Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I can't resist the urge to jump into this debate.
I've worked in taxation for most of my career, and let me tell you, when it comes to retroactive legislation, there's a big difference between what we see in some countries and what goes on in Canada.
Since the GST was introduced in 1991, the Department of Finance's and the Canada Revenue Agency's position has always been that interchange fees were not related to financial services but rather to administrative services.
This was challenged before the Tax Court of Canada. In 2018, the court upheld the Department of Finance's and the Canada Revenue Agency's position, namely that these were not financial services, based the rule of law and the way it was enforced by the banks.
In 2021, the Federal Court of Appeal give the banks a huge gift by ruling that those services were now considered financial services. That gift would be paid retroactively to the banks by middle-class Canadian taxpayers. You'd expect a government to correct that to maintain what's always been its position up to 2021. I understand that there was a two-year period wthehen there may have been some legal uncertainty on this. With respect to the decision not to appeal to the Supreme Court, I would point out that the Supreme Court hears cases of national interest. I just wanted to set the record straight.
My questions will be for Mr. Gray. After the budget was tabled, the Canadian Chamber of CommerI have a couple of other ones for youce stated that it was pleased to see “a number of new measures introduced which will ensure our domestic clean technology players can remain competitive in the face of the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act”.
I would like you to explain two things.
First, why is it so important that the government invest in these measures to remain competitive with what the Americans are doing?
Second, in your view, what are the most important measures in that regard?