Evidence of meeting #55 for Finance in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was program.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
4:35 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, ParticipAction
It's $3.3 million. It's a one-year contribution agreement. Over the last two years, the Public Health Agency of Canada declined—
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
The additional $5 million, are you expecting that on a longer-term basis? Were you looking for a five-year commitment, a 10-year commitment, a one-year commitment, or will you take what you can get?
4:35 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, ParticipAction
We requested a five-year commitment. I'd love it forever and ever, and we don't need more than $5 million. That would be great, and we'll leverage it up every year.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
I appreciate Mr. Bailey's being here. I have a daughter who's a heptathlete—number two in Ontario, number six in Canada. I'm hoping for good things from her. But in my view, ParticipAction is not for her. That money is for young people who aren't participating in sport. She's active every day of the week. She takes Sundays off. She's in much better shape than I'll ever be.
4:35 p.m.
An hon. member
You're right. I think we can all agree on that.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
It's nice to have Donovan here, but shouldn't we have people we'd actually be helping with this money? I want to know who we're actually helping? We're not helping Donovan Bailey. He's in good shape already, I can tell.
What is ParticipAction's vision for actual results? That's what I'm looking for.
4:35 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, ParticipAction
Two quick answers.
First, only 10% of our youth meet the daily physical activity guidelines, so your daughter is not our target. We're targeting 90% of the kids in Canada.
Second, we in fact believe that average Canadians inspire average Canadians. Donovan is here as a member of our board. Our current campaign that's on the airwaves right now features average Canadians who have overcome average Canadian problems. They have become more physically active or have inspired their families to be more physically active. These people are absolute rock stars in their communities. That's what I believe inspires Canadians.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
For my banking friends, I have one quick question. The consolidated tax return that you talk about in your brief; what does it do to revenues for the Government of Canada?
4:35 p.m.
Vice-President, Policy, Canadian Bankers Association
I'll ask my colleague Darren Hannah to answer, Mr. Wallace.
October 26th, 2009 / 4:35 p.m.
Darren Hannah Acting Vice-President, Banking Operations, Canadian Bankers Association
It really doesn't have a revenue impact in the long term. What it does do, though, is change the time that revenues will be realized. If I have a bunch of subsidiaries, I'm expecting them all to make money. It's just a matter of whether they make it now or next year or the year after. Right now, no matter what, you have to file separately from every entity. If you could do a consolidated filing, you'd be able to save on administration.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
But would those losses go against revenues from profits from other entities?
4:35 p.m.
Acting Vice-President, Banking Operations, Canadian Bankers Association
Oh, yes.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
4:35 p.m.
Acting Vice-President, Banking Operations, Canadian Bankers Association
As I said, all this would do is change the timeframe. Clearly, if I have losses in one year in a subsidiary, I can carry them forward, because I'm expecting this thing to make money at some point in the future. If I have it consolidated, I can offset one against the other.
So in the long term, it doesn't really change the revenue. It just changes the timing.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
4:35 p.m.
NDP
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Firstly, I want to begin by thanking everyone who is helping us to contribute to the report, which will serve as a thoughtful piece in preparation of the next budget.
I will begin with the witnesses from the Canadian Home Builders' Association. Your submission provides an excellent, very rigorous, and very good explanation of the effects of sales taxes on home construction and sales in Canada. You have forewarned us of certain exemptions and limitations that do not always follow the course.
I, for one, would like to hear you talk to us about something a bit more specific and slightly more topical. At our request, you prepared a document in August 2009. That is why you are here. Since then, we have learned that the Liberal governments of British Columbia and Ontario intend to harmonize sales taxes, which would have a significant effect on the price of homes.
I would like to know if you could put a figure on that and share with us the fruits of your labour.
4:40 p.m.
President, Canadian Home Builders' Association
Thank you for your comments.
The harmonization in both Ontario and B.C. will substantially add to the cost of a new home. Currently it's estimated, depending on the jurisdiction, that the embedded sales tax they pay is about 2%. In Ontario, at 8%, it would be an additional 6% for a home. In B.C., where it's 7%, it would be an additional 5%, less whatever rebate the provinces have worked out. For an average home, if you take the $400,000 mark, 5% is a lot of money. It's $20,000 on a home. It will affect the consumer in a big way.
4:40 p.m.
NDP
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
Mr. Friend, I have been in this profession for some time now. You have just given one of the most clear and direct answers that I have ever heard. I just wanted to give you a little spontaneous applause.
Ms. Yalnizyan, during your presentation, you talked to us in particular about the crying need to extend the application of possible tax deductions to home renovations. You want to extend them in two ways. Firstly, you want to target home renovations, and further energy efficiency. Home renovations would serve to advance sustainable development. I would then like to hear you talk to us a bit more about unfairness within the current system.
We all agree that this is a good program that provided a fast injection of money into the economy to create jobs. As the home builders stated so well, this curtailed the underground economy, as people want to get their credit and a proper receipt. This has resulted in money flowing back into the open economy.
I would like to hear you talk about two consequences: the placing of emphasis on energy efficiency; and the extension of the tax credit to renters, and not just homeowners. Is this part and parcel of your vision?
4:40 p.m.
Senior Economist, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
I think it could be in the way we have suggested. You could extend this and reorient the tax credit. There's already another measure the federal government has put into place. That could be amplified to make sure that more landlords and renters can take advantage of it.
At the moment, you can't do something like get an energy efficient fridge. A lot of the receipts you're talking about are going to be filed for the goods, not for the services. There is a lot of possibility that the current home renovation tax credit, as it exists, will not substantially offset the underground economy. It very much depends on who's doing what kind of renovation where and what you can get the bills for. A lot of renovations take more than $10,000. The first $1,000 is exempt.
The point of our submission is that it's nice that there is some kind of measure to increase the number of construction jobs out there. It is nice that people would continue to invest in their homes at a time when there are going to be a lot of people who need work. What you're finding is that there are a lot of people who already have jobs--electricians, plumbers, and all the rest--who are moonlighting. We're not creating additional jobs. It's not clear that it is not going into the underground economy, because they don't want to be declaring taxes on the wages they're making.
We are suggesting that the focus should be on energy efficiency, because this is a much larger issue we need to deal with than whether we put a deck on our cottage or whether we re-sod the lawn or whether we change the colour palette in our kitchen.
These sorts of measures may leak offshore, as do granite counters and many other things people are buying and declaring for their tax credit, but it would put us in better stead over the long haul to be more energy efficient, whether you have a lot of money--$10,000 or more--to put into renovations or enough for small measures that would actually make your household more energy efficient.
It actually saves everybody money over the long term.
4:45 p.m.
NDP
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
You are undoubtedly right, that may vary slightly in the country.
I want to talk a little bit about the situation in Quebec. There are two programs underway in Quebec, right now. There is the federal program, but Quebec also had a pre-existing program that is included in the budget. Since one of the conditions in Quebec is that those concerned must be registered with the Régie du bâtiment du Québec, the Quebec building authority, I can assure you that the number of applications for registration has soared to unprecedented levels.
I would like to come back to the chartered accountants. We have approximately one minute left together. I've heard loud and clear your congratulations and your hope that Canada establish the lowest marginal tax rate of G8 countries. Like us, you must have surely noticed that more than $15 billion in new contributions have been demanded to compensate for the fact that the Employment Insurance Fund was looted.
Do you agree with us on the point that asking for $15 billion in new contributions to be made by the same businesses constitutes a new form of taxation, if I can call it that? It is a tax on the pay stub, but it remains a form of taxation.
4:45 p.m.
Chair, Tax Policy Committee, Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants
I'm not sure exactly what the question relates to. Is it the funding of the EI program?
4:45 p.m.
NDP
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
The government announced that 15 billion additional dollars would be levied on businesses to make up for the shortfall in the Employment Insurance Fund. When you claim that Canada will have one of the lowest marginal tax rates, have you factored in this new $15 billion tax?
4:45 p.m.
Chair, Tax Policy Committee, Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants
The comparison I referred to in terms of Canada's competitiveness was with respect to the corporate income tax. So once these changes flow through in 2012, Canada would be the lowest of the G-7, assuming the other countries do not change their corporate tax rates.
With respect to EI, corporations do pay a portion of the EI, as you probably know, in that it is the employee and the employer who both fund the program.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
