From today’s ipolitics.ca article Lynne Swanson is also quoted. Here is part of the article:
“…Members of the Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics Committee voted unanimously Tuesday to invite Lebouthillier to appear along with Privacy Commissioner Daniel Therrien and Marie-Claude Juneau, privacy coordinator for the CRA…
While prominent Liberals, including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, criticized the information sharing deal before the election, Lebouthillier has defended it. “Minister Lebouthillier wants to reassure Canadians that all exchanges of information are subject to strict confidentiality rules,” reads the e-mail sent by Lebouthillier’s office…
Lebouthillier’s position has angered groups that have been fighting the deal such as the Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty, which is asking the courts to declare it unconstitutional.
Meanwhile, two Liberal cabinet ministers who had criticized the deal to transfer banking records in the past are no longer calling for it to be scrapped or changed.
Speaking on the way into a cabinet meeting Tuesday, Treasury Board President Scott Brison and Transport Minister Marc Garneau rallied behind the position adopted last week by Lebouthillier.
Brison, who sharply criticized the deal and tried to have it amended when he was Liberal finance critic, said the Liberal government has to work with the agreement negotiated by former Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservatives.
“The previous government negotiated with the Americans on this and we have certainly inherited the situation we have,” Brison told iPolitics. “At the time, the previous government could have negotiated more effectively. The question is where are we now and it is a difficult one to deal with retroactively.”
In 2014, Garneau accused the IRS of trying to get the Canada Revenue Agency to “do its dirty work” through the deal – a deal he now supports. “I take the position that our government is taking now and has been expressed by the minister of revenue,” he said Tuesday…”
elizabeththompson@ipolitics.ca
@Bubblebustin, wonder why the delay if she has the answer from the CRA. Does sitting on it serve a strategic purpose? Certainly her first concern is not the wellbeing and rights of the CANADIAN TAXPAYER her portfolio is supposed to be first and foremost responsible to and for. I don’t see any concern for the “rights of the taxpayer” as per ‘Taxpayer Bill of Rights Guide: Understanding your rights as a taxpayer’ http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/tg/rc17/rc17-e.html#_Ref191279146
Where are your rights to timely information as a Canadian citizen and taxpayer residing in Canada, and under Canadian privacy laws, don’t you have the right to know if your Canadian owned and sited data has been transmitted to a foreign government?
Why does the Revenue Minister feel that she does not have to follow the Privacy Commissioner Therrien’s advice;
“…The Canada Revenue Agency should automatically notify individuals when it shares their banking information with the U.S. Internal Revenue Service under a controversial information sharing agreement, says Canada’s Privacy Commissioner.
And,
“Testifying before Parliament’s Access to information, Privacy and Ethics committee Daniel Therrien said there is no reason for the CRA not to advise people when their information is transferred.
“Can it be realized? It is certainly an effort but we know that the government wants to facilitate access to data by citizens so it seems to me that would be a move that would fit in that objective.”…..
https://ipolitics.ca/2016/04/14/cra-should-notify-people-when-their-bank-records-are-shared-therrien/
Therrien also said:
“…should the CRA inform the individuals in question that their information has been shared with the IRS? I think there is no reason why not. What we heard is that under access to information provisions, if somebody makes an access request, he or she will be entitled to that information, and that is absolutely true. If that is true, then why not provide a mechanism that provides for more systematic information being given to individuals?..”…
https://openparliament.ca/committees/ethics/42-1/8/daniel-therrien-23/
FATCA was one of the issues that Lebouthillier was briefed on during the transition from Harper government to Trudeau Liberals:
Interesting to see the categories of issues included in the briefing, as well as the big empty secrets NOT listed under “Section 6 – CRA Litigation Forecast*+ “:
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/gncy/mnstrl-trnstn/menu-eng.html
See;
‘Canada Revenue Agency Ministerial Transition Documents – November 2015’
“Note to Readers
The briefing documents listed below were prepared for the Minister of National Revenue. In accordance with both the Access to Information Act and Privacy Act, a limited amount of text within these documents may not be disclosed, mainly for reasons of solicitor-client privilege, economic interests of Canada, international affairs, advice to minister or Cabinet Confidences. Additional documents will be added as they become available.”
“Section 6 – CRA Litigation Forecast*+
Section 7 – Issues
Supporting small and medium businesses*
Better service to Canadians*
Estimating the magnitude of non-compliance (Tax gap)*
Tobacco compliance and contraband*
Underground economy*
Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA)*
International collaboration on tax avoidance*
Rules for charities related to political activities*
Collective bargaining*
Bill C-377 – Requirements for labour organizations*
Disability Tax Credit promoters*
Ontario Retirement Pension Plan*
Robillard Commission Report*
Overview of recent reduction exercises and major long-term funding pressures*
Quebec: GST compensation*
British Columbia and Ontario housing market*
*Documents under review
*+ Documents protected pursuant to the Access to Information Act “
More notice given to Israelis than the NO notice given to affected Canadians, including Bubblebustin who received no information to her proactive queries from her bank, and the CRA and only an answer from the Minister of Finance after months of stonewalling ) http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2016/08/17/bubblebustin-passes-along-some-information-to-help-other-canadians-searching-for-whether-or-not-their-banking-information-was-sent-to-cra-for-fatca-information-reporting/ ) ;
“…A petition was recent filed at the HCJ against the FATCA agreement and the legislation enforcing it, but the Supreme Court dismissed it last week, thereby paving the way for the transfer of the information to the US authorities. At the same time, in the framework of the HCJ proceeding, it was ruled that information would not be disclosed to the US authorities about a person whose account was classified as requiring reporting, but who was notified about this less than 30 days previously, or about a person who had been notified, but who had made objections, until his object is answered.
In other words, the next 10 days are a window of opportunity for submitting objections to a decision by a financial institution to deliver information to the Tax Authority, and if a person has already filed an objection after being contacted by a financial institution and informed about the transfer of information about him to the US authorities, in which case the financial institution must answer him before transferring the information….”
http://www.globes.co.il/en/article-fatca-us-israel-tax-data-exchange-begins-sept-30-1001153040
TIGTA again criticizes the IRS for insecure treatment of data this time in transmission to ‘external partners’:
https://www.treasury.gov/tigta/press/press_tigta-2016-37.htm
“Improvements Are Needed to Ensure the Protection of Data the IRS Transfers to External Partners
WASHINGTON — When the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has shared data, including Personally Identifiable Information, taxpayer information, and other sensitive data, with external entities, it has not always adequately protected the data through secure file transfer technology, according to an audit report that the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) released today.
The IRS shares data with various outside entities including Federal, State, and local agencies; financial institutions; and contractors for tax administration purposes. IRS and Federal guidelines require that sensitive data is protected during transmission to prevent unauthorized access or disclosure. TIGTA initiated this audit to determine whether the IRS is properly protecting this data and whether it is maintaining encryption controls and other security configurations in accordance with the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
The IRS uses three methods to transfer data to external partners: 1) a commercial off-the-shelf product for transfers over the Internet, 2) a commercial off-the-shelf product for direct mainframe-to-mainframe data transfers, and 3) drop boxes to allow the IRS and its external partners to place and retrieve data transfers.
In reviewing all three of these external file transfer methods, TIGTA found the IRS did not ensure that encryption requirements are being enforced and ensure that nonsecure protocols are not being used in order to fully protect information during transmission. These protocols include File Transfer Protocol and Telnet, which are known insecure transfer protocols. The IRS also did not remediate high-risk vulnerabilities or install security patches on file transfer servers in a timely manner. For example, TIGTA found 61 servers with high-risk vulnerabilities, 10 servers with outdated versions of Windows and UNIX operating systems still in operation, and 32 servers missing 18 unique security patches, of which four were deemed as critical. Lastly, the IRS did not ensure that corrective action plans for security control weaknesses met IRS standards. This reduced the assurance that the IRS would correct weaknesses timely.
“It is essential that the IRS fully protect sensitive personal and taxpayer information that it transmits externally,” said J. Russell George, Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. “The IRS must ensure that data transmissions are properly authorized and secured, and that remediation plans for correcting weaknesses are effective,” he added.
TIGTA made six recommendations in the report. Of these recommendations, IRS management agreed with two, partially agreed with three, and disagreed with one.
Read the report.
https://www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2017reports/201720004fr.pdf
Note: The difference between the date TIGTA issues an audit report to the Internal Revenue Service and the date TIGTA publicly releases the report is due to TIGTA’s internal review process to ensure that public release is in compliance with Federal confidentiality laws.”