Finance Committee on April 24th, 2018

[Pierre Leblanc]

That's in this bill before you, and that's right. Child benefits, like some other income benefits, work on a July to June schedule. In July 2018 it will be based on your 2017 income. Both the maximum benefits and the income thresholds will be indexed at 1.5%, which is the indexation that applies to the 2018 tax year.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

My understanding is that over a two- or three-year fiscal period, for the province of Ontario—if I remember the numbers correctly—roughly another $2 billion plus will flow to many families here in Ontario, including the ones in my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge.

[Pierre Leblanc]

Over the fiscal planning period it's $5.6 billion nationally, so that seems consistent.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

I'll stop there, Chair. We have a vote.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Pierre Poilievre]

The floor goes to Mr. Julian. We have 25 minutes until the vote. I propose we allow Mr. Julian to make his intervention.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

I second that, Mr. Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Pierre Poilievre]

We have a seconder.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Ms. Norrie, I'd like to come back to the scenario you laid out for us, the 25-year-old veteran with five years of service, and the $3.9 million over.... I have two questions coming out of that.

First, what is the actuarial table? We're talking about that amount of money over what period of time?

Second, how would that compare to that same case with the benefits that existed prior to the BIA's being introduced? If you don't have an answer right off the bat, if you could provide it in writing that would be wonderful.

[Kathy Norrie]

Sure. I can follow up with some of that information.

As to the first part of your question, the $3.9 million would be over the veteran's expected lifetime. That's part of what's been designed into these pension for life benefits. Currently, before the BIA we would have had a lump-sum disability award. These payments would be monthly for life.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

I understand, but for the actuarial table, what would the estimate be over the lifetime?

[Kathy Norrie]

Unfortunately, I don't have that information with me, but I'd be happy to provide it.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

That would be wonderful. Thank you very much. Giving us the existing structure of benefits for that same veteran would be helpful as well.

[Kathy Norrie]

Sure.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

If you don't mind, I'll move to another subject, which is around the CPP.

Mr. McGowan, in Bill C-26, as you're aware, we had no provision for dropout provisions in the expanded CPP. I'm wondering if there were Department of Finance estimates or models around what the cost would have been for dropout provisions had they been included in Bill C-26.

[Pierre Leblanc]

Others in the Department of Finance who look after the Canada Pension Plan would be able to respond to your question. We can bring it back to them, or we can see at what point they'll be here on this bill.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Okay, thank you.

Further to that, then, we have the drop-in provisions. I'd like the same models around the drop-in provisions. I would like to be able to compare the benefits that would have accrued to people under CPP with the dropout provisions that were not only for base CPP, but also for the expanded CPP, and then compare that to the drop-in provisions that have been applied in the BIA. As with the veterans, that gives us a good sense, clearing away the fog that sometimes exists in politics, to actually see whether there is a net benefit to people as a result of that, and particularly people with disabilities. That's of keen interest to a number of us around the table.

Is that something we could entrust you to pass on to your colleagues at Finance? And can you back to the committee in fairly short order, because of course we'll be hearing from witnesses starting in the next day or two?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Pierre Poilievre]

You will have to make the answer very quick, and that will have to be the last question.

[Pierre Leblanc]

My understanding is that for other parts of the bill you'll be able to ask our colleagues that question directly.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

I have one brief question for follow-up as well.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Pierre Poilievre]

Go ahead.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

For income sprinkling and spouses, is there department model analysis over the possible inclusion of spouses in income sprinkling for businesses, and are there estimates on the cost of that? That would be the other question I had for today.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Pierre Poilievre]

Excellent.

I thank the witnesses for being with us today. They will return tomorrow to discuss parts 3, 5, and 6.

Unless there is any other business, that will adjourn today's meeting and we will proceed to voting.