From: 1revenuecanada@canada.com   
      
   Why Canadians hate the Canada Revenue Agency? : CRA SOTW   
      
   Why we hate the tax collector   
   Article by Vern Krishna   
   					 	 	 	   
      
   Tax collectors are necessary to the functioning of governments and   
   implementation of social policies. Why then are they so unpopular? Because, as   
   history teaches us, they have always overreached and used heavy-handed   
   collection procedures against the    
   vulnerable of society.   
      
   We see the antipathy toward tax collectors in the Bible (Luke 18:9-14), which   
   recounts the parable of the Pharisee and a tax collector who went up into the   
   temple to pray. "The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: 'God, I thank you   
   that I am not like    
   other people -- robbers, evildoers, adulterers -- or even like this tax   
   collector.' But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look   
   up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, 'God, have mercy on me, a sinner.'   
   "   
      
   The techniques of the modern tax collector are more dignified, but not   
   necessarily more sensitive   
   In England, King John's penchant for increasing feudal taxation without   
   consulting his noblemen precipitated the creation of that great constitutional   
   document -- Magna Carta -- in 1215. The Magna Carta propagated a form of "tax   
   farming," whereby the    
   King extracted promises from his nobles of soldiers for battle in exchange for   
   feudal lands.   
      
   A century and a half later, the grievances of a poll tax on all males and   
   females over the age of 15 caused the Peasants' Revolt in 1381. Hume's The   
   History of England captures the drama of the event: "The first disorder was   
   raised by a blacksmith in a    
   village of Essex. The tax-gatherers came to this man's shop while he was at   
   work; and they demanded payment for his daughter, who he asserted to be below   
   the age assigned by the statute. One of these fellows offered to produce a   
   very indecent proof to    
   the contrary, and at the same time laid hold of the maid: which the father   
   resenting, immediately knocked out the ruffian's brains with his hammer."   
      
   Taxation has long been the instrument of persecution. In England, for example,   
   Jews were forbidden from joining any of the artisan guilds and could not own   
   land. Thus, confined to money lending and finance, they were taxed on their   
   goods, chattels, debts,   
    gifts, and through licences, fines and ransoms. The penalties for   
   non-compliance with the tax laws were severe: imprisonment, property   
   confiscation, seizing of women and children, gouging out eyes, extracting   
   teeth and other cruelties. Indeed, Jews were    
   considered such a valuable economic resource that they were even forbidden   
   from emigrating for fear of undermining the tax base of the country.   
      
   France introduced an income tax in 1355 to finance the Hundred Years' War. The   
   rate was set at 4% on the rich, 5% on the middle class, and 10% on the poor.   
   By 1789, taxation was one of the leading causes of the French Revolution.   
      
   The British, equally creative and shortsighted in their colonies, imposed a   
   tax on salt [Salt Act] in India claiming a monopoly on all of its production   
   and distribution. Tax collection was subcontracted to oppressive salt agents.   
   On March 12, 1930,    
   Mahatma Gandhi began his now famous 241-mile march to Dandi [on the west coast   
   of India] to protest the tax on an essential ingredient of food. Thousands of   
   his followers on the march were beaten, arrested and thrown in jail.   
      
   A year later the tax was reduced, but the damage was done. The nonviolent   
   political struggle against the salt tax was a significant step on the road to   
   Indian independence, which became the first step in the eventual dismantling   
   of the British Empire.   
      
   Fast forward to Canada in 1984. To be sure, the techniques of the modern tax   
   collector are more dignified, but not necessarily more sensitive.   
      
   The Conservatives, in opposition at the time, created a task force to study   
   the behaviour of the Canada Revenue Agency.   
      
   The task force documented its conclusions of the tax collectors' proclivity   
   toward oppressive and insensitive conduct. "What we heard disturbed us deeply.   
   We were distressed by the fear with which ordinary Canadians greet a call from   
   the tax department,    
   a fear that is sometimes cultivated by [the CRA]."   
      
   The report didn't stop there. "Another impression that was deeply instilled in   
   us during our tour was that the tax burden is falling disproportionately on   
   Canadians of modest means.... The complexity of the many provisions affecting   
   lower-income    
   Canadians often causes serious resentment.... These taxpayers can least afford   
   the costly professional assistance needed to defend their rights. Another   
   factor that undermines the rights of ordinary Canadians is the sweeping powers   
   given to the [revenue    
   agency]. In some cases, they are even greater than the powers of the police."   
      
   Upon attaining power, however, the Conservative government merely issued an   
   impressively titled "Declaration of Taxpayer Rights," but did not enact the   
   declaration as a taxpayer bill of rights.   
      
   Thus, unlike Americans -- who have their Taxpayer Bill of Rights codified in   
   their Internal Revenue Code -- Canadian taxpayers do not have equivalent legal   
   protection.   
      
   Canadians, with characteristic politeness, suffer from the costs of complying   
   with the ever-increasing complexity of a badly drafted tax statute, escalating   
   legal and accounting fees, long delays in the resolution of disputes,   
   oppressive procedural rules,   
    draconian interest charges, and heavy-handed collection procedures.   
      
   The Income Tax Act deems an assessment to be valid and binding on the taxpayer   
   even if it contains an error or defect or has been incorrectly calculated or   
   improperly issued. The burden is on the taxpayer to show that the assessment   
   is wrong.   
      
   Unlike the two-year limitation rule in civil litigation, the taxpayer has only   
   90 days from the mailing of the notice of assessment, regardless whether he   
   receives the mail, to file his objection or lose his rights of appeal.   
      
   The rule places an intolerable burden on taxpayers who cannot afford high   
   professional fees in prolonged litigation.   
      
   The rule effectively denies middle-income taxpayers -- who pay the most in   
   taxes to support the government's treasury -- access to justice in tax law.   
      
   To be sure, tax collectors must perform their duties to ensure a fair system   
   of social policy and the smooth functioning of governments.   
      
   That does not mean, however, that the system should be heavy handed on   
   vulnerable individuals, who feed the public treasury the revenues that pay the   
   collectors.   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)