House of Commons Hansard #252 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was chair.
Technical Tax Amendments Act, 2012Government Orders
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
There being no motions at report stage, the House will now proceed, without debate, to the putting of the question on the motion to concur in the bill at report stage.
Technical Tax Amendments Act, 2012Government Orders
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
Technical Tax Amendments Act, 2012Government Orders
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
Technical Tax Amendments Act, 2012Government Orders
6:20 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
Technical Tax Amendments Act, 2012Government Orders
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
(Motion agreed to)
When shall the bill be read the third time? By leave, now?
Technical Tax Amendments Act, 2012Government Orders
6:20 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
Technical Tax Amendments Act, 2012Government Orders
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
Technical Tax Amendments Act, 2012Government Orders
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
On debate, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue.
Technical Tax Amendments Act, 2012Government Orders
6:20 p.m.
Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo B.C.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to begin third and final reading at debate stage of this important piece of legislation for taxpayers and tax professionals, Bill C-48, the Technical Tax Amendments Act, 2012.
I have to admit that it is certainly not the most riveting or the most exciting piece of legislation that has ever come before Parliament. However, it is a very important piece of legislation and it is going to go a long way and a significant way toward the goal of simplifying Canada's tax system.
As previous Parliaments' efforts to adopt these technical tax amendments were unsuccessful for a variety of reasons, we have seen a considerable backlog develop over the years, making it more important now to act and to finally pass these technical tax amendments.
We all recall even the Auditor General of Canada recently cautioning over a growing concern, and outlining that concern in a 2009 report. She said:
Taxpayers’ ability to comply with tax legislation depends on their understanding of how the rules apply to their own circumstances. ... Uncertainty about how the law should be applied can also add to the time taken and costs incurred by tax audits and tax administration.
Of course, I could not agree more with the comments from the Auditor General. Furthermore, I would also like to flag that the Auditor General also made some important observations about the impact of not dealing with this issue in a timely manner, an impact with far-reaching implications.
Among the many negative effects for taxpayers of the uncertainty over the backlog of outstanding income tax amendments, the Auditor General's report identified:
higher costs of obtaining professional advice to comply with tax law; less efficiency in doing business transactions; inability of publicly traded corporations to use proposed tax changes in their financial reporting, because they have not been “substantively enacted”; ...and increased willingness to use aggressive tax plans.
Before continuing, let me pause here to thank my colleagues on the finance committee from all sides for their timely and swift consideration of the technical tax amendments, 2012, earlier this year. I also want to thank them for giving their unanimous support to the legislation. It is little wonder, as during the multiple hearings the finance committee held, we heard from dozens of witnesses ranging from the Certified General Accountants Association of Canada to the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants to the Canadian Tax Foundation, and many more. They were all calling for the timely implementation of today's legislation.
Permit me to share with the House and with all Canadians some snippets of what we heard at committee, all underlining the lengthy process to get this legislation to this stage and the importance of Parliament finally adopting it.
First, allow me to quote from the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants, which said:
Bill C-48 marks the end of a very long road, one with many twists and turns over the years. The last technical bill on income tax received royal assent in 2001....
That speaks for itself. It was a long time ago. They continued to say:
...it is fair to say that we greet the technical tax amendments act of 2012 with a sense of relief. We support Bill C-48. The CICA understands how important it is for taxpayers to have greater certainty and a clearer understanding of Canada's federal income tax system.
We listened to the Canadian Tax Foundation, and again I will quote at length. The CTA said:
We live in a rapidly changing world, and this legislation must respond dynamically to changes in commercial transactions. Can you imagine how much work would be required if you made no repairs to your home or your car for more than 10 years? That is what has happened with these two statutes. The last bill addressing technical amendments was passed in 2001. ... [The Technical Tax Amendments Act, 2012] represents 10 years of repairs and maintenance in updating the Income Tax Act and the Excise Tax Act. Its passage is important to all Canadians. ... I want to emphasize it again. Its passage is very important to all Canadians. ... Delays in the passage of tax legislation leave taxpayers and their advisers in a no man's land of uncertainty. My message for the Standing Committee on Finance is that you should encourage passage of this legislation....
I will give the House another example. The Certified General Accountant's Association of Canada told finance committee:
...we encourage you to move swiftly to pass this important piece of legislation. The bill deals with a massive backlog of unlegislated tax measures. Its passage would, in our opinion, bring greater clarity to the tax system and strengthen the integrity of our laws.
We all know these delayed technical amendments cause serious difficulties for taxpayers, businesses, professional accountants and their clients, and of course, government. We heard some very vocal support for the technical tax amendments act, 2012 at finance committee from these and many other public interest organizations and tax professionals. The support was a big part of the reason the legislation received unanimous support from all members, from all parties, on the committee.
For those watching at home, and parliamentarians, I want to briefly recap the content of the technical tax amendments act, 2012. As I alluded to earlier, the vast majority of these amendments have already been publicly released in either a previous budget or a previous technical tax bill. In addition to that, the vast majority of it was previously and extensively released prior to introduction during the multiple public consultation phases. The ultimate legislation, in point of fact, incorporates a tremendous amount of the feedback provided by Canadians during those many public consultations.
Today's act, among other things, would further simplify Canada's tax system through numerous technical amendments to the Income Tax Act, the Excise Tax Act and related legislation. I would like to further add that today's legislation also takes key steps to close some tax loopholes to create a stronger and fairer tax system for all Canadians.
I want to quickly review the legislation, part by part, to highlight some key measures and what they hope to achieve. Even though today's act is obviously extremely technical in nature and includes seven different sections, I will keep my remarks brief.
I will commence with Part 1 of the bill, which would modify the Income Tax Act by taking into account comments we received during our extensive consultations and which would create simpler rules for non-resident trusts.
Parts 2 and 3 deal directly with the taxation of Canadian multinational corporations with foreign affiliates, implementing changes, some of which date all the way back to 2004, that would make Canada's tax system more fair and equitable, and of course, easier to administer. As is the case with the majority of measures contained in the bill, these changes, again, are the result of extensive public consultations.
Part 4 of the bill deals with the concept of bijuralism. More specifically, it contains amendments that will ensure that the bill will function effectively under both common and civil law. This means that amendments dealing with certain legal concepts, such as rights, interest, real and personal property, life estate and remainder interest, tangible and intangible property, and joint and several liability, will accurately capture common and civil law in both official languages.
Part 5 of the bill is designed with fairness for taxpayers in mind and sets out to close tax loopholes to ensure that Canadians would carry their fair share. The act would close tax loopholes related to specified leasing property, ensure that conversion as specified investment flow through trusts and partnerships into corporations are subject to the same rules as transactions through corporations—
The House resumed from May 9 consideration of the motion, and of the amendment.
Opposition Motion — 2013 Spring Report of the Auditor General of CanadaBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders
6:25 p.m.
NDP
The Deputy Speaker NDP Joe Comartin
It being 6:30 p.m., the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the amendment to the motion relating to the business of supply. I would advise the hon. parliamentary secretary that she will have approximately 10 and a half minutes when this debate resumes.
Call in the members.
Business of SupplyGovernment Orders
6:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
I declare the amendment defeated.
The next question is on the main motion.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Business of SupplyGovernment Orders
6:55 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
No.
Business of SupplyGovernment Orders
6:55 p.m.
Conservative
Business of SupplyGovernment Orders
6:55 p.m.
Some hon. members
Yea.
Business of SupplyGovernment Orders
6:55 p.m.
Conservative
Business of SupplyGovernment Orders
6:55 p.m.
Some hon. members
Nay.
Business of SupplyGovernment Orders
6:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
In my opinion the nays have it.
And five or more members having risen:
Business of SupplyGovernment Orders
7:05 p.m.
Conservative
The House resumed from May 10 consideration of the motion that Bill S-9, an act to amend the Criminal Code, be read the third time and passed.
Nuclear Terrorism ActGovernment Orders
7:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of the third reading stage of Bill S-9.
Nuclear Terrorism ActGovernment Orders
7:05 p.m.
Conservative
Gordon O'Connor Conservative Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON
Mr. Speaker, if you seek it I believe you would find agreement to apply the results of the previous motion to the current motion, with the Conservatives voting yes.
Nuclear Terrorism ActGovernment Orders
7:05 p.m.
Conservative
