Thank you for that question.
In working on the arrangement with Taiwan, because it was set up as an arrangement and it's not between two sovereign jurisdictions, in order for the Income Tax Act to apply appropriately, we needed to have certain provisions in the implementing act to ensure that it is functionally equivalent to a tax treaty so that the Income Tax Act rules work. It was in reflecting on this that the question of Hong Kong arose.
Now, Hong Kong has been in place for a couple of years. The Canada Revenue Agency has issued an interpretation to make it clear to all Canadians that, yes, residents of Hong Kong and investments in Hong Kong do get the benefits that are accorded to a tax treaty under the Income Tax Act. It has been working just fine. However, we were concerned that perhaps in light of making very particular amendments to address the different situation that exists with Taiwan—because it is a different relationship, with China, relative to the relationship with Hong Kong—we decided that for greater certainty it was appropriate at this time to include similar clarifying amendments with respect to Hong Kong, to avoid any adverse inference being raised from having done the specific...with respect to Taiwan and not Hong Kong. However, nothing in this should be read into as having any change or any difference in respect of the interpretation provision and how it has worked since it has entered into effect in Canada.