Mr. Speaker, in response to a) The confidentiality provisions of the acts administered by the Canada Revenue Agency, CRA, prevent the disclosure of any taxpayer information. However, the CRA can say that it was first made aware of the possibility of a “Canada Desk” when the report entitled “Tax Haven Banks and U.S. Tax Compliance” issued by the United States Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, was made public on July 17, 2008, and through subsequent media reports in November 2008, more specifically a Globe and Mail article dated November 14, 2008, “Swiss banking's $5.6-billion man”.
In response to b) The confidentiality provisions of the acts administered by the CRA prevent the disclosure of any taxpayer information. However, as a matter of course, the CRA takes all allegations of possible non-compliance very seriously. Where the CRA is made aware of or provided with information on possible non-compliance with Canadian tax laws, the CRA reviews the information to determine whether non-compliance exists. If non-compliance is detected, the CRA takes appropriate actions, which could include audits or investigations.
The confidentiality provisions of the acts administered by the CRA, prevents the CRA from providing a response to parts c), d) and e).
In response to f) As noted in a), the CRA reviews information available to determine possible level of non-compliance in any sector of the economy. The confidentiality provisions of the acts administered by the CRA prevent the disclosure of any taxpayer information
In response to g) The confidentiality provisions of the acts administered by the CRA prevent the disclosure of any taxpayer information. With regard to penalties and/or interest, in general, the CRA would levy those in accordance with legislation. In Canada, only the courts have the power to levy fines in cases involving possible tax evasion or avoidance.