Finance committee  Sure. I can answer and Mark can chime in if there's anything else. Yes, I think the main requirement in the deduction is that the person is travelling 120 kilometres away from their home, unlike the deduction that's in law right now where there are safeguards to limit the circumstances in which the deduction can be claimed beyond that requirement to travel 120 kilometres for the work.

Finance committee  I can't, offhand, think of a specific example. It might be important to clarify that. Both of the deductions provide that expenses that are deducted under one cannot be deducted under the other, so the same expense couldn't be deducted twice under the two different deductions. The concern is more that there are two different deductions in the Income Tax Act that have very similar purposes and apply in many of the same situations and very similar situations.

Finance committee  The tax system is set up in such a way that people are limited in what deductions they can make with respect to employment income in general. Most expenses related to employment income are not deductible unless they're specifically enumerated exceptions in the Income Tax Act, whereas business is more of a bigger picture of what expenses are relevant to computing the profit of a business, and that builds off accounting principles.

Finance committee  Both the existing labour mobility deduction that was implemented through the Budget Implementation Act and this deduction in Bill C-241 are deductions, so they're both amounts that an employee deducts from income and not tax credits.

Finance committee  I guess you're talking about situations where someone is carrying on a business. In those situations, it's a question of what's reasonable in the circumstances.

Finance committee  There's no dollar limit in general for business expenses. It depends on what's appropriate.

Finance committee  Right now, when someone receives post-doctoral fellowship income, it's included in their income for purposes of calculating their taxes, so it's effectively taxed like employment income. However, there's a historical anomaly where it was not included in earned income for the purposes of calculating RRSP room, so the measure is really intended to provide fairness in giving someone RRSP room in a situation where they're paying tax on that income.

Finance committee  Those are questions the department is working on, on an ongoing basis. The pillar two rules would result in a significant change in our tax system. We also, obviously, already have existing rules dealing with foreign companies that are owned by Canadian companies in dealing with multinationals, so the pillar two rules are something that would need to be layered on top of that.

Finance committee  Since the subsidies were introduced at the beginning of COVID-19, there has always been a relatively short timeline during which entities had to apply for the subsidy. Under the current law, it's 180 days from the end of the qualifying period. This is relevant to the wage subsidy, rent subsidy and the Canada recovery hiring benefit.

Finance committee  Thanks for the question. Yes, I can confirm that the government is continuing to work with other countries on pillar one negotiations, and the department itself is very busy continually working with other countries to advance that. In the budget, the government confirmed that the government remains optimistic that there will be an agreement reached on pillar one and that there will eventually be legislation reflecting that agreement, which would in due course be implemented in Canadian law.

Finance committee  I'm sorry, but I don't think we actually have anyone on the call who can speak about the Canadian innovation. We could speak to some of the measures in part 1 of the bill or in parts 2, 3 or 4 that are intended to allow for innovation and for increased growth in the economy, but I don't think we have anyone here on that particular topic.

Finance committee  I don't think there would be anyone on this call who could answer that. These are all tax people from the Department of Finance, so there might be someone on Thursday who would be able to answer that question.

Finance committee  I think the answer to your question was provided yesterday by people who are in a better position to give you an answer than the officials on this call today. I can appreciate that you were not satisfied with the answer you received yesterday. In terms of those of us who are here today, we're really here to talk about the technical tax aspects of this bill.

Finance committee  Hi. It's Lindsay Gwyer from the tax legislation division. I believe that is in part 5 of the bill. There's no one here today to talk about those measures. I think there will be people here, I assume, on Thursday who could answer that question.

Finance committee  The technical briefing given last week was on the notice of ways and means motions. The items in part 1 of the bill—the income tax part—are all the same. What's in the BIA is the same as what was in the notice of ways and means motion, so there's nothing additional. My understanding is that it would be the same for the other parts, though I can only speak for certain with respect to part 1.