Bill S-31 · 37th Parliament · Jean Chrétien
Income Tax Conventions Implementation Act, 2001
An Act to implement agreements, conventions and protocols concluded between Canada and Slovenia, Ecuador, Venezuela, Peru, Senegal, the Czech Republic, the Slovak Republic and Germany for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedSept. 18, 2001
- Debated in principleOct. 16, 2001
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberOct. 31, 2001
- Passed the second chamberDec. 3, 2001
- Became lawDec. 18, 2001
Leading supporters
Ranked by the part each played: who is responsible for the bill, who carried it, and who spoke for it most.
- Jean ChrétienPrime Minister
Who carries this bill
Arrows run from the person responsible to those who answer to them on this bill. The critic leads the Senate’s scrutiny and answers to no one on it.
Where members stand
Votes and debate for this bill have not been read yet.
How it changed on the way
1% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (77,451 words introduced, 77,376 passed).
How precisely it is written
mixedChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Moderate
The bill supplies many objective definitions and numeric limits drawn from tax treaties, yet repeatedly hands the Minister open-ended power to issue any regulations needed to carry out each convention. This combination produces black-and-white rules on some points and wide administrative discretion on others.
Open to argument
“The Minister of National Revenue may make any regulations that are necessary for carrying out the Convention or for giving effect to any of its provisions.”
The phrase grants broad, subjective discretion without objective criteria or limits on what regulations may cover.“due regard shall be had to the other provisions of this Convention”
The standard is subjective and invites argument over what regard is due.“the visit is substantially supported by public funds”
The qualifier 'substantially' is undefined and open to differing interpretations.
Clear-cut
“after six years from the end of the year in which the profits which would be subject to such change would, but for the conditions referred to in paragraph 1, have accrued to that enterprise.”
A fixed six-year time limit supplies a clear, objective cutoff.“the tax so charged shall not exceed 10 per cent of the gross amount of the interest”
A specific numeric ceiling removes doubt about the maximum rate.“a fixed place of business through which the business of an enterprise is wholly or partly carried on”
The definition uses concrete, observable criteria rather than subjective judgment.
Discretion. Each convention section grants the Minister of National Revenue unrestricted power to issue any regulations deemed necessary to implement or give effect to the treaty.
Challenging the law itself. The provisions contain defined terms and numeric caps that reduce vagueness or overbreadth claims under section 7 of the Charter.
Disputing a charge under it. Precise definitions and percentage limits make factual disputes straightforward, but the open-ended regulation-making power could complicate arguments over what conduct is actually required.
Read by a language model from the royal assent text; every quoted phrase appears in the bill. A reading of the drafting, not legal advice.
Did it work?
no evaluation found
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.