The committee has to understand that what these people were doing was legal. But suddenly, there was a lot of abuse, and I can easily imagine the kind of abuse that may have happened. The 20 shareholders were all members of the same family. When salaries were transferred to the RRSP, all 20 members derived a benefit from it. So, that really was a major tax avoidance issue, and on top of that, these companies did not pay corporate taxes. That was a double advantage, and it was time to put an end to it.
The problem is that some people have always acted within the law and suddenly, they are told that what they were doing legally is now, and even retroactively, illegal, and they will be penalized up to 100%. This is the issue. People who obey the law should be allowed a transition period to adapt to the new provisions, and there is no such transition period here.
It is a kind of fiscal abuse that we have to stop, I agree. When we say the law is complex, I guess this is a very good example of it. There should be a transition period to allow those people who have always obeyed the law not to have their income taxed up to 100%. That is what they ask, mostly. But this loophole had to be closed because it really amounted to abusive fiscal planning.
I will leave what is left of my time to my dear colleague.