I'll respond to that question for sure, but on your previous question, just to close the loop, looking at the time frames for large, sophisticated taxpayers is something we have committed to looking at. Is there room for greater guidance, greater consistency, in that regard?
Similarly, on the individual side of things, we are trying to take some actions, such as calling people if we haven't heard from them, to try to have more of a conversation and defuse disputes before they arrive. It is an area we're looking at.
On the issue of corrections, I think in that space there can be differences across regions. One point we noted in our response was that the workloads vary across regions as well. To the extent that one region is doing a particular national workload for the whole agency, or that one has very complex sectors operating within their region, you can see some regional variations. I put that as a caveat on this whole thing.
As we look at it, we need to find substantively if we have variations. There's no doubt about that. We also need to recognize that we need to compare like with like. If there is a difference in a particular region for a good reason, we need to factor that into what we see.
In terms of how quickly we're processing reassessments, we have improved in that area. Last year we experienced some delays, for sure, in processing reassessments. It was due to a combination of factors. One was a reorganization we did within the agency. It had a transition period, so we were slower last year. I think now we've moved up to our service standard. If it's in paper-based form for a non-complex case, we endeavour to get that done within eight weeks 80% of the time. We're back on track.
I'd like to see us go even better and faster. Certainly, as you say, for a very simple change, we need to make sure those are finding their way into our system and processed as quickly as we can.
Again, those are areas we continue to look at as we try to make sure we're providing as good a service as we can to the taxpayers.