii) for Canadian banks, (iv) who will absorb these costs, (v) are there other types of non-financial costs such as efficiency or fairness reductions; (i) how many complaints has the CRA received regarding FBAR or related vexatious inquiries by the IRS, (i) what are the main complaints, (ii) what has the CRA done concerning these complaints, (iii) what department at the CRA is in charge of dealing with complaints of this nature, (iv) will the CRA cut Full-Time Equivalents from that department or reduce its funding, (v) has the office of the Taxpayers’ Ombudsman looked into the matter; (j) will FBAR prevent double taxation of pre-migration gain; (k) has there been an increase in arbitration cases due to active procedures by the IRS, (i) what departments are most affected, (ii) has the CRA cut Full-Time Equivalents from each of these affected departments or reduced their funding; (l) will FBAR affect different saving vehicles such as, but not limited to, (i) Registered Retirement Savings Plans, (ii) Registered Education Savings Plans, (iii) Registered Disability Savings Plans, (iv) Tax-Free Savings Accounts; and (m) how many Canadian-American dual citizens are affected by FBAR and does Canada have contact information for the dual citizens affected by FBAR?

Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1  Once again, it is an omnibus budget bill and so our government decided to accept almost holus-bolus things such as the decision to allow the IRS to have some of the most sensitive information Canadians hold namely, their personal financial information, under an American initiative called FATCA. This is a budget that most tellingly would do little or nothing to address the almost 300,000 Canadians who are unemployed, 300,000 more than after the recession of 2008.

Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1  One of the key problems with the FATCA provisions in the bill is that there is nothing in this that would inform Canadians that their privacy is being violated, that their information is being turned over to the IRS. We proposed some reasonable amendments to these provisions, but as usual, they were all rejected by the Conservatives.

Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1  Together they have looked at this and have urged Finance Canada to slow down. They say that the steps we have already taken completely vouchsafe Canadian business and protect Canadian banks. We do not need to push FATCA through, and we certainly should not be pushing it through in an omnibus budget bill. Their recommendation I think is worth reading into the record this evening: ...we recommend that the government delay passage of the Implementation Act until: (a) the issues surrounding Charter protections, other taxpayer protections, and global cooperative efforts have been thoroughly studied and addressed; and (b) the U.S. government agrees to reciprocal treatment with respect to the tax information reporting system that has been unilaterally imposed on Canada.

Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1  The bill continues to ignore the challenges faced by veterans in Canada, continues to show contempt for veterans. The bill, through the FATCA provisions, makes the CRA effectively the tax collector for the IRS, and continues to demonstrate disrespect for Parliament and democracy by putting all of these poorly thought out provisions in a budget implementation act as opposed to free-standing legislation, dealt with by committees with the expertise to make the best possible legislative decisions.

Finance committee  I know on tax treaties it's the potential on both sides to oversimplify and ramp-up rhetoric. We heard a number of times from the minister and from others in the government suggesting that no Canadian will be impacted by this.

Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1  They are the engines of our economy, but in this bill there is no small business job creation tax credit. It is not there, even though it is a proven way to grow jobs in this country. They grow jobs in our communities. Money is spent in our communities, and we collect taxes that help to feed our health care and education systems and so on.

Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1  Speaker, during question period and at other times FATCA has come up a number of times. I feel, though, that the member's question was somewhat misleading, because as Canadians listened to that question, they believed that all Canadian taxpayers would now be forced to reveal their savings and their income to the IRS or to the United States. That is untrue.

Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1  People's private banking information will be collected by their banks, passed on to the CRA, and then on to the IRS without being notified at all. Personal banking information, as we know, can reveal a lot. Could my friend speak to the effort we are making as New Democrats right now to simply pull this piece of the bill out so we can understand what its implications are before the Conservatives impose this on up to a million Canadians?

Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1  The Conservatives are going to ram it through and they will all vote for it happily because the Prime Minister told them to do so. Why not listen to the evidence for once? Why not protect those million Canadians who are going to have their private banking information passed on to the IRS in Washington without them even being notified? Why not stand up for Canada just this once?

Canada-U.S. Relations  To be clear, the agreement will not impose any new or higher taxes and CRA will not assist the IRS in the collection of U.S. tax moneys.

Finance committee  For instance, when the Americans did Buy American...we were able to negotiate some exemptions. The contributions made by the Canadian government to registered accounts, RDSPs and RESPs, are Canadian taxpayer-funded contributions to help Canadian families. The earnings on these contributions will be considered taxable earnings by the IRS.

Canada-U.S. Relations  Speaker, again, I respect the hon. member's passion for this subject, but passion cannot be mistaken for facts. The facts are that any American citizen living outside the United States has a tax obligation to the IRS. They have always had that, because the United States is one of two countries in the world where tax is based on citizenship. We can argue that that is right or wrong, but that is American tax law and American policy, and it has always been American policy.

Finance committee  I think in another blog, you referred to, or Moody's Tax Advisors talked about, a deduction against Canadian tax for the vast amount of professional fees paid to the IRS offshore voluntary disclosure program, and you argued that there ought to be this deductibility.