Finance committee  I believe, according to Finance officials, the retroactive amount is $195 million, which represents about 5/100 of 1% of tax revenue.

Finance committee  Yes. To the discussion earlier, it's an unusual thing to do to be increasing taxation on a service at the same time as you are trying to lower the cost of card acceptance.

Finance committee  The incidence of any taxation will ultimately fall on the users of the card system, which are both the consumers—because they are customers of the issuers—and the merchants—because they are customers of the acquirers.

Finance committee  It certainly brings in new challenges, and it brings in new avenues and new concerns. Our bigger concern, candidly, is the implication that retroactivity has on Canada as a target for investment. It creates a chill. It creates a question about the rule of law and about the certa

Finance committee  Potentially it could, absolutely. I can provide some additional details in writing afterwards.

Finance committee  Absolutely. Is that short enough?

Finance committee  Your point is very well taken. Indeed, I mentioned it in the opening remarks. It is ironic that the government is proposing this measure at the very same time it is claiming that it is trying to lower the cost of card acceptance fees for small businesses—

Finance committee  No. They have been paying it. That's exactly the issue. They've been paying it and contesting it for the better part of 20 years. It was only when they got, frankly, to the point where they took it to court, and ultimately the government lost, that all of a sudden this came about

Finance committee  Yes, where there have been—

Finance committee  Yes, it would make it so that the request for overpayment they made or would make in response to the ruling would then simply no longer be allowed to be processed.

Finance committee  I'll start by saying that, in some respects, it's both. You have retroactive legislation that applies, potentially, all the way back to the introduction of GST. When I have—

Finance committee  You have retroactive legislation that applies literally back to the inception of GST, if you take it back far enough. When I get calls from clients—and I do, from institutions—their first question is, “I don't understand my exposure, because I have something here that has no end

Finance committee  The concern we have is that the government is retroactively trying to make a change. Our concern is with the retroactive dimension of this. It is trying to retroactively change, to use legislation to override, in effect, a court case and a court decision.

Finance committee  The answer is it was contested through the entire period.

Finance committee  The answer is that they contested it through the entire period. There was a charge, and then the institutions would go back to CRA. CRA did nothing, and then eventually they were taken to court and they lost. The interpretation—