Bill C-43 · 41th Parliament · Stephen Harper
Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2
A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 11, 2014 and other measures
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedOct. 23, 2014
- Debated in principleNov. 3, 2014
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberDec. 10, 2014
- Passed the second chamberDec. 15, 2014
- Became lawDec. 15, 2014
Leading supporters
Ranked by the part each played: who is responsible for the bill, who carried it, and who spoke for it most.
- Stephen HarperPrime 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.
What it set out to do
The pre-release version of this Legislative Summary is now available. Parliamentarians and their staff can obtain a copy by submitting a request or contacting the Library of Parliament. Members of the public can obtain a copy by the contacting the Information Service at the Library of Parliament. On 23 October 2014, the Minister of Finance introduced Bill C-43, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 11, 2014 and other measures (Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2), in the House of Commons and it was given first reading. Part 1 implements certain income tax measures proposed in the February 11, 2014 budget. Most notably, it (a) extends the intergenerational rollover and the lifetime capital gains exemption for dispositions of property used in farming and fishing businesses; (b) extends the tax deferral provision with respect to breeding animals to bees, and to all types of horses that are over 12 months of age, that are kept for breeding; (c) permits income contributed to an amateur athlete trust to qualify as earned income for RRSP contribution limit purposes, with an election available to taxpayers for up to a three-year retroa…
Summary by the Library of Parliament.
Where members stand
Votes and debate for this bill have not been read yet.
How it changed on the way
74% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (138,862 words introduced, 135,224 passed). A committee amended it.
substantial changeintent mostly kept
The bill passed with 74 percent of its introduced text altered through additions, removals and replacements. Core income tax measures on farm property, capital gains and trusts remained but were reorganized with new assent details and minor wording adjustments.
- Title page updated from first reading to royal assent.
Before: “FIRST READING, OCTOBER 23, 2014”
After: “ASSENTED TO 16th DECEMBER, 2014”
- Added assent date line in the enacted text.
After: “[Assented to 16th December, 2014]”
How precisely it is written
mixedChallenging the law: ModerateDisputing a charge: Hard
The bill mixes highly detailed numerical formulas and date-specific rules with repeated subjective phrases such as 'appropriate circumstances' and broad grants of ministerial or regulatory power. This creates pockets of black-and-white rules alongside open-ended discretion that invites argument over scope.
Open to argument
“provides for the appropriate taxation of taxpayers that invest in Australian trusts”
Uses the undefined, subjective term 'appropriate' instead of objective criteria.“amends the foreign affiliate dumping rules to ensure the rules apply in appropriate circumstances and, if applicable, provide appropriate results”
Relies on repeated subjective 'appropriate' standards without defined tests.“authorize the Minister of Transport to make an order, and the Governor in Council to make regulations, that prohibit the development or expansion of or any change to the operation of an aerodrome”
Grants open-ended prohibition power without statutory limits on when or how it may be used.“explicitly prohibit jammers, subject to exemptions provided by the Minister of Industry”
Leaves the scope of exemptions entirely to ministerial discretion without statutory criteria.
Clear-cut
“3/4 of the total of all amounts each of which is the taxpayer's proceeds from a disposition in a preceding taxation year that began after 1987 and ended before February 28, 2000”
Supplies exact fractions, specific dates and cross-referenced definitions that fix the calculation.“"security interest", in respect of a property, means an interest in, or for civil law a right in, the property that secures payment of an obligation”
Provides a clear, closed definition tied to a legal concept.
Discretion. Ministers and the CRTC receive wide authority to issue orders, regulations, exemptions, conditions, administrative penalties and registration systems across multiple divisions, with few statutory guardrails stated in the text.
Challenging the law itself. Vague terms such as 'appropriate' and broad regulatory powers could support a vagueness or overbreadth challenge under section 7 of the Charter, though many tax formulas are too specific to attack on those grounds.
Disputing a charge under it. Complex formulas with multiple cross-references and layered conditions make it difficult for a person to dispute whether a specific transaction triggers the rule.
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.