Taylor Bachrach

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 16th, 2020]

With regard to the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program, since March 22, 2016: (a) what is the complete list of infrastructure projects that have undergone a Climate Lens assessment, broken down by stream; and (b) for each project in (a), what are the details, including (i) amount of federal financing, (ii) location of the project, (iii) a brief description of the project, (iv) whether the project included a Climate Change Resilience Assessment, (v) whether the project included a Climate Change Green House Gas Mitigation Assessment, (vi) if a project included a Climate Change Resilience Assessment, a summary of the risk management findings of the assessment, (vii) if a project included a Climate Change Green House Gas Mitigation Assessment, the increase or reduction in emissions calculated in the assessment?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 16th, 2020]

With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) interdepartmental committee that reviews files and makes recommendations on the application of the General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR), broken down by fiscal year since 2010-11: (a) how many of the proposed GAAR assessments sent to the CRA’s headquarters for review were referred to the interdepartmental committee; and (b) of the assessments reviewed in (a) by the interdepartmental committee, for how many assessments did the interdepartmental committee (i) recommend the application of the GAAR, (ii) not recommend the application of the GAAR?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 16th, 2020]

With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency's (CRA) activities under the General Anti-Avoidance Rule under section 245 of the Income Tax Act, and under section 274 of the Income Tax Act, broken down by section of the act: (a) how many audits have been completed, since the fiscal year 2011-12, broken down by fiscal year and by (i) individual, (ii) trust, (iii) corporation; (b) how many notices of assessment have been issued by the CRA since the fiscal year 2011-12, broken down by fiscal year and by (i) individual, (ii) trust, (iii) corporation; (c) what is the total amount recovered by the CRA to date; (d) how many legal proceedings are currently underway, broken down by (i) Tax Court of Canada, (ii) Federal Court of Appeal, (iii) Supreme Court of Canada; (e) how many times has the CRA lost in court, broken down by (i) name of taxpayer, (ii) Tax Court of Canada, (iii) Federal Court of Appeal, (iv) Supreme Court of Canada; (f) what was the total amount spent by the CRA, broken down by lawsuit; and (g) how many times has the CRA not exercised its right of appeal, broken down by lawsuit, and what is the justification for each case?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 16th, 2020]

With regard to the information collected by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) regarding electronic funds transfers of $10,000 and over and the statement by the Minister of National Revenue before the Standing Committee on Finance on May 19, 2016, indicating that using this information, the CRA will target up to four jurisdictions per year, without warning, broken down by fiscal year since 2016-17: (a) how many foreign jurisdictions were targeted; (b) what is the name of each foreign jurisdiction targeted; (c) how many audits were conducted by the CRA for each foreign jurisdiction targeted; (d) of the audits in (c), how many resulted in a notice of assessment; (e) of the audits in (c), how many were referred to the CRA's Criminal Investigations Program; (f) of the investigations in (e), how many were referred to the Public Prosecution Service of Canada; (g) how many prosecutions in (f) resulted in convictions; (h) what were the penalties imposed for each conviction in (g); and (i) what is the total amount recovered?

[Income Tax Act, November 6th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Surrey Centre for articulating the benefits of the changes before us. As I have heard in the communities I represent, they are much needed.

What we have not heard in the debate yet is a clear explanation from the government as to why it refuses to make the changes to the commercial rent assistance program retroactive to April 1.

Could the member explain to the House why there has been so much reluctance to make those changes retroactive and to correct what was really an unfair disparity between tenants whose landlords were up for participating in the program and those whose landlords were not?

[Income Tax Act, November 5th, 2020]

Mr. Chair, we all acknowledge the first iteration of the commercial rent assistance program was flawed. There were businesses that qualified for the flawed program and received those benefits, and there were businesses whose landlords did not want to play ball and did not get them. What do you say to those businesses that are not able to get retroactive support back to April and that are faced with this profoundly unfair situation?

[Income Tax Act, November 5th, 2020]

Mr. Chair, I think, especially with the Service Canada offices still closed in northwest B.C. in some communities, the complexity of the program is of particular concern.

My next question is around the emergency wage subsidy. It has been successful at helping businesses retain their remaining employees who are working for them, but it has not been so successful at allowing them to rehire the ones that they laid off.

Does your government have a plan to increase the number of employees who have been laid off being rehired under these programs and re-employed?

[Income Tax Act, November 5th, 2020]

Mr. Chair, my next question relates to the emergency wage subsidy. The initial iteration of the program was complex enough that there were small businesses that struggled with the application process.

The new iteration, this latest iteration that we are debating tonight, is infinitely more complex. How are very small businesses, owner-operator businesses, going to apply for this program when they do not have teams of lawyers and consultants helping them? They are trying to run their businesses. Service Canada offices are still closed in the region I represent.

What is the minister's message to them?

[Income Tax Act, November 5th, 2020]

Mr. Chair, I would like to begin by acknowledging that for so many businesses in northwest B.C., the wage subsidy and the CEBA loans have been keeping them afloat. That is why I will be pleased to be supporting the legislation before us.

My question to the Minister of Finance is about a specific category of businesses that the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands mentioned. In northwest B.C., there are a lot of small tourism operators who have not just lost a percentage of their revenue for the year, but because they depend wholly on international clients, many from the United States, they have lost their entire season.

I was speaking last night with Gill McKean who owns Westcoast Fishing Adventures with his wife, Mandi. They have lost their entire season.

Is the minister considering targeted support of a magnitude that is going to be able to keep businesses like Gill and Mandi's afloat?

[Citizenship Act, November 2nd, 2020]

Madam Speaker, I would like to try to link together the former speaker's comments with my hon. colleague's comments just now. One of the things the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo mentioned was how moving citizenship ceremonies are, and my hon. colleague just mentioned the record of Stephen Harper.

When I was the mayor of Smithers, I only got to attend one citizenship ceremony because the next year Stephen Harper's government cut small town citizenship ceremonies across the country. I wonder if my hon. colleague would join me in calling for the reinstatement of those citizenship ceremonies so that the change we are debating today, and will hopefully be passed into law, can be made even more significant for people living in rural Canada.