...And Not Yet (In)Famous.
Given the history of this particular Made-In-Canada thing, particularly the 'secret amnesty' aspect of it, it's hard avoid thinking that the current artful dodging, based on the following by Harvey Cashore and Kimberley Ivany of the CBC, is being done on purpose:
The Canada Revenue Agency routinely failed to meet deadlines under the Access to Information Act after receiving requests for documents about the KPMG offshore tax scandal and private lobbying meetings with the accounting industry, according to a summary provided by the agency itself.
CBC News began making requests to the federal agency more than a year ago for information about compliance officials and their meetings with KPMG executives, Department of Justice officials, and industry lobbyists — yet deadlines to produce those records have repeatedly not been met...
And how, exactly, you might be asking yourself can the CRA get away with this egregiousity?
Well.
It turns out that there are no consequences whatsoever:
...As for when the bulk of the documents might be produced, (the CBC's Dean) Beeby says there is no way of knowing when CRA might finally comply. Beeby says the act contains no penalties, so there is no incentive to provide documents in a timely fashion...
But when Josephine Q. Citizen gets a letter from the CRA demanding information and documentation in a timely manner...
.
2 comments:
The Scofflawallory Of The Rich...
Five major banks and four traders were sued on Wednesday in a private U.S. lawsuit claiming they conspired to rig prices worldwide in a more than $9 trillion market for bonds issued by government-linked organizations and agencies.
The lawsuit filed in Manhattan federal court by the Boston Retirement System said the collusion dates to at least 2005, was conducted through chatrooms and instant messaging, and caused investors to overpay for bonds they bought or accept low prices for bonds they sold.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-banks-rigging-lawsuit-idUSKCN0Y932L
The case is Boston Retirement System v Bank of America NA et al, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 16-03711.
Jeebuz Crispy Chrisps!
Thanks for that Anon-Above (I think).
.
Post a Comment