Finance committee  Yes.

Finance committee  Absolutely. Just getting back to Daniel's comments as well, all this is doing is levelling the playing field—and not even fully yet, but it's a great start. You're right. If this bill passes as is, there's still no advantage. Someone selling their business to their kid will not

Finance committee  We're taking away some of the disadvantage.

Finance committee  I would echo those comments, because in many cases the second generation wants the previous generation to stay involved in some form or another, sometimes not at all, but often. I think it was Kevin who was saying that in many cases.... I've just gone through a few sales here in

Finance committee  As for the first part, yes. The second part, yes, I agree with that, but there's no requirement when you're selling to a third party that the third party.... That third party has every right to have managers run the business. If dad is selling to son, and son wants to stay involv

Finance committee  It does.

Finance committee  I think that's fair. As we said, those of us who have been advocating for the change to section 84.1 don't want it to be abused. We think the section needs to stay there for abuse, but these guardrails prevent that. These guardrails make it apply to legitimate succession planning

Finance committee  That's correct. It's partly because of the guardrails you have in this bill, but also because for the larger companies.... I've just gone through a couple here, and section 84.1 and the capital gains exemption didn't even come into play. The numbers are big enough that this is ju

Finance committee  Exactly. Sorry, I have one last comment. Keep in mind that, again, these people don't have tons of pensions or RRSPs. This is their retirement.

Finance committee  I'd say, without over-exaggeration, every day. I'll just back up for a second. I don't think this has been said today, but section 84.1 is the section of the act that accountants get sued on more than any other section of the act, because it's so prevalent, it's not logical and

Finance committee  Yes.

Finance committee  I have one last comment. What can often happen—and has happened throughout the history of the tax act—is that all of a sudden another piece of legislation might be introduced with no real correlation to this section, but it may inadvertently trigger a loophole. You have to keep

Finance committee  Thanks for the question. Yes, I do think Bill C-208 does have enough guardrails, at least initially. As someone who has practised for 34 years, I'm going to preface this by saying that someone will always find something. Even if you think you have the proper guardrails now, you

Finance committee  That's correct. Since the bill is available to the public, my group and I have gone through it. If anything, we'd like to see it go a little further—we always do. But no, as much as I have said there are potential loopholes, we haven't seen any. With the two things I mentioned ea

Finance committee  Thank you. Section 84.1 has been a thorn in my side for 25 to 30 years. I was pleased when I saw the Liberal bill in 2015—which did not get passed—and I'm just ecstatic to see what's transpiring so far. There was a brief example given in the earlier session, but I want to quickl