Thank you for those questions. I agree with you that there are better spots for us to pursue additional government revenue if that were the objective here.
The lens with which we would encourage you to look at it, first and foremost, is to do what's fair. If groups like mine were coming to you and saying, “Okay, let's put an advantage in place to sell to an international company or to an arm's-length party”, I think you would rightly laugh us out of the room. If we were saying, “Let's create a huge advantage to sell to our kids”, you might question whether that's fair. Governments should be neutral here and ensure that the tax treatment of the sale of a business, whether it's to one's family or to a third party, is the same.
My understanding is that this is how it works in the rest of the world. Tax policy should not speak to whom we should advantage in the sale of a business. We should make it a level playing field regardless, and then let the market, business owners, sort out who is the best party to take over the businesses.
Honestly, if we were to incent something, I think it's in the national interest to incent the transfer of the business to the kids for all the reasons we've talked about, including keeping those businesses as going concerns in the communities that depend on them for jobs and employment.