It's not really a disagreement. It's a matter of two different parts of the calculation. On what Finance has calculated here, what we're saying is that Finance calculated the loss of revenue, which was $66 million, but what they didn't include was that there would be less administrative cost incurred, or they didn't give us the information about how much administrative cost savings there would be.
In what Finance gave us, they provided us only how much the revenue would go down. They didn't provide us how much administrative costs would go down. All we had were some other analyses that CBSA had done before, which had shown that, for example, at $100 it costs them more to administer a $100 level than they actually collect.
The reason it looks like it's two different calculations is that when we asked Finance to provide us the information about how much the reduction was—and again, I think we've heard today that they did that type of calculation—they didn't provide us that information on the reduction of the administrative costs. They just provided us the information on the reduction of the revenue.