Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 1-15 of 18
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Finance committee  It's regardless. It's not a success thing.

November 2nd, 2017Committee meeting

Randy Freda

Finance committee  There are two sides to that. The first is that if they haven't produced anything within two years, then it's deemed to be unsuccessful. Let's say they end up eventually producing something from it; it's deemed to be—

November 2nd, 2017Committee meeting

Randy Freda

Finance committee  They could do that, or it could become something they can write off right there, for going forward.

November 2nd, 2017Committee meeting

Randy Freda

Finance committee  To clarify, there are two measures. When you said “exploration” in a general sense, I then went with the idea that you were talking about the discovery well measure. There is another measure with regard to reclassification of Canadian development expenses for flow-through share

November 2nd, 2017Committee meeting

Randy Freda

Finance committee  Yes, and in particular a shareholder that buys a flow-through share. Basically, with that flow-through share they get a share, but they also get access to the deduction. Let's say it was a development expense of $100—

November 2nd, 2017Committee meeting

Randy Freda

Finance committee  With a successful flow-through share arrangement?

November 2nd, 2017Committee meeting

Randy Freda

Finance committee  In that context, it doesn't matter whether it's successful or not.

November 2nd, 2017Committee meeting

Randy Freda

Finance committee  For the actual investor, let's pretend it's $100 and it gets flowed out to them at $100. The investor would be able to write off $100.

November 2nd, 2017Committee meeting

Randy Freda

Finance committee  No, because.... That's where I'm saying the success.... What we're talking about when we're talking about that measure is that it was a development expense. It wasn't an exploration expense. It's only by sort of being designated as exploration.... It's basically put into the cl

November 2nd, 2017Committee meeting

Randy Freda

Finance committee  Correct. That development expense that's normally 30% was deemed to be a Canadian exploration expense, and they'd be able to deduct it at 100%. You're right that they would only be able to claim a development expense at the 30% rate.

November 2nd, 2017Committee meeting

Randy Freda

Finance committee  In terms of exploration, the measure deals with how discovery wells would be treated. They would be treated as development wells at 30%, unless they're proven to be or deemed to be unsuccessful. In that case, they would then become exploration expenses, which are deductible at 10

November 2nd, 2017Committee meeting

Randy Freda

Finance committee  I guess what I'm trying to get at is.... I think it might be the same. Those discovery wells will be treated to start off with as development expenses at 30%. You don't necessarily know whether they're going to be successful or unsuccessful at that point in time, but if a discove

November 2nd, 2017Committee meeting

Randy Freda

November 2nd, 2017Committee meeting

Randy Freda

Finance committee  Correct.

November 2nd, 2017Committee meeting

Randy Freda

November 2nd, 2017Committee meeting

Randy Freda