Bill C-32

Fall Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2022

An Act to implement certain provisions of the fall economic statement tabled in Parliament on November 3, 2022 and certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022

Part 1 implements certain measures in respect of the Income Tax Act by
(a) providing that any gain on the disposition of a Canadian housing unit within a one-year period of its acquisition is treated as business income;
(b) introducing a Tax-Free First Home Savings Account;
(c) phasing out flow-through shares for oil, gas and coal activities;
(d) introducing a new 30% Critical Mineral Exploration Tax Credit for specified mineral exploration expenses incurred in Canada and renounced to flow-through share investors;
(e) introducing the Canada Recovery Dividend under which banks and life insurers’ groups pay a temporary one-time 15% tax on taxable income above $1 billion over five years;
(f) increasing the corporate income tax rate of banks and life insurers’ groups by 1.5% on taxable income above $100 million;
(g) providing additional reporting requirements for trusts;
(h) providing rules applicable to mutual fund trusts listed on a designated stock exchange in Canada with respect to amounts that are allocated to redeeming unitholders;
(i) providing the Minister of National Revenue with the discretion to decline to issue a certificate under section 116 of the Income Tax Act in certain circumstances relating to the administration and enforcement of the Underused Housing Tax Act ;
(j) doubling the First-Time Homebuyers’ Tax Credit;
(k) expanding the eligibility criteria for the Medical Expense Tax Credit in respect of medical expenses incurred in Canada related to surrogate mothers and donors and fees paid in Canada to fertility clinics and donor banks;
(l) introducing the Multigenerational Home Renovation Tax Credit;
(m) allowing access to the small business tax rate on a phased-out basis up to taxable capital of $50 million;
(n) modifying the computation of income as a result of the adoption of a new international accounting standard for insurance contracts;
(o) introducing a new graduated disbursement quota rate for charities;
(p) providing that the general anti-avoidance rules can apply to transactions that affect tax attributes that have not yet been used to reduce taxes;
(q) strengthening the rules on avoidance of tax debts;
(r) modifying the calculation of the taxes applicable to registered investments that hold property that is not a qualified investment;
(s) modifying the tax treatment of certain interest coupon stripping arrangements that might otherwise be used to avoid tax on cross-border interest payments;
(t) clarifying the applicable rules with respect to audits by Canada Revenue Agency officials, including requiring taxpayers to give reasonable assistance and to answer all proper questions for tax purposes; and
(u) extending the capital cost allowance for clean energy and the tax rate reduction for zero-emission technology manufacturers to include air-source heat pumps.
It also makes related and consequential amendments to the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation Act , the Excise Tax Act , the Air Travellers Security Charge Act , the Excise Act, 2001 , Part 1 of the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act and the Income Tax Regulations .
Part 2 amends the Excise Act, 2001 and other related texts in order to implement changes to
(a) the federal excise duty frameworks for cannabis and other products by, among other things,
(i) permitting excise duty remittances for certain cannabis licensees to be made on a quarterly rather than a monthly basis, starting from the quarter that began on April 1, 2022, and
(ii) allowing the transfer of packaged, but unstamped, cannabis products between licensed cannabis producers; and
(b) the federal excise duty framework for vaping products in relation to the markings, customs storage and excise duty liability of these products.
Part 3 amends the Underused Housing Tax Act to make amendments of a technical or housekeeping nature. It also makes regulations under that Act in order to, among other things, implement an exemption for certain vacation properties.
Division 1 of Part 4 authorizes the Minister of Finance to acquire and hold on behalf of His Majesty in right of Canada non-voting shares of a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Canada Development Investment Corporation that is responsible for administering the Canada Growth Fund and to requisition the amounts for the acquisition of those shares out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
Division 2 of Part 4 amends the Bretton Woods and Related Agreements Act to increase the maximum financial assistance that may be provided in respect of foreign states.
Subdivision A of Division 3 of Part 4 enacts the Framework Agreement on First Nation Land Management Act .
Subdivision B of Division 3 of Part 4 contains transitional provisions in respect of the enactment of the Framework Agreement on First Nation Land Management Act and makes consequential amendments to other Acts. It also repeals the First Nations Land Management Act .
Division 4 of Part 4 amends the Government Employees Compensation Act in order to fulfil Canada’s obligations under the Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America concerning Cooperation on the Civil Lunar Gateway.
Division 5 of Part 4 amends the Canada Student Loans Act to eliminate the accrual of interest on guaranteed student loans beginning on April 1, 2023.
It also amends the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act to eliminate the accrual of interest on student loans beginning on April 1, 2023.
Finally, it amends the Apprentice Loans Act to eliminate the accrual of interest on apprentice loans beginning on April 1, 2023 and to clarify when the repayment of apprentice loans begins during the interest suspension period from April 1, 2021 to March 31, 2023.

Fall Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2022

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this is a situation I am hearing of more and more about as well. When it comes to pediatric services, clearly what we are doing is not working. Health care is a provincial initiative, but there is substantial federal funding that goes through.

Had something like this been present, specifically in reference to my hon. colleague's question, I would have been happy to consider it, because we can see our health care system is broken. In Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, we often see ERs closing down. I have a friend who is a pediatric resident, and I was trying to talk him into moving to the area because we have such a need, just as I am sure my colleague is seeing in her area.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, there is a lot in this fall economic statement worthy of support, and I think a lot to critique. My hon. colleague pointed that out as well. However, I take some issue with his recitation of history. I was in this House from 2008 to 2015, when the Conservative government ran deficits in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014. After the 2008 economic shock, it ran six successive deficits and only magically balanced it in an election year.

My hon. colleague talked about taking credit for reducing the GST. The Conservative Party invented the GST. It brought the GST to Canadians. How can he expect Canadians to take him seriously when his party has been so instrumental in creating deficits in this country and brought the GST to this country? Does he still think the GST is a good tax?

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, well, how much Liberal spending preceded that GST? If we want to go back to 1988 or 1993, that is absolutely fine.

With all due respect, obviously, I was not here in that period of time but I am happy to answer the question. The reality is this: I am very proud that we lowered the GST—

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh!

[The Deputy Speaker, Chris d'Entremont]

Order.

The hon. member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo has the floor.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would love the answer the hon. member's question if he would just stop shouting over me. I really would.

I believe in prudent financial spending. If I had my way, we would not be spending such astronomical figures that we actually need the GST. The reality is that the government must have the GST because it is spending so much, and that is being spent on the backs on our children, our grandchildren and future generations.

I fear that their tax payments and their funding of the interest payment for taxes will cripple us in the future.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I rise here today to speak to the government's economic update. On weekends, I spend time in my riding to talk to the folks who I represent. The topic front of mind for all is the state of the economy.

As the Deputy Prime Minister gave her update in the House, I, like many others, listened intently. I heard her warn Canadians that things are going to be tough this winter, and that inflation is high and likely to get higher. Boy, how her tone has changed from the message of sunny days and sunny ways.

A few months ago, we heard that very same minister stand in the House and tell us that we are not so bad off and that we should be happy because the rest of the world is worse. In March, she accused us Conservatives of talking down the Canadian economy. Perhaps the minister could now admit that it was not talking down the economy, but rather it was, and continues to be, a warning to this Liberal-NDP coalition of the harmful consequences on real Canadians that their failed economic policies are producing.

The minister acknowledges that tough times are here, sunny days are behind us, and it is time to pay for Liberal overspending. The Liberals have run up the government's credit card to the limit, and it is now up to the taxpayers to pay the bill. The truth of the matter is, the ones who feel their mismanagement the most are the ones they claim to be standing up for.

We all know that socialists raise their fists in the air exclaiming, “Power for the people”, but what is the result? It is power over the people.

I have heard the minister say numerous times in the House that the government's plan is a compassionate plan. I beg to differ. Is it compassionate to triple the carbon tax on home heating? Is it compassionate to triple the tax on gas? Is it compassionate to triple the carbon tax on food production and delivery? I can answer that with a resounding “no”.

The people of Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame are not feeling any compassion from this government. They are contemplating how to stay warm and keep food on the table this winter. It is looking more like doing both may not be an option. People in my riding are facing a home heating bill that has nearly doubled since this time last year. Is that compassion?

Charlie from Gander, for example, is a hard-working family man who considers himself to be part of the middle class. He told me that he is scared that he will not be able to afford oil to heat his home this winter.

Food banks across the country are experiencing record high usage, yet what did this minister say to that? Well, she did not say, “Let them eat cake”, but she might as well have. She tried to relate to hard-working Canadians by telling of the hardship that her family is experiencing in making the huge sacrifice of cutting their Disney+ subscription. It would be funny if it were not so serious. This government is so out of touch with Canadians that it is completely tone deaf to their plight.

Last week, my colleague told the minister of a senior who is living in her car in Halifax, Nova Scotia, because, even though she has employment and CPP benefits, she is unable to afford housing. The minister's response was to advise the woman against spending her savings on cryptocurrency. Really? How tone deaf can she be to believe that a woman who is forced to live in her car because she cannot afford a house has $10,000 to invest in anything for that matter?

Maybe the minister is just as tone deaf in reading the situation as the Prime Minister is. He thought it would be a good idea to hold a concert in the lobby of a hotel where he had the taxpayers spend $6,000 a night for five nights for his room, which is almost double the average Canadians' earnings in a month. To justify his extravagant spending when questioned in the House, the Prime Minister thought he could distract taxpayers by reminding them of the extremely generous one-time $500 payment to low-income renters. Do the members of this government not see how disingenuous their words are?

The Conservative Party asked the government for a little relief on home heating this winter by removing the carbon tax from heating fuel. In Atlantic Canada, this would be a big relief and offer some peace of mind. What was this government's response? Well, the Liberal government decided to ignore their pleas, and the request of the Liberal premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, by forcing the carbon tax on three Atlantic provinces.

The MPs from our own province should be sympathetic, but no. The senior minister from Newfoundland and Labrador is sick and tired of people complaining about the cold winter. The Liberal-NDP coalition government is tone deaf and out of touch. The government's excuses for the rising inflation rate are anything and everyone other than its mismanagement and reckless overspending. It would like us all to believe that it is because of COVID, but as my colleagues have pointed out on several occasions and I feel is worth repeating, the Prime Minister added $100 billion of debt prior to the first case of COVID in Canada. That bears repeating so we can absorb the figure: $100 billion that is not COVID-related.

This week, the Auditor General confirmed that the members on this side of the House have been warning since 2020 that wasteful spending was resulting due to a lack of controls. With respect to Employment and Social Development Canada, the Auditor General identified at least $32 billion in overpayments and suspicious payments that require further investigation. In the Prime Minister's eyes, that is insignificant and he would like us to believe the rest of the spending was to support Canadians through the pandemic. That too is not completely correct. The Parliamentary Budget Officer discovered that 40% of all new spending measures had nothing to do with COVID. That is $200 billion in spending that is unrelated to COVID. That boggles my mind.

The spending that was done in the name of COVID was poorly managed, to say the least. We saw CERB cheques going to prisoners and there was a $44-million arrive scam app which did nothing and could have been developed for approximately $24,000 in someone's basement over a weekend. The list goes on and on. I am sure members are tired of me saying all this stuff.

What the Liberals do not seem to understand is that this money that they keep spending and giving away to their friends is not their money to give away. Hard-working, taxpaying Canadians deserve respect and real compassion. The Conservative Party is here to do just that. We will fight for those who leave their homes every day to work in the energy industry to provide heat for our homes and gas for our vehicles, for those who fish our waters and farm our land to provide food security for Canadians, and for those who look after our children in day care and who tend to our sick and our elderly. Conservatives have a plan that would work and not just pay lip service.

A Conservative government would impose conditions so that if cities want more federal infrastructure money, they would have to remove the gatekeepers. We would connect their infrastructure dollars to the number of homes that actually get built so that young people could find a place to live. We would also sell off 15% of the 37,000 federal buildings we have so they could be converted into housing and our young people could have affordable homes. We would bring in a pay-as-you-go law so that every time we spent a new dollar, we would have a new dollar of savings to pay for it. Conservatives would fund our programs with real money rather than printed cash, because we know there are no freebies in this world and we know that ultimately, taxpayers and consumers pay for everything.

We would reinstate the Bank of Canada's core mandate to make sure inflation stays at 2% as brought about by the Mulroney government, the last great government, or the second-last great government, after Prime Minister Harper's. We would audit the Bank of Canada through the Auditor General to show her that never again is there such a horrendous abuse of our money as we have seen over the last couple of years.

I cannot support this bill because it has $14 billion of spending that is ready to go, but we do not know what it is for. Is it tucked away to be wasted on another gun buyback? Will that $14 billion be wasted to confiscate the hunting tools that are used to harvest the 20,000 moose per year that are taken to put protein on the tables in my province? Will it be wasted to buy back the Plinkster rifles that young girls use to shoot targets with their daddies, as they learn the safety aspects of handling firearms?

Bill C-32 leaves me with more questions than answers. Therefore, my vote will be nay.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, there is no question the member works hard, but where he seems to go down the wrong path is the Conservatives do not understand the difference between spending and investing in Canadians.

The member talked a lot about the economy. I would like the member to tell me and all Canadians why he voted against the top-up for housing and the dental plan and why he voted against the child care program. The Conservatives are voting against major initiatives that would help every Canadian right across this great country.

If the member is going to cut, would he please share with the House which programs he would cut? Could he just let us know?

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Mr. Speaker, what a pile of baloney that just spewed out of the member's mouth.

The people in my province, my constituents, understand that is all washed out bait. If anyone has ever been fishing, they would know they need to change their bait once in a while because it gets washed out and that old worm is no good.

The people of Newfoundland and Labrador understand that what is being thrown out there is washed out election bait. The Liberals should come up with something else. I will tell the House what else. The people of Newfoundland and Labrador are not too fond of the government using money they are pumping into the transfer program and now having to bail out the Bank of Canada for the first time in history because of the government's failed policies.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his speech, which I listened to carefully.

He mentioned certain government expenditures, of course. During the pandemic, the government spent a lot of money, but one expenditure had the support of all the parties except the Bloc Québécois. That was the wage subsidy for businesses.

The Conservative Party, which raised millions in contributions from its members, the Liberal Party and the New Democratic Party all benefited from the wage subsidy. The Conservative Party received $1 million, the Liberal Party $1 million, and the New Democrats $260,000. They got this money directly from a program aimed at supporting businesses so they could avoid going bankrupt and having to shut their doors.

The former leader of the Conservative Party, the member for Durham, said during his election campaign that he would pay back the money taken from the wage subsidy program. I have just one question for my colleague. Has his party begun to reimburse the million dollars it took directly out the pockets of honest taxpayers?

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I cannot really speak to that, but I will tell members what I can speak to.

I can speak to my Bloc colleagues standing up and criticizing our offshore oil and gas industry in Newfoundland and Labrador, and we pay into the transfer program. The billions and billions that are going to come out of Bay du Nord are going to go to subsidize the wonderful people of la belle province.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I was listening intently to the last part of my Conservative friend's speech, and I think he said something like the Mulroney government was the second-last best government in Canada, and it confused me. I am wondering if he could clarify that. I think what he was trying to imply was that either the Mulroney government was worse than the Harper government or vice versa. Could he clarify which order they come in as the worst government?

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I cannot really say for sure who the best recent prime minister was. It was Harper or Mulroney. It is hard to interchange them.

However, I will tell members that this coalition government is definitely the worst the country has ever seen. I cannot believe that my hon. colleague has the gall to come in and sit in this House and be part of that team.

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have a simple question. Obviously, with the doubling of the national debt under the current Liberal government to over a trillion dollars, the servicing of the national debt is going from $25 billion this year, the same as we put into our Canadian Armed Forces, our military, to, next year, close to $50 billion, the same as we do for health care transfers.

I would like my hon. colleague to expand on what we could actually do with that $50 billion.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Mr. Speaker, when we get over on that side, we will make sure that money is spent where it is deserved and needed, like to support our military and support our health care system.