heenanblaikie.com

55

Suite

T

[email protected]

F

Michel

1866411

613.236.3488

Metcalfe

300

Bastarache

2699

Street

public

‘Canadian

Parliament,

the

mandates

Bill

the

(i.e.,

the

the

On

Division

Bill

likely

taxation

Freedoms

be

under

In

Re:

Dear

Attention:

Ottawa,

Mr.

June

1

Rideau

this

Minister

legislation,

analysis

a

constitutional

upheld

C-377

C-377

either

Terrance

division

Mr.

Constitutionality

02,

be

accountability

the

opinion,

ofpowers

justified

under

ON Western

and

2013

Oakey:

Street,

(“Charter”).

the

is

Constitution

adds

by

it

is

of

consistent

regulates

KIN

of

appears

to

Oakey federal

that

National

the

Mr.

section

Bank

I

powers

determine

a

Suite

as

heads

consider

is,

8S7

new

courts

Terrance

a

v.

with

or

the

reasonable

that

Alberta,

700

the 9

I

with

of

Revenue

analysis,

of

the

Act,

section

1(3)

conclude

“matter”

as

Bill

the

filing

the

power

respect

whether

provincial

the

of

2007

1867,

a

Oakey

validity

purpose

C-377

valid

the

to

Charter

of

limit

the

for

that,

assigned

SCC

to

to

the

financial

what

Constitution

as

first

which

public

under enactment

tax government).’

22

of

if

Income

well

of

at and

the

Bill

step

Bill

benefits

Bill

para

to

the

disclosure.

section

law

information as

that,

Paris C-377

Vancouver

Lawyers

Heenan

is

the

C-377

André

The

Peter

The

26.

Pierre The

DonaM The

The

Of

law

C-377

Tax

the

Heenan

to

Singapore

Counsel

Act,

is

Honourabte

Honourable

of Honourable

Right

Right

M.

Blaikie

level

in Bureau,

Marc

Patent

identify

R.

Victoria

essentially

essentially

afforded

BlaMe,

1

Act,

is

Honourable

Canadian

Honourable

Munroe,

Federal

any

Johnson,

in

of

1867.

and

LIP,

is

enacted

CC.,

According

Calgary

René

Michel

CC. Donald

Trade-mark of

light

the

an

to

case,

Q.C.

by

section

0.0.

Alberta

0.0.0.,

Jean

Dussault,

Pierre

government

the

Bastarache,

J.

Charter.

Montreal

provide

Moreover,

labour

Johnston,

to

Parliament’s

of

Agents

Chréhen,

Limited

relates.

Elliott

about

any

into FRSC

“pith

Charter

CC.,

the

labour

Blaikie

Toronto

Trudeau,

Liability

149.01.

CC.

to

P.C.

P.C.,

infringement

0.0.,

law,

organizations

division

transparency

falls

and

testimony

Ottawa

O.C.,

CC.,

Partnership

The

FRSC,

P.C.,

I

that

organizations.

it

of

Q.C.

O.M.,

substance”

Oudbec

conclude

under

CC.,

The

Ad.

would

objective

power

Rights

O.C.,

E.

enacted

C.H.,

of

Sherbrooke

section

Ad.

Q.C., before

powers

one

would

likely

E.

with

and

over

FRSC

that

and

Trois-Rivikres

of

of

of

it (1984-2000)

6

aras

at

Montreal

D.L.R. 2

information

rights

in presumptive

As

valid

seriousness

a

section

end

Even

Canadian

provisions

obligations

Further,

Quebec

Tessier

Kitkatla

Constitution 3 taxation,

labour

undertakings. 2

cases,

under Tessier

on

relation

Constitution they

Van

Insofar

section

income

and

Labour

15-11.

valid

the

noted,

labour

58-59.

of

Buren

(3d)

enactment

can the

if

under

Ltée

Ltée

provincial

the

area. 6 the

(Attorney

relations

Band Trust

149.01

section

would legislative

as

organizations

while

to

under

405

properly

the dues

Bridge

amateur

v.

Income

constitutional

v.

organizations,

labour

“the the

of

of

by

section

Co

v. interest

Quebec

on

Quebec (Que.

Act,

law

Moreover,

supports

the

British

the

labour not

is

make

[1943]

new

General)

section

As

received

149.01

Co.

raising

of

are

specific

sufficiently

laws

encroachment

C.A.).

is

1867.

athletic

determinative

be

relations Income

Tax

long

v. federal

(Commission

(Commission 92(13)

scheme.

not

provisions

in

a

Columbia

public

A.C.

Madawaska

organizations;

characterized

valid

are

were

the

was

v.

labour

Act,

8

of

See

a

as

The

analysis.

Lacombe,

by

section

of

536;

as

head

organizations,

exempt

money

organizations.

view

of

powers. 4

Peter

the

Tax

found

certain

upheld

the

does

enactment

opposed

labour

is

According

integrated

fact

the

(Minister

Société

relations

de

de

of

pith

address

(1958)

Hogg,

not

that

Act.

Act,

on

of

la

Constitution

la

2010

by

not

power

that

149.01

to

from

Section

sante

financial

the

as

sante

the

as

and

Asbestos

organizations

Bill

it

The

a

intrude

any

In

such

Constitutional

to

change

of

15

valid

does

the

SCC

falling

federal powers

constitutional

by

of

matters

within

taxation

exchange

Small

et

other

D.L.R.

et

substance

C-377 to

assigned

mode

degree

such

merely

de

section

Parliament’s

de

virtue 149.01

38

as

not

notwithstanding

the

v.

on

operations Heenan

la

Ia

at

Business,

the

under

Société

Act,

organizations

subsection

(2d)

the

sécuritJ

of

sécurité

power.

or para

attempt

does

provinces

of

as

ancillary

under

of

of

the

characterization

Law

provides

would

exclusively

system

for

only

federal

763;

fiscal

1867, may

or

registered 42.

integration

their

Parliament’s

nationale

not

other

analysis,

du

these

Tourism

in

matter

du

Abitibi

section

Blaikie

to

imposes

Though

of

powers.

Canada,

be

travail),

intrude

travail),

transparency

there

be

power

of

powers,

regulate

scheme,

powers

149.1(15),

these

head

for

deducted

benefits,

part

that

taxation”

associated

de

Power

of

and

to

149

is

charities

it

required

I

5th

2012

disclosure

2012

organizations.

on

‘amiante

of

over Bill

disclosure

Moreover,

the

the

of

they

still

is

Culture),

power

of

this

doctrine,

the

of

it

Edition

and

government. 5

provincial

instructive

the

provinces

SCC

SCC

will

C-377

provinces

the

a

property it

the

impose

singled

from

under

activities

or

Paper

would

federal

Income

with

appears,

(1981)

depends

to

23

and

Income

23

2002

law.

fiscal

be

Supplemented

make

of

requirements at

at

the

a Co.

is

upheld

as

tax

91(3)

para

out

para

not

disclosure

128

powers.

SCC

registered

taxpayer’s In

that

presence

fmancial

and

related

under

Tax

v.

integrity,

fact

long

of

have

benefits

the

Tax

on

laws several

federal

be

11.

Page

11.

31

of

such

other

civil

Act,

as

that

the

new

the

the

at

Act

the

as

to

a

a

in 2

8 R

under

accountability

Moreover,

court

of

Finally,

generalized

any

constitutionality, political

such

requiring

and

“reasonable

directors

Bill

the

to

capable

raise

Quebec

While

Bill

I

Conformity connection

in

increasing

be

law

order

head

According

opinion

organizations

v.

end

labour

require

construction

other Ruzic,

upheld

lobbying

C-377

interference

C-377

is

would

section

concerns

activities.

this

of

to

(Attorney

requiring

rationally

in

of

activities

Bill

be

government

organizations

2001

and

sections

my either

such

opinion

because

an

and

disclosure.

transparency

as

as

find

valid to

provides

with

estimate”

1

C-377

activities

opinion,

with

SCC

interpretation

sufficient trustees

a of

related

the or

General)

the

information.

that

that

valid

a disclosure

generalized

Charter

the

and

In

affect

is

or

with

24

reviewing

with

Supreme

of

Charter. respect

the

the

does

particularized

conforms

at

it

Charter.

my

functionally

is

for

to

the of

because

enactment

para

v.

limits

(149.01

or to

“rational

how

privacy

minor,

a

to legislation

privacy

Lacombe,

and

the

not

the

few

determine

opinion,

Income

employees

26.

validate

to

of

that

Court, It

their

constitute

percentage

public

freedom

court

disclosure

tax

disclosure

with

comments

individuals’

(3)(b)(vii)(vii. is

section

the

is

interests

functional

interests

important

2010

of

benefits,

money

connected

disclosure

constitutional

Tax

test

the

would

the

where

serves

accountability

according

federal how

SCC

of

with

149.01

section

a

Charter. 8

the

Act.

of

serious

association of

of

is

regarding

under

they

interpret

38

the

and,

any

political

test”.

impugned time

the

to

spent.

compensation

Heenan aggregate

statements

powers. 7

to

at

1)).

In

of

does

remember

under

encroachment

paras

spend

a

infringement

the

the important

to

my

encroachment

dedicated

notably,

and

The

As

valid

In

with

not

time

Charter,

this

any

41-45.

the

beliefs

under

long

opinion,

the

light

one

their

provision

portion

Here,

attempt

federal

Blaikie

amounts

provision

respect

possible

of

ancillary

spent

that,

interpretive

that

as

of

would

goals

section

money,

by

over

disbursements

and

the

Bill

section

both

would

on

of

if

is

a

such

by

legislative

to

on

to

could impugned

political

a

not,

court

the

the

C-3

of

inconsistency

100000$”

regulate

of

individual

powers

of

provincial

in

statutory

likely

tax

2(d)

it

persons

time

likely

these

77

law

transparency

149.01

power

a

courts

is

be

presumption

benefits

would

way

of

does

unlikely

must

activities

scheme,

interpreted

doctrine.

only

the

the dedicated

portion factors,

to

be

provision

that

will

as

of

to

persons

is

powers.

not

activities

“officers,

justified

Charter.

view

political

satisfy

the

provided

aimed

between

well

require

avoids

choose

appear

that

Page

it

of

in

and

other

may

will

this

on

of

as

the to

as

my

a

is

in

at 3 Page 4

Yours very truly

Heenan Blaikie LLP Aa4gAAj

Michel Bastarache

HBdocs - 14894410v1

Heenan Blaikie