Evidence of meeting #55 for Finance in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Director, Tax Legislation Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
I don't think that's a particular case of this, but the upshot of this amendment is to ensure that if it's otherwise picked up as a dividend, this rule won't apply.
It used to talk about paragraph 82(1)(a), which is where the existing dividend rules were for picking it up. Now it's adding a cross-reference to paragraphs 82(1)(a.1), 82(1)(c), and 82(1)(e) to ensure that it picks up dividends under the new dividend regime.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
I don't want to beat this horse to death, but I just frankly don't understand it. Maybe other members understand what they're voting on, but I certainly don't.
You have a concept here called “excessive eligible dividend designation”, on page 99. What's that?
Director, Tax Legislation Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
This has to do with the fact that under the new dividend regime, a corporation—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
Sorry, Mr. Lalonde.
John, let's hold off on that until we get to that section. Okay?
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
I was just asking questions with respect to the overall section, too, just so I understood what the point—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
No, we'll deal with it clause by clause, as we have been doing.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
Okay, we are back to the vote on clause 43
Shall clause 43 carry?
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
I will record an abstention on that particular clause. I've already said I don't understand it, so I'm not going to vote either for it or against it.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
Then we need a recorded vote to record an abstention for Mr. McKay, do we?
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 1; abstentions 4)
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
Oh, a corporate loophole there, left open. That's interesting. Okay, that is carried.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
In all seriousness, if there is the concern that Mr. McKay has expressed in terms of clarity, would it be fair to ask the ministry to come back with a bit of an explanation to give him--
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
That might be fair, but we'll let Mr. McKay decide that and do it on his own time.
Now we'll move to amendment G-5, new clause 43.1. That's a government amendment.
Mr. Del Mastro.
Conservative
Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair.
What we're looking to do here is amend, after line 9 on page 96, the following.... The French version of the act will be replaced in section 43 after article (ii), and in the English version paragraph 74.4(2)(f) will be replaced as indicated by the memo before you. They're both technical.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
Any discussion on those?
(Amendment agreed to on division) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
(Clauses 44 to 46 inclusive agreed to on division)
(On clause 47)
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
On clause 47, there is an amendment, G-6, which is on page 21 of your package. I am hesitant to assume another technical amendment here, but—
Conservative
Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON
Yes, amendment G-6 asks that in clause 47 we amend after line 21 on page 118, beginning with new paragraph 89.(1)(c), the following as indicated by the memo before you, Mr. Chair.
December 5th, 2006 / 11:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
Okay. Seeing no desire for conversation on that amendment—
Mr. McKay.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
On the amendment, Chair, on subclause 47.(1) at page 99, the concept of “excessive eligible dividend designation”, could I have an explanation of what that means?
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
On subclause 47.(1) under--it looks like definitions--page 99, line 20.
Conservative
