Thank you.
Going into the actual wording of Bill C-305, if you look at proposed subsection 430(4.101), paragraphs (a) through to (d), we had witnesses talk about the use of the phrase “primarily used”. Is the use of that terminology going to be problematic in excluding certain types of property, or do you think it would be best for us to modify that wording to make it more encompassing?
A large part of the story from this committee so far has been about the language in this and whether we need to broaden it while being more specific. If you can help direct us to the goal line, that would be much appreciated.