Public Accounts Committee on March 11th, 2026

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Jean Yip]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 27 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. Members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application.

I would like to remind participants of the following points. Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. All comments should be addressed through the chair.

I believe we have all our members here.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Monday, February 9, 2026, the committee is resuming consideration of Bill C-230, an act to amend the Financial Administration Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts regarding the debt forgiveness registry.

I would like to welcome our witnesses.

From the Canada Revenue Agency, we have Isabelle Brault, director general of the legislative policy directorate in the legislative policy and regulatory affairs branch; Jennifer Boudens, acting director general of the finance and administration branch; and Charly Norris, acting director general of the collections and verification branch.

From the Department of Finance, we have Lauchlin MacEachern, acting director general of legislation in the tax policy branch.

From the Treasury Board Secretariat, we have John Daley, senior director of public accounts and advisory services.

Mr. Daley, you have a maximum of five minutes for your opening remarks.

[John Daley, Senior Director, Public Accounts and Advisory Services, Treasury Board Secretariat]

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members of the committee.

Thank you for inviting me to speak today about how the Government of Canada manages debt deletion.

Before I begin, I would like to acknowledge that I am speaking today from the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

I am joined by my colleagues from the Department of Finance and the Canada Revenue Agency.

The Financial Administration Act is the cornerstone legislation that governs how the federal government manages public funds. It establishes the legal framework that guides financial management across all government departments and agencies, and it clarifies the responsibility of Treasury Board and the deputy heads to ensure effective and appropriate management of public finances.

Under the act, the Treasury Board is the government’s central financial authority. It enables the Treasury Board to establish policies and practices that help departments manage public funds responsibly. The Treasury Board Secretariat helps departments apply financial policies that explain how departments should handle situations when a debt may need to be written off, remitted, forgiven or waived. The act also requires deputy heads to maintain internal controls and conduct regular audits to ensure compliance with legal requirements, as well as government policies and procedures.

Within this system, there are four main mechanisms available for debt deletion.

One is a debt writeoff, which removes the debt from the government’s books when it cannot be collected or when collection is not cost-effective. The legal debt still exists, but the government stops collection efforts for various reasons.

Two is remission, which legally extinguishes a debt owed to the Crown. A remission can be approved by the Governor in Council when collection would be unreasonable, unjust or not in the public interest. When a debt is remitted, the obligation is permanently relieved and is no longer owed to the Crown.

Three is forgiveness, which also legally extinguishes a debt but applies only to specific types of debts such as loans or advances. These debts can only be forgiven by Parliament, usually when collection would be unreasonable or unjust or when the forgiveness is in the public interest. Once again, the obligation is permanently removed.

Four is a waiver under the Financial Administration Act, which applies in limited situations to interest and administrative charges.

Departments must assess each case, apply the relevant authorities and document their decisions in line with the Financial Administration Act, the debt writeoff regulations and the interest and administrative charges regulations, when writeoffs are in relation to the Financial Administration Act.

Bill C-230 proposes to amend the Financial Administration Act to include more information on the deletion by the government of large debts owed by corporations, trust companies and partnerships. In its current form, the bill would require the President of the Treasury Board to establish and maintain a publicly accessible, searchable online database listing any debt, obligation or claim owed by a corporation, trust company or partnership of $1 million or more that has been formally written off, remitted, waived or forgiven by the Crown.

It is important to situate this discussion within the government’s existing reporting framework. The public accounts of Canada provide annual disclosures of debt obligations and claims that have been written off, remitted, waived or forgiven, in accordance with the Financial Administration Act. The public reporting reinforces accountability by ensuring that Parliament and Canadians can understand the fiscal impact of these decisions each year. The public accounts identify the departments responsible, the level of approval involved, the legal authority and the number and total value of debts deleted.

The government takes the stewardship of public funds very seriously. It also supports the objective of transparency in how public money is managed.

Today, my colleagues and I are ready to discuss how these tools work, their role in sound management and their contribution to Canadians' confidence in the management of public resources.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Jean Yip]

Thank you.

Mr. MacEachern, you have a maximum of five minutes for your opening remarks, and then we will proceed with the rounds of discussions.

[Lauchlin MacEachern, Acting Director General, Legislation, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance]

Good afternoon.

My name is Lauchlin MacEachern. I'm the acting director general, legislation, of the tax legislation division in the Department of Finance. I'm responsible for the review of draft tax legislation. I can speak to the consequential amendments in the bill regarding the sharing of tax information.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Jean Yip]

Thank you.

We will now begin our first round of six minutes, starting with Mr. Chambers.

Welcome.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. It's a pleasure to be here.

It's great to see all of you here in person. I much prefer this—as opposed to Zoom, which we were accustomed to for a number of years—so thank you for joining us here today.

I appreciate the opening remarks and the care that the government suggests that it takes on debts that are owed to the treasury.

I have a couple of questions. Anyone can answer.

What was the single largest writeoff last year that the CRA or any department made? I'm looking for the amount.

[Charly Norris, Acting Director General, Collections and Verification Branch, Canada Revenue Agency]

We can't disclose that amount, due to confidentiality reasons. It's one account, and it would probably lead to the disclosure of that account, either directly or indirectly.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

You're aware, though, that in 2019 the single largest amount was a routine fact that was provided to Parliament. It was $133 million in 2019. You're aware that that amount was disclosed. Isn't that right?

[Charly Norris]

Unfortunately, today we can't disclose that amount.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Okay.

Did the Income Tax Act or the Privacy Act change between 2019 and today? Why can you no longer disclose a piece of information that you used to disclose?

[Charly Norris]

Again, under the confidentiality, section 241, disclosing one account could lead to the disclosure of that account either directly or indirectly, so unfortunately we can't disclose that.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

I understand. Did the government break the law previously when it made those disclosures?

You don't have to answer that; that's fine. However, if you're open to it, I would love to see the legal opinion on which the change in policy was based. We're here today primarily because of that legal opinion, because Parliament has not been able to get that information. I think it is in the public interest to disclose that information.

Here's my next question: Are you able to provide an amount in total that has been written off as a result of carousel schemes? These are the GST schemes that are frauds perpetrated on the CRA. There were a number of articles about these a few years ago. The rumours are that the CRA has been defrauded of hundreds of millions of dollars in total. Do you have a ballpark figure that you can share with the committee?

[Jennifer Boudens, Acting Director General, Finance and Administration Branch, Canada Revenue Agency]

Unfortunately, we are unable to respond to that question. Our systems track the writeoffs that we do in accordance with the legislation under which they are written off.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you.

We used to know the single largest writeoffs. We don't know those anymore. We are unable to determine the total amounts of writeoffs for various activities. I'll reiterate that I think this is a matter of public interest. I'm not asking you whether you agree with it or not. I'm making a point that this is information that I think is relevant to the public. Taxpayers—and parliamentarians, frankly—deserve to know who these individuals are. I say “individuals”, but I mean corporations.

I understand that there may be some concerns about privacy. I don't know if anyone can speak to this, but if a corporate name appears on a registry or in a public document today, is it not already the case that someone can search in publicly available registries for who the directors of that corporation are, whether it's a provincially registered entity or a federally registered entity?

[Charly Norris]

If this were disclosed, and then you took that entity and went to all the registries across the provinces.... There are different levels of information.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

You could find out, just by the name of a corporation, even a numbered corporation, whether it's provincially or federally registered. The directors of that organization are typically listed in a public registry. Is that your understanding?

[Charly Norris]

That's correct—directors and in some cases shareholders.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

That's correct. Exactly.

I would be willing to hear concerns about privacy, but if someone's full name appears as their corporate name, I don't think the disclosure of that name would be a violation of the Privacy Act in the first instance. Even if someone believed it was violating privacy, I think the fact that I can take that corporate name and search it in another public database to produce that individual's name makes the privacy point irrelevant.

I'm open to hearing or being persuaded on that point, but I think we will need to get some legal opinions, certainly from the Privacy Commissioner. By the way, I reached out to him and haven't heard back from him—but I know you don't represent that office. However, if there are concerns, I would appreciate having those spelled out at the earliest opportunity.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Jean Yip]

Thank you.

Now Mr. McKinnon has the floor for six minutes.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

I'd like to start by saying that I'm largely supportive. I'm sympathetic to the goals of this legislation, although I have some concerns about whether they can be achieved.

I'll start with my first point, and I'm not sure if this is a point for officials or for the sponsor of the bill, who might want to come up with amendments coming forward.

The first thing is that this legislation is to create a registry, but it's completely silent on where that data comes from. Is it up to the government to make the entries in the registry, to maintain the registry and to update it, or is it up to the individuals, the corporations, the partnerships or whatever? I think that's key. If nobody is responsible for it, then it's not going to happen. If it's the individual companies, corporations or partnerships, I think there needs to be some sort of incentive for doing so, or perhaps disincentives for not doing so. That is my first point.

I don't know if that's something you want to respond to or if that's relevant to you guys.

[John Daley]

I appreciate the question.

I guess I would say that, essentially, if the bill is passed in its current form, the government would be in a position to determine the most appropriate way for the registry to be presented, based on the specific reporting requirements of the final bill.

Currently, the public accounts of Canada already provide this information at an aggregate or summarized level. What they don't do is provide it at a case-by-case level, so yes, there would be work required by departments to collect that information.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

You would say that under the legislation as written it would be the responsibility of the government to put the information in there and to maintain it.

[John Daley]

Based on the current form of the bill, that is our current interpretation, yes.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I see. Okay.

My next point goes to the cost. We have had some discussion in this place around the costs of data systems and so forth. I guess it would be worth hearing about the cost of the analysis to create the system, the design of it, the analysis deciding where it's going to live, what servers it's going to live on, how it's maintained and what the cost of that would be on a long-term basis. I think that would be very key to the system.

It's also significant because bills that require the government to spend money require royal assent. I'm not sure that the proponent has acquired that yet.

I would ask if you would like to respond to that concern.

[John Daley]

Currently, in accordance with the Financial Administration Act, information in relation to debt deletion is reported at the aggregate level in the public accounts of Canada. There is currently no centralized system for the collection of this information, so yes, there would be a need to have a system in place, as well as procedures and guidance, likely produced by the Treasury Board Secretariat of Canada. Then departments would be responsible for the extraction and verification of that information.

However, it's difficult to say what that would cost.