Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
Messages
Date: 21-Aug-2000 - 4:17 PM
Subject:Quantifying the cumulative cost of the proposed FIE tax
From: Jon Chevreau

FIE = Foreign Investment Entities. See related threads for background.

The following is from someone who wishes to stay anonymous:

I was trying to come up with a simple example for communication purposes (to MPs). You might find this useful:

The legislation proposes in one swoop to reduce our family assets (outside the pension plan) by 25 per cent. How does this happen? To take the simplest example:

If one starts with 10,000 dollars and over a period of time it appreciates to 20,000 dollars, a 10,000 dollar capital gain is involved. This only goes into effect when we sell. Good money management is generally not to sell until one has to. The draft legislation essentially forces us to sell, pay tax at the highest marginal rate (which is proposed to be 50% after January 1 for these assets). Thus the 10,000 gain is reduced to $5,000. Our assets now total $15,000 rather than $20,000.

Although the situation is more complicated (obviously), this is the essence.

Back Top

Date: 22-Aug-2000 - 11:46 AM
Subject:Re: Quantifying the cumulative cost of the proposed FIE tax
From: Jon Chevreau

There's another cost a reader points out: even to those holding these FIEs INSIDE their RRSPs. Does not imputing yearly capital gains even where not realized affect the original cost base and therefore the 25% foreign content limit? Yet more bureaucracy to monitor.

Back Top

Date: 23-Aug-2000 - 11:22 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

...continuation of the taxed-out thread "Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (1)"

Back Top

Date: 23-Aug-2000 - 11:45 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

Date: 23-Aug-2000 - 11:13 AM
Subject:Tax Nightmare Looms
From: Jon Chevreau

....is an effective headline used by Gordon Pape to describe the ETF/FIE tax issue, which leads off his latest Internet Wealth Builder. Link below is to Pape's web site, which nicely summarizes the issue. Please consider this the "Part 2" to the long 95-post original Bylo post on this issue. Note that the Post, Globe and now the Toronto Star have all weighed in on this issue.

Internet Link: Tax Nightmare Looms

Back Top

Date: 23-Aug-2000 - 12:53 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Terry

Over at TFL, Mikale made this valuable contribution

"The draft legislation is even more pernicious than I originally envisioned. I thought that an individual investor with substantial unrealized capital gains [ucg] in FIEs would be able to skirt the start of the mark-to-market regime by way of an estate freeze into a holding company with an underlying trust in favour of kids and grandkids, thereby deferring tax on the ucg and splitting income on the future annual taxation. Not so, according to Ernst & Young:

Property subject to the mark-to-market rules will be excluded from "eligible property" under section 85. It also appears that a foreign affiliate rollover under subsection 85.1(3), and various other rollovers, would be denied on the basis that such property would not be capital property. And I would endorse the unnamed mandarin quoted in Carrick's column. This was not a MF industry conspiracy. However, the e-mail/fax generator campaign has certainly "tipped" the industry to rebut any proposed changes."

The bottom line is tax planning around this issue appears to be very limited.

Internet Link: Ernst & Young

Back Top

Date: 23-Aug-2000 - 2:38 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: DanH

Here's my contribution to the cause, in addition to letters/e-mails sent personally.

Back Top

Date: 23-Aug-2000 - 2:47 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Terry

Now I know who you are, I e-mailed you yesterday to congradulate you on a fine premier addition to your column and again today to ask if you knew where the FPSC stood on this issue.

Good Work!!

Back Top

Date: 23-Aug-2000 - 2:52 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Contrarian

several Canadian mutual funds contain ETF's so they will also be impacted. i've always found the idea of mutual funds buying etf's to be absurd.paying mer's on top of mer's is not my idea of cost efficiency.

Back Top

Date: 23-Aug-2000 - 2:57 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

Excellent article DanH. You've explained what otherwise is rather dry and technical in a way that most people can understand.

One factual nit: The MER ("ER" in the States) on SPYs is now 12 bp and the iShares version is down to 9 bp. It's not yet known what Vanguard will charge for VIPERs but traditionally they match or undercut their competition. (And since VIPERs will be just a special class of their existing funds, they've got instant economies of scale.) In any case, that's at least a 20 bp difference with the Canadian price leader , TD eFunds. And as an aside, if you buy ETFs through a US broker, (a) the brokerage fees are lower and (b) the dividends can be reinvested for free.

Back Top

Date: 23-Aug-2000 - 3:46 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Jon Chevreau

I have a clarification from a Finance official on affecting foreign content in RRSPs. He agrees the accrual method could inadvertently cause the 25% limit to be exceeded but said that if this happens, either through the accrual method or the mark-to-market method, legislation would be amended to prevent this from happening.

Back Top

Date: 23-Aug-2000 - 4:02 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Terry

That's exactly what we're looking for, legislation to prevent that and the taxation of unrealized capital gains from happening.

We just have a strong preference that the current legislation be modified to avoid the issue altogether.

But I get a little worried when they come up with answers to these questions cause to me when they do that, it seems less likely that they'll capitulate.

Back Top

Date: 23-Aug-2000 - 4:50 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: DanH

Terry, I sent a message to the communications director and "cc" to her associate, along with the article link. I'll let you about any feedback.

Bylo, while I knew that many had dropped the fees, I should have included a range or qualified the 0.18% with an "and less" statement. Thanks for your kind words and I hope the article send more people to your site to send that letter.

Back Top

Date: 23-Aug-2000 - 5:14 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: lawnjockey

Any financial advisor telling clients to purchase affected securties without warning them of this impending legislation would be remiss in their duties.

So, with the stroke of a pen, these conservative investment vehicles are to become risky and complicated.

Back Top

Date: 23-Aug-2000 - 5:40 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: reader1

Yes, I agree that if you use a U.S. broker, the commission on purchasing/selling the ETFs become almost insigificant.

For example, through interactivebrokers.com, the commission to buy 100 shares of SPY is $1.00. That works out to 0.007%. Not to mention the low MER.

This is too good a thing for the government to kill.

I wish I had discovered U.S. on-line brokers earlier.

Back Top

Date: 23-Aug-2000 - 6:23 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: cbg1

Steve Kangas @ the TFL joins the fight.

Internet Link: http://www.fundlibrary.com/tfl/Education/Articles/p_ArticleDetail.cfm?IB=4197

Back Top

Date: 24-Aug-2000 - 11:32 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: gauthijm

Off-Topic question... And On-Topic after...

How do I join a US-Online-Broker? I tried Datek, they do not accept canadian accounts...

What is better one, from the established firms ?

I have a US-Dollar account throught the Bank of Montreal/Mbanx subsiduary, which I guess (?) I could use to send money from...

On-Topic:

Me & my GF sent a letter to everyone form Bylo's site, except Mr Kenney of the Alliance, as the link there DID NOT work for the Faxweb.

Have a great day, Jean

Back Top

Date: 24-Aug-2000 - 12:04 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

Jean,

TD Waterhouse US. See: Buying US mutual funds and stocks from Canada. Not the cheapest but they do business with Canadians. Also it's easy to transfer $s between TD in Canada and the US.

As for the fax to Kenney not working, I've just tried it and got the same results. We're working on it. In the meantime perhaps you could e-mail your submission to him or fax it to his Ottawa office. He's aware of the campaign, in any case, but the more cc:s he gets the higher our priority on CA's opposition agenda. Thanks.

Back Top

Date: 24-Aug-2000 - 12:14 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: NormR

The fax thing should be all fixed up now :)

Cheers, NormR

Back Top

Date: 24-Aug-2000 - 12:24 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

The fax thing should be all fixed up now

If only the "tax thing" could be fixed as fast :-)

Thanks Norm.

Back Top

Date: 24-Aug-2000 - 4:46 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Jon Chevreau

In the latest TaxLetter, David Louis lists a number of things that could be caught by the FIE rules:

1.) a foreign business that owns valuable real estate

2.) a foreign life insurance polic (eg. whole life or non-term insurance policies. He says Canadian policyholders willl have to take into income annual increases in the policy's value.

3.) An interest in U.S. or other foreign real estate

4.) an investment in corporations where more than half the value derives from investment properties. He says the legislation lists 12 classes, including real estate, shares in corporations, interests in partnerships or trusts, derivatives, currencies, resource properties and commodities

5.) as an example, he cites a FIE might include an investment in U.S. real estate held by a Limited Liability Corporation (LLC), a type of company often used by groups of U.S. investors.

He also notes that the rules don't apply to foreign corporations controlled by small groups of Canadians or non-arm's-length groups (so-called controlled foreign affiliates). In this case, he says, "a separate group of tax rules kicks in."

Fun, eh?

Back Top

Date: 24-Aug-2000 - 5:21 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: DanH

Jon, that's why I think the fund industry couldn't have been behind this. It's not an anti-indexing thing - it's a tax grab. The legislation, if passed as it stands, will adversely affect many foreign mutual funds based in Canada.

Back Top

Date: 24-Aug-2000 - 5:23 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Boomerbucks

Right. See my post in the "What's left?" thread.

Back Top

Date: 24-Aug-2000 - 5:39 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Terry

FWIW, I tend to agree that they're not behind it, but I don't hear any loud screams of protest either. In fact there silence along with the silence of the FPSC is in of itself a statement as to where they stand on the issue.

With respect to point 3, am I now to understand that Canadian limited partnerships who buys U.S. real estate would be affected by this?

What about people who own property in the U.S.?

I think I'm misinterpreting this point and I'm starting to think I need a holiday.

Where would one go for clarification on what is meant by "an interest in U.S. or other foreign real estate."?

If it is included, then this whole issue is getting more absurd by the day.

Back Top

Date: 24-Aug-2000 - 5:52 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: DanH

...am I now to understand that Canadian limited partnerships who buys U.S. real estate would be affected by this?

My understanding is that only foreign securities (trusts, corporations, partnerships) that own real estate and other investment properties fall under the FIE definition.

What about people who own property in the U.S.?

Not a problem. There are two key definitions here, Foreign Investment Entity and Investment Property. FIEs are those foreign business entities that own investment properties with a carrying value of at least 50% of the carrying value of the entity's assets. If a Canadian owns investment property, there's not problem. The Canada-US Income Tax Treaty has a separate set of articles dealing with income and capital gains/losses with respect to real property.

But Canadian funds are definitely affected. My article highlighted Fidelity Far East as probably one fund with the biggest potential backlash. Of course it's a Canadian MF trust. It has substantial holdings in Asian holding companies (foreign businesses). The holding companies hold a combination of shares of other companies and real estate (investment property). That's why this Canadian fund is affected.

And yes, it is absurd and unnecessarily confusing. As I'm typing the explanation I feel like a cat chasing its tail. God I hope they go back to the drawing board.

Back Top

Date: 24-Aug-2000 - 5:54 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: DanH

BTW Terry, still no response from the FPSC.

Back Top

Date: 24-Aug-2000 - 6:09 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Terry

I thought as much, I knew I was missing something, trying to run my business and spend the amount of time I am on this is starting to fry a few cells.

Michael Kane just e-mailed me and said he would be doing articles on this. He also asked if I knew of a real life investor who is willing to be photographed.

I'd sooner not have to contact any of my clients to forefill this request, so on that note is anyone interested from the Vancouver area? cbg1, green, anyone else? If so e-mail me at greenemsc@aol.com

..and thank you Mike!!

Back Top

Date: 25-Aug-2000 - 9:14 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

Sometimes a US-based ETF can be substantially less tax-efficient than one might expect. According to ETF Update and Complete Listing [IndexFunds, 25Aug00] MSCI Canada iShares (WEBS) is about to pay a whopping 23% distribution. Presumably this is because as a US-based security they were forced to realize a capital gain on the spin-off of Nortel Networks from BCE earlier this year. A Canadian-based fund (or individual) would have been able to avoid this.

Of greater interest to most people is the listing of all ETFs that trade on the American Exchange along with ticker symbols, MERs, asset sizes and recent returns.

Back Top

Date: 25-Aug-2000 - 11:10 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

Even Morningstar's John Rekenthaler has taken notice:

Bylo Selhi reports that besides snow, ice hockey, and expensive booze, you have yet another reason to avoid Canada: protectionist legislation. Apparently, Canadian lawmakers have drafted legislation that would make it impractical for Canadian investors to own U.S. mutual funds and Exchange Traded Funds. He's organizing a protest here.
Should I also notify the US State Department?

Back Top

Date: 25-Aug-2000 - 8:49 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Shakespeare

The rumours that this nonsence was started because of the notorious Br*nfm*n transfer of funds brings to mind the famous quote from Anatole France:

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread. [Cournos, Modern Plutarch]

from Collins Concise Dictionary of Quotations

Back Top

Date: 26-Aug-2000 - 9:03 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

Jon's got yet another article on this in today's NP on p. C4, but unfortunately Lord Conrad forgot to post it on his website.

Back Top

Date: 26-Aug-2000 - 9:34 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

Jon sez:

The proposed law is similar to how Ottawa taxes strip bonds. Even though the investor doesn't receive a penny of interest until the bond matures, Ottawa, under a "mark to market" provision, taxes you annually as if you had recived interest.
Careful. There's a big difference here.

Prior to the change in rules on strip bonds and other compound interest bonds/GICs, you were effectively tax-sheltering interest income until the bond matured. CCRA argued (rightly in my mind) that this gives an unfair tax advantage to owners of compound interest bonds as compared to owners of ordinary (semi)annual interest bonds who have to declare and pay tax on the interest income. This is entirely consistent with the principle of taxing income in the year in which it is earned.

The proposed regulations on US-based securities (wrongly in my mind) break new ground in that they would tax capital gains as accrued rather than as realized. This is a dangerous precedent that's entirely inconsistent with the principle of taxing capital gains only when they're actually realized.

Back Top

Date: 26-Aug-2000 - 10:47 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: George$

Jon: I understand that a number of our well heeled politicians and bureaucrats own condos in places like Florida and Arizone.

My question. If this EFT tax on unrealized capital gains goes through, can we next look forward to a similar yearly tax [at the 100% rate] on the annual appreciation value of the condos? Or what about the Muskoka cottage?

This tax proposal has an out-of-this-world ring to it. What are the mandarins in Finance smoking these days?

Back Top

Date: 26-Aug-2000 - 11:58 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Contrarian

Bylo, I agree with you re stip bonds. I don't report the capital gains part of the gain until the bond matures. If the yield was 6%, I only report 6%/yr even if i made 20% on the bond that year. all my bonds are in my rrsp now so i have not done this for a few years.

Back Top

Date: 26-Aug-2000 - 12:05 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Terry

I also agree with Bylo on this issue but the other issue of concern besides the taxing of unrealized capital gains is the change in tax treatment of an investment without grandfathering the tax treatment you were lead to believe you were getting when you bought the investment. That to me is at least as offense as the proposal to tax unrealized capital gains

Back Top

Date: 26-Aug-2000 - 2:48 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Terry

make that "at least as offensive"

Back Top

Date: 26-Aug-2000 - 3:34 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: cbg1

I also agree with Bylo on this issue but the other issue of concern besides the taxing of unrealized capital gains is the change in tax treatment of an investment without grandfathering the tax treatment you were lead to believe you were getting when you bought the investment.

Hi Terry, the grandfather issue scares me, Grandfathering should be used when new information shows that an established investment product or technique is not being taxed fairly. The grandfather clause would then protect the person who originally purchased in good faith a product considered legitimate at the time,

I would suggest that there is no new information to show that the US ETF’s and mutual funds are not being fairly taxed. I would not be happy if we were only able to succeed it getting a grandfather clause on products that are totally aboveboard. A specific and unmistakable exemption is what was originally written into the Budget Plan, I believe nothing less is acceptable.

This tax proposal has an out-of-this-world ring to it. What are the mandarins in Finance smoking these days?

George$, I totally aggree with you. Gordon Pape said it too “To put SPDRs, WEBS and Berkshire Hathaway in the same category as offshore tax havens is so far off the mark that it leaves one wondering which planet the Finance bureaucrats are living on.”

Maybe there really are dope smoking aliens living among us :-))

Back Top

Date: 26-Aug-2000 - 4:49 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Terry

cbg1, I wasn't suggesting for a second that this legislation contain a grandfathering clause.

My suggestion was that changing the tax treatment of an investment for no valid reason is a dangerous path to go down. And to do so in such a way as to punish those investors who bought the investments on their original merits, is even worse.

Back Top

Date: 27-Aug-2000 - 7:15 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Jon Chevreau

I'll see if I can post Saturday's piece in electronic form when I return to the office Monday morning. As for the strip bond bit, perhaps it's a bit of oranges vs apples distraction, although I think Gordon Pape made a similar analogy. In any case, the point is that the two cases are far different: with interest income, the combined principal and interest are steadily rising (assuming you don't sell at the wrong time when rates move against you). With stocks or stock funds, there's always the chance that after 5 years of taxing unrealized gains that the security falls back to the initial value -- so that the gains were NEVER realized and yet taxes paid on them. What exactly happens at that juncture if you then crystalize a net break-even position, assuming the law goes through unmodified?

Back Top

Date: 27-Aug-2000 - 7:34 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

I think Gordon Pape made a similar analogy.

Yabbut, we hold you to a higher standard :-) And I think Pape is wrong when he makes the taxation of strip bonds and compound interest GICs seem like a tax grab. It's not. It just puts them on an equal footing with annual interest bonds and other kinds of ordinary (e.g. employment) income.

What exactly happens at that juncture if you then crystalize a net break-even position, assuming the law goes through unmodified?

If the new legislation forced you to realize a capital gain then, while that alone would be precedent-setting and troubling, it would at least raise your ACB. Later when you actually sold, if it's then at "net break-even" then you'd actually have a capital loss to claim. But since Finance wants to turn this all into ordinary income, it seems to me you'd not be able to claim a loss.

I still think the analogy to bonds is less than perfect, since in the case of bond interest what CCRA requires is fair but when applied to equities is patently unfair. The inability to claim a loss just makes this even more unfair.

Back Top

Date: 27-Aug-2000 - 8:21 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Terry

I could be wrong, but it seems to me if you sell these investments prior to the legislation being enacted, you'd either have a capital gain or a capital loss. The gain you would be taxed on assuming you never had an capital losses you could carry forward. If you had a loss it seems to me you could use that against current gains. Otherwise you could go back 3 years to use the loss against past gains. Otherwise you'd just have to save the loss and use it against future capital gains. If the legislation passes and you realize losses, it seems to me you could use that to reduce your total income, which is the flip side of having to claim it as ordinary income.

Back Top

Date: 27-Aug-2000 - 8:24 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

If the legislation passes and you realize losses, it seems to me you could use that to reduce your total income, which is the flip side of having to claim it as ordinary income.

You mean CCRA recognizes "negative income"?

Back Top

Date: 27-Aug-2000 - 8:30 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Jon Chevreau

you've heard of "negative income tax?"

Back Top

Date: 27-Aug-2000 - 9:01 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Terry

You mean CCRA recognizes "negative income"?

Well business & rental losses come to mind as does Allowable Business Investment Losses (ABIL's) So they do in some circumstances. Presumably someone could have losses related to this type of income but have positive income in an overall sense. I'm just speculating about the losses. Perhaps they'll allow the losses to be used against future or past gains?

The closest I can think of in terms of negative income tax is a refund.

Back Top

Date: 27-Aug-2000 - 11:51 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: cbg1

What exactly happens at that juncture if you then crystalize a net break-even position, assuming the law goes through unmodified?

If the new legislation forced you to realize a capital gain then, while that alone would be precedent-setting and troubling, it would at least raise your ACB. Later when you actually sold, if it's then at "net break-even" then you'd actually have a capital loss to claim. But since Finance wants to turn this all into ordinary income, it seems to me you'd not be able to claim a loss.

I have to believe this is all just too stupid to go forward. Look at how convoluted this is getting. The questions are endless and nobody has a clue as to what Finance really has is mind. What are they going to do, make it up as they go along?

Back Top

Date: 28-Aug-2000 - 9:32 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Shakespeare

Here's Eric Kirzner's article:

Tax problem possible for ipu holders

Back Top

Date: 28-Aug-2000 - 9:37 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

Here's Eric Kirzner's article:

Or you could just check at you-know-where every morning ;-)

Back Top

Date: 28-Aug-2000 - 10:01 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Jon Chevreau

Here's the Saturday piece in electronic form:

From Aug 26/2000 National Post FP Investing:

Absurd law will slaughter portfolios;

Suddenly, cheap ETFs would become very expensive

By Jonathan Chevreau

One of the most absurd tax laws in recent memory is coming under heavy pressure from a concerted grassroots campaign. Legislation proposed by the Department of Finance that would force investors to pay tax on foreign stock market winnings they haven’t even banked is being met with widespread derision from major investment opinion leaders and the country’s mutual fund industry, which stands to benefit big-time from the new law. Adding their voices to the protest are the following heavyweights: former securities regulator Glorianne Stromberg; mutual fund gurus Gordon Pape, Duff Young, Dan Hallett and Stephen Kangas; University of Toronto business professor Eric Kirzner; Walter Robinson, president of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation; personal finance author Bruce Cohen; the Investment Counsel Association of Canada; the Canadian Association of Retired Persons; and many, many more. This growing army of small investor advocates is pitted against the twin goliaths of Ottawa and the $400-billion domestic mutual fund industry. Acting as the point man in this battle is Bylo Selhi, the anonymous advocate of low-fee, do-it-yourself investing. Selhi says that traffic at his Web site, www.bylo.org, has tripled in the past two weeks, and most of it is attributed to Ottawa’s moronic tax initiative. And what’s all the fuss about? As Selhi explains on his Web site, Ottawa wants to annually tax, as income, unrealized capital gains on certain foreign investments — even if the securities haven’t been sold. When the Finance department first unveiled proposed legislation in late June to combat offshore tax evasion, few people picked up on how extensive a sledgehammer the department planned to use to quash offshore tax evaders — and the many law-abiding innocent investors who will suffer from the department’s broadly aimed blows. Only in the past few weeks has it become apparent that, far from targeting only wealthy users of offshore tax havens such as the Cayman Islands, the legislation affects anyone who owns closed-end mutual funds that generally trade in New York or London; foreign investment trusts such as Berkshire Hathaway; the ever popular exchange-traded funds, offered by houses such as Barclays Global Investors or State Street; and even certain foreign stocks. Malcolm Hamilton, an actuary with William M. Mercer Ltd., says Ottawa "shouldn’t be slaughtering 99 innocents to catch the one guilty party." Hamilton says he hopes the Finance Department has inadvertently cast its net too widely. Otherwise, he adds, it would appear Ottawa really wants to punish high-income earners — and encourage consumption rather than retirement saving. "Investors get slaughtered at every step," Hamilton explains. "First, management expense ratios are higher in Canada. Second, capital gains taxes are higher. See CHEVREAU on Page C5

They paint you into this corner where you have high-cost funds and highly taxed capital gains. And now every time you find the smallest avenue of escape — not even a complete one — they cut that off," Hamilton says. The proposed law is similar to how Ottawa treats strip bonds. Even though an investor doesn’t receive a penny of interest until the bond matures, Ottawa, under a "mark to market" provision, taxes you annually as if you had received interest. The result was to force all strip bonds inside RRSPs. Worse, investors would not only pay for phantom capital gains on foreign investment entities, but be taxed on 100% of the profits — rather than the 67% rate normally allotted to capital gains on other securities. The result will be to force investors to hold these securities only in their already-limited RRSPs or — more likely — to drive them back into the arms of the traditional Canadian mutual fund industry, whose foreign funds are not affected by the proposed law. That, in turn, will hurt returns because Canadian fund fees are almost 10 times higher than, say, exchange-traded funds. Stromberg, formerly of the Ontario Securities Commission, says she is "astounded" by the proposed law, "because it denies to the individual investor the ability to use modern portfolio management techniques at a reasonable cost." What’s infuriating is this law attacks the minority of knowledgeable investors who are trying to build a self-sufficient retirement nest egg in the face of the twin assaults of taxes and high investment management fees. They realize they need more than the RRSP contribution room permitted (tax-assisted retirement saving, whether through pension plans or RRSPs, is less than half that of what Britain and the United States offer) and have therefore created low-fee, tax-efficient portfolios for their non-registered savings. Note that these taxable portfolios are created with income that is already net of tax deducted at source. The legislation further discourages Canadians from accessing higher-yielding foreign markets, which account for about 97% of the world’s stock market capitalization. It is especially punitive to those building non-registered retirement portfolios and, in effect, forces investors to choose between individual [foreign] stocks and U.S. mutual funds sold by Canadian fund companies. But at least one chief executive at a national mutual fund manager believes the proposed change is preposterous, even though his industry stands to benefit. "We think it’s a totally ridiculous bill," says Bill Holland, CEO of C.I. Fund Management, a top 10 fund firm. And there’s another killer: As the legislation stands, these phantom gains will also count in working out the foreign content inside RRSPs and registered retirement income funds, which in turn may well trigger penalties for going beyond the 25% limit — unless investors sell off some of their foreign winners. (A Finance official confirmed this interpretation after I contacted the department. But, he added, the legislation will be amended to ensure the foreign content limit is not affected.) Pape, the fund expert, warns in his electronic newsletter, Internet Wealth Builder, of a looming "tax nightmare." Apart from the horrendous complexity of sorting out unrealized capital gains and losses, he questions the fairness of the proposals. "Most people do not regard it as fair ball to be taxed on income they do not receive," he says. Pape says none of Ottawa’s "sophisms" for justifying this tax treatment hold water. "The U.S. is not the Cayman [Islands]. ... To put SPDRs, WEBS and Berkshire Hathaway in the same category as offshore tax havens is so far off the mark that it leaves one wondering which planet the Finance bureaucrats are living on." Financial Post jchevreau@nationalpost.com

Back Top

Date: 28-Aug-2000 - 2:17 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

1. Jon's above article is here in a much more readible format

2. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) news release

3. Keep 'em coming folks...

Back Top

Date: 28-Aug-2000 - 10:15 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Contrarian

The CPP is investing into foreign markets through indices. Maybe they should also be punished for investing outside Canada.

Back Top

Date: 29-Aug-2000 - 9:40 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

This morning's media coverage includes...

National Post: CTF joins protest against gains tax

Globe & Mail: War on taxing foreign content far from over

Quicken: Taxation to the nth degree

Back Top

Date: 29-Aug-2000 - 1:18 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: gummy

Got a copy of this, today, from Kenney:

Internet Link: Letter

Back Top

Date: 29-Aug-2000 - 1:20 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: gummy

... or, mebbe it was this.

Back Top

Date: 29-Aug-2000 - 1:57 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Dino

Jon... thanks from an average investor who would not have been aware of this grab if not for your efforts to alert us. I've sent e-mail protests, and am urging others to do the same. Keep up the good work .

Back Top

Date: 29-Aug-2000 - 2:46 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: reader1

Right now, a lot of attention is being paid to ETFs, however, I believe that U.S.-based mutual funds are equally important.

In fact, while there are about 60 or so ETFs and iShares, there are tens of thousands of US-based mutual funds which offer Canadians tremendous investment opportunities. These distribute their dividends (as required to U.S. law), and therefore, cannot be considered tax shelters.

The proposed tax legislation should not apply to them.

Back Top

Date: 30-Aug-2000 - 9:48 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: ngoldman

Ernst & Young has a good article on their web page http://www.ey.com/GLOBAL/gcr.nsf/Canada/Library_Tax_TA00-08 Norm

Back Top

Date: 30-Aug-2000 - 5:08 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Jon Chevreau

Two days to go to provide input to this campaign. I do believe that we're starting to have an impact. More on this tomorrow.

Back Top

Date: 30-Aug-2000 - 5:22 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Terry

That's good to hear. I've been talking with Michael Kane, from the Vancouver Sun, and I'm of the understanding that he'll be doing an article this Friday. So we'll put pressure on them up until the last day.

Back Top

Date: 30-Aug-2000 - 6:34 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: reader1

I got the following response from Jason Kennedy, opposition finance critic. He said that "the Official Opposition will oppose this initiative in the most vigorous way possible". So far, the Alliance is the only party I have heard back from.

He also attached a letter that he send to Paul Martin, however, this had been posted here before, so I left it out.

----

O T T A W A Wednesday, 30 August 2000

Thank you for forwarding me your recent correspondence of August 17, 2000 regarding proposed changes by the Liberal government to the way foreign investment equities are taxed.

I fully appreciate your concerns about any proposal to force law-abiding Canadian investors to pay tax on capital gains accrued but not realized.

Please be assured that the Official Opposition will oppose this initiative in the most vigorous way possible on the grounds that the proposed changes to our tax code would harm law-abiding investors and devastate the financial community involved in Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs).

Enclosed, please find a letter that I have sent to the Minister of Finance urging his department to put an end to this egregious proposed change in tax policy respecting ETFs.

I will endeavour to keep you informed of our efforts in quashing this proposal, and I wish to thank you for your excellent correspondence about this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Jason Kenney, MP

Back Top

Date: 30-Aug-2000 - 7:30 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

Way to go cbg1.

This just in: The Motley Fools are Standing Up for Canadian Fools

Back Top

Date: 30-Aug-2000 - 8:57 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Tony Humble

As my daughter would say "like, totally ahhhhsome Bylo". With Motley Fool on our side it would be Fool-ish to offer resistance. Can we expect a response from the real "Fool on the Hill" tomorrow? I'm actually driving to Ottawa tomorrow...anything I can deliver?

Back Top

Date: 30-Aug-2000 - 9:05 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

Tony,

Tell your daughter that what will be totally ahhhhsome is ifwhen a bunch of small investors across Canada make Ottawa not only listen but actually admit the error in their ways and back down on what was supposed to have been a "done deal."

Back Top

Date: 30-Aug-2000 - 9:21 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Shakespeare

Bylo, remember they backed off on the Senior's Allowance, too, once the flaws were pointed out.

I don't think this is a Grand Conspiracy; the drafter just had spread the net too wide. The comment period thus serves its purpose - democracy in action.

I suspect that the internal draft/review process is somewhat limited by the fact that the drafters and reviewers will have an institutional bias that will miss certain things; this is why you have an external examiner on a Ph.D. committee.

Back Top

Date: 30-Aug-2000 - 9:38 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

Yabbut, we're gonna do it without help from the Raging Grannies :-)

Back Top

Date: 30-Aug-2000 - 9:45 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Jon Chevreau

Yes, the Seniors Benefit was axed because of concerted pressuer and you could also argue after a long time that bracket creep was also finally addressed once the media started focusing on it. But the media generally just amplify what's out there: you need to be able to put the media magnifying glass above a germ of something: in this case, Bylo's site and insights.

Side question: how will all this "attention" impact Bylo's anonymity?

Back Top

Date: 30-Aug-2000 - 9:52 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Tony Humble

What anonymity? Doesn't everyone know that Bylo is really Kelly Rodgers with an integrity transplant and an IQ booster shot?

Back Top

Date: 30-Aug-2000 - 9:58 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Shakespeare

Who is Kelly Rodgers?

Back Top

Date: 30-Aug-2000 - 10:01 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

Jon's collaborator on TWB the book!

Back Top

Date: 30-Aug-2000 - 10:36 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Shakespeare

See bio here

Back Top

Date: 30-Aug-2000 - 10:42 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Terry

Side question: how will all this "attention" impact Bylo's anonymity?

Well we now know Bylo's voice, unless he had his own collaborator..hmmmm.

Maybe once the government ammends its way and admits their folly, Bylo will once again rise his flag to full mast.

Back Top

Date: 30-Aug-2000 - 11:14 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Dr_fortran

While we're at it, we might as well ask them to remove their tax on those multiyears bonds that have not been cashed.

Also, I wrote an email to J. Chevreau describing how it will be another notch of brain drain. Just the main points here:

Think of yourself as an American Executive being transfered to Canada to expand a branch. Would you want to be here and have to pay taxes on non-realized gains, at top marginal tax rate? No Way! Soo guess what, the smart brains will stay out, Canada competitiveness will decline and we will become just another Third World nation having for currency el peso del Norte. This is not just shooting ourselves in the foot but blowing off both of our legs. We don't need this Berlin Wall of investment.

Back Top

Date: 31-Aug-2000 - 12:07 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Tony Humble

See bio here

Thanks, Shakespeare. If you read the article referred to therein "Stalking the Wild Gurus" you'll see a spiteful and thinly-veiled attack on her ex-partner Jon Chevreau. This piece of ego-serving crap will live forever on the record, and haunt her until the imminent onset of her well-deserved obscurity.

By the way, it is rumoured that, in order to induce the smile/ grimace in the bio picture, two teams of midgets were required to attach and hoist high-tension ropes attached to the corners of her mouth. (She really is as grim in person as she appears in print)

Back Top

Date: 31-Aug-2000 - 12:41 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: green

I'm actually driving to Ottawa tomorrow...anything I can deliver? [Tony Humble]

Suggestion: Tony, if you have time and paper follow the three main threads on this forum on this topic which are titled:

Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians
Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
Reader response to ETF tax issue

Print each discussion and each link referenced. Find Paul Martin or some senior in the Finance Department and drop it in his lap. Maybe drop it at the address of the public servant (that expression does not role easily off the tongue at the moment), Len Faber, that was originally referred to as the point person in Finance to send feedback to as listed in Bylo's protest site.



Back Top

Date: 31-Aug-2000 - 6:01 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: cbg1

From article by Jonathan Chevreau, Financial Post, August 31, 2000 "What if Ottawa doesn't back down? Working within plan to tax 'phantom' ETF gains"

The chorus of protests over the federal government's proposal to tax "phantom" gains on a long list of foreign investment properties is at last making itself felt.

Tomorrow is the deadline for objections, but that deadline may now be extended, according to Walter Robinson, federal director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

His chats with senior Department of Finance officials this week suggest to him that Finance has been made aware that the net it cast is too wide.

Robinson expects some modification of the legislation as it relates to U.S. instruments.

Lets hope Walter Robinson is right.

Back Top

Date: 31-Aug-2000 - 8:07 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

if you have time and paper follow the three main threads on this forum on this topic

Or better still go to Your Say which has links to all of those threads, along with a compilation of comments that people have e-mailed me.

Note especially the number of people who after working in the US and owning US securities are now back to Canada to retire. Their investments have appreciated over the years, and now whether they hold 'em or fold 'em are looking at a whopper of a tax hit.

Back Top

Date: 31-Aug-2000 - 10:16 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: cbg1

Article by Jonathan Chevreau, Financial Post, August 31, 2000 "What if Ottawa doesn't back down? Working within plan to tax 'phantom' ETF"

Finance should back down and back off. We will call them when we need them.

Internet Link: What if Ottawa doesn't back down?

Back Top

Date: 31-Aug-2000 - 10:29 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: cbg1

"What if Ottawa doesn't back down?"

http://www.nationalpost.com/financialpost/fpcomment/columnists/story.html?f=/stories/20000831/384111.html

The URL was too long to work in the link box in the above post. Please copy the URL and paste to your browser.

Back Top

Date: 31-Aug-2000 - 10:53 AM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Shakespeare

Or click here

Back Top

Date: 31-Aug-2000 - 1:16 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Warren

FYI, here is the text of the letter recently sent by the President of CAPFA (Canadian Association of Professional Financial Advisors, a group of FEE-ONLY Financial Planners) to the Finance Minister:

August 23, 2000

The Honourable Paul Martin Minister of Finance Tax Legislation Division Department of Finance 17th Floor, East Tower 140 O’Connor Street Ottawa, K1A 0G5

Dear Mr. Martin:

Re: Foreign Investment Entities/Exchange Traded Funds

The June 22nd,, 2000 Draft Legislation dealing with non-resident trusts and foreign investment entities is particularly odious to the average retail investor and taxpayer of Canada. Whatever intractable contest the Department of Finance has with sophisticated tax planning Canadians should not be carried on the backs of the conscientious average taxpayer. Canadians have been particularly impoverished over the past thirty years with the declining Canadian dollar. Now it is proposed that they be further squeezed between the jaws of punitive pre-matured taxation and excessive investment management fees of the Canadian Mutual Fund Industry. If one were a die-hard cynic one could perceive a certain insidiousness about this proposed legislation.

The proposals are frightening for both taxpayer and professional alike bringing disparity of treatment. What with the new Section 163.2, professional advisors will develop a reluctance to advise for fear of penalty or the price of advice will, perforce, escalate in cost. The popularity of Exchanged Traded Funds is merely a symptom of more deeply rooted concerns and the proper market response to them. It is with these thoughts our Association implores you to reconsider the proposed legislation to bring a better sense of fairness to the average Canadian taxpayer.

Yours truly,

David S. Shymko, R.F.P., T.E.P. President

DSS/sp

As I know David well, I feel I can say that any who want use some of this wording should feel free to do so. Otherwise, this is just one more professional voice added to the strong objections Ottawa is receiving on this issue.

Warren.

Back Top

Date: 31-Aug-2000 - 3:11 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Keith

Granted, this tax is unfair to those few Canadians that actually hold U.S- based mutual funds and ETF's in a non-registered account. Howver, maybe 1 or 2% of taxpayers are affected by this dumb legislation. As Mikale stated over at TFL in his arcane manner, typical voters are not going to shed too many tears for the few relatively wealthy investors affected by this new taxation initiative.

I agree that it is important to keep up the pressure on Finance to rethink the implications of its short-sighted proposals. However, it's also just as important to provide alternative suggestions that would ensure that those who hold foreign-based investments actually pay their fair share of taxes.

As it stands now, there are no safeguards in place such as the issuance of T5's to CCRA, that ensure taxes are declared and paid. As it stands the current "honor" system is ludicrous because millions of dollars in taxes are no doubt not being paid.

I guess my question is, how do the citizens of Canada have a guarantee that that taxes on foreign-based investments are declared and paid? Although the proposed legislation is somewhat Draconian, there must be a softer version of it that guarantees the ability of Canada to collect legitimate taxes, yet more fairly treats those who hold U.S. based funds and ETF's.

Back Top

Date: 31-Aug-2000 - 3:45 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: DanH

As Mikale stated over at TFL in his arcane manner, typical voters are not going to shed too many tears for the few relatively wealthy investors affected by this new taxation initiative.

But I would tend to think that Canadians in funds like the Fidelity Far East (nearly $1 billion in size) would care a great deal. That fund has substantial holdings in Asian holding companies (FIEs under the proposed law). With an accrued gain on those companies = 38% of the fund's assets, I think it's just a matter of showing Canadians exactly how widespread the potential implications really are. This is not just a US thing.

As it stands now, there are no safeguards in place such as the issuance of T5's to CCRA, that ensure taxes are declared and paid. As it stands the current "honor" system is ludicrous because millions of dollars in taxes are no doubt not being paid.

It's my impression that the IRS does issue slips with adequate information (form 1042-S) and has increased the sharing of information with the CCRA over the years.

Back Top

Date: 31-Aug-2000 - 5:35 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

maybe 1 or 2% of taxpayers are affected by this dumb legislation.

Perhaps today. If the "majority" who aren't affected today stay "silent" then that sets a dangerous precedent on taxation of accrued but not crystallized capital gains. Remember the justification is partly that certain US-based securities are very tax efficient, and thus can be used to defer capital gains. But they're no different in that respect than Canadian ETFs, index funds and similar low turnover securities like Fairfax Financial, AIC funds, etc. Most "hi-tech" "growth" stocks pay no dividends at all, so they're 100% tax efficient. You want to open the door -- however slightly -- on that?

As it stands now, there are no safeguards in place such as the issuance of T5's to CCRA, that ensure taxes are declared and paid. As it stands the current "honor" system is ludicrous because millions of dollars in taxes are no doubt not being paid.

Untrue!!! In fact, it's harder for a Canadian resident to cheat on US securities than on Canadian ones.

1. As in Canada with T5s, the dealer/broker/fundco [DanH, not the IRS] issues 1042-S that break out all income earned by a US security as interest, cap gain or dividend. This information is reported to the IRS and is shared with CCRA (see next point.)

2. The dealer/broker/fundco is required to withhold tax on interest and dividend income (ordinarily 30%, but reduced to 15% for Canadians who file a W-8 form.)

3. The Canadian taxpayer can only recover the taxes that were withheld in the US by filing a Canadian tax return and claiming a credit for foreign taxes paid. Presumably CCRA uses these filings to justify repayment of taxes withheld in the US on behalf of Canadian taxpayers.

4. Canadians with investments worth more than CA$100k held outside Canada must file a T1135 declaration annually with their Canadian tax return. This indicates how much they have, and in what country(ies) they have it.

So how's a Canadian going to hide income from US securities given 1. and 2., even if they're willing to forego 3. and lie on 4.?

Back Top

Date: 31-Aug-2000 - 8:16 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Keith

Hi Bylo: A determined tax cheat could easily circumvent paying any taxes but the 15% U.S. witholding tax by not reporting certain holdings or income to CCRA--illegal, but far too easy to do. It is unlikely that CCRA is able to easily access the IRS data base to ferret out the information that the U.S. brokers supply to the IRS, or they wouldn't have proposed this new legislation.

Unlike what happens with other types of tax cheating, even a thorough CCRA audit would unlikely be able to uncover the details of foreign holdings held in foreign accounts.

Foreign brokerages, fund dealers and trusts are under no obligation to report anything to CCRA about a Canadian citizens holdings. This has been and continues to be a problem for Canada-- although I don't see how the proposed legislation will remedy this. One could easily circumvent it by simply not reporting foreign income or holdings, as is presently done by tax cheats.

Back Top

Date: 31-Aug-2000 - 8:31 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Contrarian

most people hold etf's and foreign stocks with Canadian brokers , so a T5 is automatically generated.

Back Top

Date: 31-Aug-2000 - 8:39 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Bylo Selhi

Keith,

I'm assuming (perhaps incorrectly) that CCRA and the IRS routinely swap data back and forth. I'm making that assumption because (a) there is a tax treaty in effect between the two countries and (b) each country routinely reclaims taxes withheld from its nationals by the other country.

A determined tax cheat could easily circumvent paying any taxes but the 15% U.S. witholding tax by not reporting certain holdings or income to CCRA

But they have to file an IRS W-8 in order to get the reduced w/h tax rate. Otherwise they pay 30%. And in either case their 1042-S info slips go to the IRS.

Foreign brokerages, fund dealers and trusts are under no obligation to report anything to CCRA about a Canadian citizens holdings.

Correct. But they are required to report to the IRS on all accounts they manage -- including those that happen to be owned by Canadians.

This has been and continues to be a problem for Canada

Do you have any evidence that this is the case with US-based securities?

although I don't see how the proposed legislation will remedy this

Exactly. The legislation is targetted at those jurisdictions where investment trusts can retain all of their income without being subject to tax. In both Canada and the US if they kept the income then they (the corporation, mutual fund sponsor, etc.) would have to pay tax on behalf of the unitholder.

If one wants to cheat why not do so in a "friendly" tax-haven country where (a) one's holdings are secret and (b) there's no tax on investment income? The US hardly meets either criterion.

Back Top

Date: 01-Sep-2000 - 12:28 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: Shakespeare

Letter received form CARP today:

August 28, 2000

Dear [Shakespeare]:

Thank you for your recent fax regarding the proposed changes to Cnada's tax laws which would impact on Canadians who hold U.S. mutual funds.

We have also written to Finance Minister Paul Martin on this subject.

Please keep us informed as to the responses you receive.

Yours truly,

Lillian Morgenthau, President

Back Top

Date: 01-Sep-2000 - 3:08 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: reader1

I just received a reply from my Liberal MP:

"Many thanks for the copy of your letter to Len Farber of the Tax Policy Branch at the Department of Finance regarding draft legislation on the taxation of non-resident trusts and foreign investment entities. Please let me know what response you receive. If I can be of further assistance on this or any other issue, please feel free to contact the constituency office at ...".

IMO, not a very helpful response.

Back Top

Date: 06-Sep-2000 - 1:44 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: cbg1

My prediction:

US Based Registered Investment Corps. will be exempt.

I believe this includes both ETF’s and mutual funds.

Congratulations and thanks to everyone that got involved in the process. This positive result has come about as a direct result of all the letters and faxes that were sent in. This is democracy in action and a very good day for Canadian Investors :-) :-).

cbg1

Back Top

Date: 07-Sep-2000 - 1:35 PM
Subject:Re: Stop tax on US mutual funds/ETFs held by Canadians (2)
From: cbg1

Finance Minister Extends Consultation Period and Announces New Effective Date for Foreign Investment Entity and Trust Tax Proposals.

Here it is.........

Internet Link: http://www.fin.gc.ca/newse00/00-064e.html

Back Top

 

[Home | Back | Forward | Archive | ContactUs | Disclaimer | Glossary | Links | Search]