Evidence of meeting #14 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was system.
A video is available from Parliament.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Jennifer, I'll have to cancel you there.
Mr. Macdonald wanted to answer before, and then we're out of time.
12:10 p.m.
Senior Economist, National Office, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Yes, I wrote a report on this two years ago, which I presented to the finance committee at that time. About 70% of the top 1%, the very high end, have a TFSA, but as Alex pointed out, only about 30% of them maximize it. This is based on 2013 levels, which have since increased. We've actually seen fairly dramatic falls in the number of people, even at the very high end, who are maximizing their TFSAs. For instance, for the top 10% of income distribution, the number of people who are maximizing their TFSAs has fallen from about one-quarter in 2010 to about 10% projected for 2015. As these limits continue to go up, we're just not seeing people maximize those accounts, even at the very high end, but the people who are maximizing them are disproportionately among the wealthy.
The original idea of the TFSA, as proposed by people like Rhys Kesselman, was to protect low-income earners from clawbacks related to the guaranteed income supplement upon retirement, but those are not the folks who are using the TFSA, despite the fact that it is probably the biggest benefit from a TFSA.
If you're making $30,000 a year, you don't have money to save, so it doesn't matter whether you have an RRSP or a TFSA. It doesn't matter what the incentives are. There is no money left over at the end of the day. You haven't seen your income increase in 30 years. That's a substantial problem. While these savings vehicles may be helpful for the higher end, they're not helpful at the low end.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Thank you, Ms. O'Connell.
I thank all our witnesses. I'm sorry we cut you a little on time. Mr. Alexander, Mr. Macdonald, Ms. Morris, Mr. Ball, thank you for your presentations. We will now go back to the motion we were dealing with while the next witnesses come to the table.
Who has an answer on the minister of CRA? Does anyone?
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Mr. Chair, I understand that the minister will be available before May 20.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay. That's the decision of the minister.
Mr. Caron, there's your information on the minister, “before May 20.”
12:10 p.m.
NDP
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
When was the minister contacted about the possibility of appearing? She seemed to know yesterday during question period that she would be appearing, yet we discussed the possibility of her appearing during the motion that was tabled in March. May is really far off. I'm disappointed that in the last 48 hours, there doesn't seem to have been any contact or any attempt to have her come to the committee in an expeditious manner. I'd like to understand what happened.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Mr. Champagne, did you have something you wanted to add?
Mr. Sorbara.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I think it behooves the committee to continue our work on Bill C-2. With regard to the motion, it was discussed amongst ourselves that we would like the minister to appear. Now we've contacted the minister and we've received feedback that the honourable minister will be available before May 20.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Could I ask a question? Is April 21 ruled out? Is that still a possibility?
Before May 20 is anytime between now and May 20. I would think that if we told the minister it's the wish of the committee that she come in her own right.... I think the feeling of the committee is that we should hear CRA officials who were involved in this process on their own and the minister on her own, and deal with this issue and estimates, right?
Mr. Sorbara.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
We all want to know the answers in terms of what has happened and the stories that have come out. Mr. Caron, I think our objectives are the same. We want to ensure that Canadians have confidence in our tax system, that everyone is paying their fair share, and that there are no sweetheart deals or anything like that going on.
I think it behooves us to continue studying Bill C-2. The minister has responded that she is available to come to the committee prior to May 20. Thank you.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
I have Mr. Caron first, then Mr. McColeman, and we're going to deal with the motion sooner or later.
12:15 p.m.
NDP
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Pretending that we absolutely must study Bill C-2 immediately doesn't make sense because Parliament has already voted on the ways and means motion. The measures in Bill C-2 are already in effect. Our current efforts to ensure that the minister can appear within a reasonable timeframe is not an attempt to postpone or delay the study of Bill C-2. We support having the minister appear before us on April 21, and then we will continue to study Bill C-2 and prepare the report that we had proposed.
Once again, why, despite the fact that we have known about the situation for at least 48 hours, was the minister not informed in advance and why are we still waiting for an answer to find out when she might come? It's not as if the motion had been a surprise; it wasn't. She knew about it because she mentioned it yesterday in the House.
One last thing. She made some comments on March 10, and she should explain them. According the motion, she could appear as late as May 20. If the questions are about responsibility and transparency because of her comments about the fact that there was an amnesty or not in the KPMG matter, they should be answered sooner rather than later. We should be concerned about this and be trying to get answers about what motivated that statement.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Phil McColeman Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
I'd like to remind the chair that I have somewhat introduced my motion, in parallel to this motion, for the minister to come on main estimates as well. Whatever the minister is contemplating for this amount of time spent on Bill C-2, I'm asking through my motion that she come on main estimates as well. Usually, that would be an hour each.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Yes. My understanding is that the minister would be here on both points, one on KPMG and the Isle of Man issue, and the other on estimates.
Mr. Sorbara.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
I would like to reiterate my point, what I already said. We've put forward a motion. We've answered with when the minister is available to come by: May 20. We'd like to proceed.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
12:15 p.m.
NDP
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
I have two comments. The first is that I would like to point out what I see to be the government's lack of organization here. Contact should have been made in the last 48 hours, and we could have had an answer today, knowing that we would like to have the minister here within a reasonable timeframe. That wasn't done.
I would like to make my second comment before we put the resolution to a vote. Another important aspect wasn't addressed in the resolution, and that's the need to have at least one additional meeting to discuss the draft report that can be submitted to Parliament. It was in the motion that I presented and it's not in this one. I would like to be able to submit an amendment to include what was in the initial motion on the matter.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Mr. Champagne is next, and then I want to make a comment on Guy's point.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
Mr. Chair, I would like to clarify for my colleague Mr. Caron that it isn't a lack of organization. Rather, it was the desire of committee members to conclude the study of Bill C-2 and, given the dates we're looking at now, to have the minister appear before the committee as soon as possible. So it isn't a lack of organization. It's to ensure the important work related to Bill C-2 is finished.
Once the study of Bill C-2 is finished, the first possible date on the calender for the minister and committee members is April 20. Everyone is aware of the MP's motion, we know about it. But we want to make sure that we finish the study of Bill C-2. As soon as we're done with that, the minister will appear with official representatives from her department. The first possible date is April 20. There is no other agenda but transparency and having the minister come as soon as possible, taking into consideration the work that this committee must do, which is to conclude the study of Bill C-2.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
12:20 p.m.
NDP
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
I'm asking the question. I just explained that the study of Bill C-2 isn't urgent. We don't necessarily want to postpone the study to the fall. We want to be able to take care of this file, but there's no urgency because the ways and means motion has already been carried. Tax cuts and lowering the limit have already been in place since we voted on it in December.
What is more urgent for the government: a sped up discussion of a bill that is already in effect or an expeditious discussion of tax havens and an amnesty for people who, in the end, have eluded the system? The government seems to have decided that a bill that is already in effect is more important than discussing tax havens. That is one question that must be raised.
The second question that hasn't yet been answered has to do with an additional meeting to draft a report. Receiving the minister and officials from the Canada Revenue Agency to talk to us about the situation is one thing. Whether the committee looks into what they will say is another, just like the way we report to Parliament. This aspect is still absent from the current motion.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Mr. Caron, we'll go to the question in one second. I think C-2 has to get through here and go to the Senate as well.
What I'm wondering is.... About your point on a report, we can't hear from witnesses and the minister and not do a report. I think the number of us who have been around Parliament for a while realize that the committee is going to have to sit for however long it takes to do a report.
We'll deal with this motion, but what I would suggest is that the steering committee meet on Monday, if that's possible, to schedule in what we can on witnesses on this point who are finishing up C-2 as well, and other issues that may be on the steering committee's agenda, so that we can schedule it out. I think the government has heard the push for the minister as soon as possible, and maybe by Monday, the minister could have perhaps a more clear position on what date she may be able to come.
You have a question, Mr. Sorbara.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal