XPost: can.general, can.politics, ott.general   
   From: sharx35@hotmail.com   
      
   "Fred Williams"  wrote in message   
   news:bf2dnS4qHvLtMhLRnZ2dnUVZ_uadnZ2d@supernews.com...   
   > Alan Baggett wrote:   
   >> Canadian Taxpayers Require Bill of Rights :CRA SOTW   
   >>   
   >> Taxpayers require Bill of Rights   
   >>   
   >> Vern Krishna, Financial Post · Wednesday, Sept. 8, 2010   
   >>   
   >> A Bill of Rights typically entrenches rights into the law so that   
   >> individuals can enforce them through the legal process.   
   >>   
   >> Unlike Americans -- who have their Taxpayer Bill of Rights codified in   
   >> the Internal Revenue Code--Canadian taxpayers do not have equivalent   
   >> legal protection. Although the government has said that taxpayers have   
   >> rights and that "the CRA take these rights seriously," neither the   
   >> Conservatives nor the Liberals have enacted taxpayer rights into law.   
   >> Why?   
   >>   
   >> The history of tax law is laced with battles over taxpayer rights.   
   >> King John's penchant for increasing feudal taxation in England without   
   >> consulting his Lords precipitated the creation of the greatest   
   >> constitutional document -- Magna Carta -- in 1215. The grievances of a   
   >> poll tax on all males and females over the age of 15 caused the   
   >> Peasant's Revolt in 1381.   
   >>   
   >> Hume's 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."   
   >> To be sure, the techniques of the modern tax collector are more   
   >> dignified, but not necessarily more sensitive.   
   >>   
   >> Taxpayer rights are not a high priority with Canadians until they get   
   >> into a skirmish with the tax authorities. Then rights become a hot-   
   >> button topic. Pierre Trudeau sacrificed enshrining property rights in   
   >> the Charter of Rights and Freedoms because of Saskatchewan's   
   >> resistance to their inclusion. The provincial NDP government was   
   >> concerned that the inclusion of property rights in the Charter would   
   >> inhibit their power to tax and expand government intrusion into their   
   >> economy.   
   >>   
   >> The Conservatives, in opposition in 1984, created a Task Force to   
   >> study the behaviour of the tax authorities. The Task Force documented   
   >> its conclusions of the tax collectors' proclivity towards oppressive   
   >> and insensitive conduct in its report: "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 Revenue Canada...."   
   >> "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 Department. In some cases, they are   
   >> even greater than the powers of the police."   
   >>   
   >> Later that year, the Conservative government -- by then in power --   
   >> issued a statement, impressively titled the "Declaration of Taxpayer   
   >> Rights." However, it did not enact the declaration as law, leaving   
   >> taxpayers to hang on to a flimsy slogan.   
   >>   
   >> Apart from Charter restrictions on search and seizure, our courts   
   >> consider the Income Tax Act essentially as a regulatory statute.   
   >> Hence, for example, the courts support the reverse onus clause --   
   >> which deems the tax authority's assessment to be proper and correct   
   >> unless the taxpayer proves it is not -- as convenient for the   
   >> administration of the act.   
   >>   
   >> The latest version of the 15-point declaration is eloquent, but   
   >> impotent. It gives taxpayers the right to:   
   >>   
   >> - Pay no more in taxes than required by law.   
   >> - Service in English and French.   
   >   
   > Leave out the "service in French" for the rest of Canada -   
   > while Quebec remains unligually French.   
   >   
   >> - Privacy and confidentiality.   
   >> - A formal review and an administrative appeal by the CRA.   
   >> - Be treated professionally, courteously, and fairly.   
   >> - Complete, accurate, clear, and timely information.   
   >> - Not pay income tax amounts in dispute before an impartial review.   
   >> - Have the law applied consistently.   
   >> - Lodge a service complaint and be provided with an explanation of   
   >> findings.   
   >> - Have the costs of compliance taken into account when administering   
   >> tax legislation.   
   >> - Expect the CRA to be accountable.   
   >> - Provide relief from penalties and interest under tax legislation   
   >> because of extraordinary circumstances.   
   >> - Expect that the CRA will publish service standards and report   
   >> annually.   
   >> - Expect that the CRA will warn taxpayers about questionable tax   
   >> schemes in a timely manner.   
   >> - Be represented by a person of his or her choosing.   
   >>   
   >> However, the 15 rights collectively confer minimal protection. The   
   >> right to pay only what the law requires one to pay is a penetrating   
   >> bureaucratic observation into the obvious. Canadians have enjoyed the   
   >> right of constitutional taxation since 1917.   
   >>   
   >> The right to service in English and French and the right to privacy   
   >> reflect existing law. Others "rights" -- for example, the right to   
   >> professional, courteous and fair treatment -- restate duties that all   
   >> public "civil" servants who live off taxpayer dollars should adhere to   
   >> without a declaration.   
   >>   
   >> The relief from penalties and interest in extraordinary circumstances   
   >> -- the so-called "fairness provisions"--depend upon the CRA's   
   >> discretion. The right of taxpayers to choose counsel is an important   
   >> legal right -- if only they could afford one.   
   >>   
   >> In 1984, the government proclaimed that the Declaration of Taxpayer's   
   >> Rights strengthens Canada's democratic institutions and increases   
   >> transparency and accountability for all Canadians. It is a pity that   
   >> it did not entrench the rights in legislation. Is an unenforceable   
   >> right a legal right?   
   >   
   > Personally, I think there should be just a single tax at a fixed   
   > percentage,   
   > the same percentage for all Canadians, a tax on personal wealth i.e.   
   > the richer you are, the more you can afford to pay. This one tax revenue   
   > would be divided amongst the various levels of government.   
      
   To clarify, are you suggesting a tax relating to total net assets rather   
   than INCOME?  If so, I say, NO FUCKING WAY. All the idiots, living from   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)