Niki Ashton on Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

With regard to the whistleblower allegations about the Canada Revenue Agency’s (CRA) Advance Pricing Arrangement program and the Minister of National Revenue’s statement in the House that “the investigation carried out by an independent tax expert showed that the terms of the agreement were favourable to the agency and did not provide any type of preferential treatment to the taxpayers involved”: (a) when was the minister informed of the allegations that the CRA had entered into certain arrangements without due diligence; (b) what is the job title of the individual who (i) made the decision to launch an investigation, (ii) made the decision to engage an independent tax expert, (iii) was responsible for setting the tax expert’s terms of reference, (iv) was responsible for hiring the tax expert; (c) with respect to the points in (b), was the minister or her exempt staff involved in these decisions, and, if so, to what extent; (d) what are the details of the process that led to the hiring of the tax expert; (e) what is the name of the tax expert; (f) what was the value of the contract awarded to the tax expert; (g) what were the details of the tax expert’s terms of reference; (h) on what date did the investigation start; (i) did the investigation start before the tax expert was hired; (j) what are the job titles of the individuals in charge of the investigation; (k) what are the job titles of the individuals who answered the investigator’s questions; (l) what are the titles and numbers of the documents analyzed as part of the investigation; (m) what laws and regulations were consulted as part of the investigation; (n) when did the investigation end; (o) what is the job title of the individual who made the decision to end the investigation; (p) what are the detailed findings of the investigation; (q) was the minister involved in the investigation, and, if so, to what extent; (r) were the exempt staff in the minister’s office involved in the investigation, and, if so, to what extent; (s) when was the minister informed of the investigation findings; (t) was the minister or her exempt staff involved in (i) drafting the investigation report, (ii) reviewing the investigation report; (u) are there different versions of the investigation report, and, if so, why and what are the version titles and numbers; and (v) was the investigation conducted an independent one?