Tag Archive: demand

Guarantor Waivers of PPSA Rights in British Columbia

By Mike Todd of Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP

Lenders should be aware that one of the waivers found in most standard form guarantees of certain statutory rights is not effective under the British Columbia Personal Property Security Act (“BCPPSA”).

This was the result in the recent BC Supreme Court decision HSBC Bank Canada v. Kupritz. The facts of that case are unremarkable. A trucking company went out of business leaving an unpaid debt to the bank of approximately $1 million. The bank was unable to recover that amount from the company’s assets and therefore sued the two principals of the company on their unlimited guarantees. One of the principals defended the claim on the basis that the bank had breached its obligations to him under the BCPPSA by failing to secure the company’s assets, improvidently realizing on the collateral seized, failing to provide notice of the impending sale of the collateral and failing to provide an accounting.

Banks are Prohibited by PIPEDA from Disclosing Mortgage Balance to Judgement Creditor of Mortgagor

by Barbara McIsaac, Q.C., and Nadia Effendi of Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

Introduction

On January 6, 2011, the Ontario Court of Appeal released a decision affirming the decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice concluding that the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, S.C. 2000, c. 5 (PIPEDA) prohibited a financial institution from disclosing the mortgage discharge statement of a mortgagor to a third party creditor.1

This decision is important, as it confirms that financial institutions cannot disclose financial information about one of their customers without the consent of that customer, unless one of the exceptions in PIPEDA allowing disclosure without consent applies.

New CRA Policy on Accessing Taxpayer Documents – Taxpayers and Accountants Beware

By: Stevan Novoselac and John Sorensen of Gowlings

Introduction

In early June, 2010, the Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”) released its long awaited administrative policy on gaining access to taxpayer information and documents.  The policy reaffirms the CRA’s position that is entitled to virtually unrestricted access to taxpayer’s information and documents, subject only to solicitor-client and litigation privilege.  As a result, obtaining tax advice from accountants, without involving tax lawyers, puts the confidentiality of the advice, and all of the related information and documents, in jeopardy.

Background

The Income Tax Act (Canada) (“Act”) requires taxpayers to maintain “books and records” to enable taxes payable to be ascertained and to determine other amounts that should have been deducted, withheld or collected.  The Act also confers extremely broad powers on the CRA to access taxpayer information and documents, subject only to the protection of solicitor-client or litigation privilege. 

The CRA first discussed its intention to draft an administrative policy on access to taxpayer information and documents at the Canadian Tax Foundation national conference in 2004 and periodically updated the tax community on the progress of the policy.  As early as 2004, the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (“CICA“) wrote to the Minister of National Revenue (“Minister”) urging that CRA access to accountant’s and auditor’s working papers be restricted to “exceptional and well-defined circumstances”, because untrammeled access would have a chilling effect on communications between taxpayers and their advisors.  The CICA’s position was that if the CRA can pry into taxpayers’ private communications with their advisors, taxpayers will be reluctant to seek advice.  This may deprive corporations and ultimately their shareholders of valuable advice, which jeopardizes the integrity of financial reporting, the audit function and corporate governance.

The New Policy

A pre-publication draft of the new CRA policy was released for comments in late 2008.  Unfortunately, the most troubling proposals in the draft remain in the final policy.  For example, both the draft and final policies state that CRA personnel are authorized to request relevant documents during an inspection, audit or examination for any purpose related to administering or enforcing fiscal statutes, where “any purpose” includes “acquiring information for the purpose of substantiating the taxpayer’s position on a specific issue, and identifying audit issues and concerns with regards to tax at risk.” 

Further, both versions of the policy state that CRA officials are authorized to inspect, audit, review or examine both “the books and records of a taxpayer” and any document of the taxpayer or any other person that relates or may relate to the information in a taxpayer’s books and records.  The phrase “any document” includes accountants’ and auditors’ working papers, including “working papers created by or for an independent auditor or accountant in connection with an audit or review engagement, advice papers, and tax accrual working papers (including those that relate to reserves for current, future, potential or contingent tax liabilities).”  Tax accrual workpapers are essentially a roadmap through all of the “soft spots” in a taxpayer’s tax return, prepared for the purpose of calculating reserves for uncertain tax filing positions.  In the draft version of the policy, the CRA acknowledged that tax accrual workpapers may be requested by auditors to expedite the audit and focus the examination on the most significant issues.  Although this language does not appear in the final version, it is obvious that the reason any tax authority seeks to obtain tax accrual workpapers is to have a guided tour of the taxpayer’s tax planning.

Canadian Housing Starts – Stop, by Stewart Hall, HSBC

[Eric's note: Although this note, like all of Stewart's, are archived elsewhere on this site, I had to give this one it's own post after reading the last sentence.] 

May housing starts decline by -6.3% month-over-month.

Canadian housing starts come to a stop in May, with the rate of construction slowing to 189.1K units on an annualized basis. This is well back of April’s rate of construction at 201.7K. Market expectations had been looking for 202.0K, while our own pessimistic forecast was looking for 192K.

In producing the forecast we had leaned heavily upon the April building permits data from last week. Numbers that reflected some significant softening up in builder intentions with approved units for construction down -8.2%m/m in the multi family dwelling category. Equally soft was the -6.4%m/m decline in the number of approved units in the single family dwelling category. Overall, housing starts are down -6.3% from the previous month.

Underneath the headline softness, despite a decline of nearly 6K in the mutli family unit category, starts at 92.8K is still reflective of heightened levels of activity. By contrast, the bulk of the headline softness was borne by the single family category which fell by 12K to a rather depressed pace of activity of 72.4K units. On the upside, rural starts bounded back, rising from a depressed 19.2K to 23.9K units.

Overall, the picture on the housing market, whether we are talking about the new build or the existing home category, the expectations going forward into the second half of 2010 and 2011 are for reduced levels of activity coming down from the historical highs that have been reached. A moderation/slowing in the pace of activity that will be led by higher financing costs, changes to the funding and financing formulas for mortgages and changes in the tax structure in Ontario and BC which host two of Canada’s most active housing markets.

In keeping with this theme of slowing activity for the housing market, the Canada Housing Trust (CHT) indicated that they may sell 15% less debt this year as fewer mortgages are expected to be raised and funded.

One way of thinking about the less pronounced decline in the mutli family category is from a cyclical standpoint. Although early on into the business cycle, Canada has a housing market that is already deep into its cycle. Given that home prices are at historically high levels, along with changes in the funding models that will raise the barrier to entry into home ownership, builder interest may very well be favoring multi family unit construction as higher overall costs force consumer demand into the multi family category that tends to come in at lower pricing points than is the case for single family residences.

None the less, the Bank of Canada and fiscal agents together have drawn a deep breath which, when exhaled, will invariably blow some of that froth off the housing market mug.

Set Offs Endangered – Security Deposits May Be Unsecured

Caisse Drummond Supreme Court of Canada Decision

by James H. Archer and Candace Pallone of McCarthy Tétrault LLP

In June of 2009, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed an appeal from the Federal Court of Appeal in the Caisse populaire Desjardins de l’Est de Drummond v. Canada case.

The facts of this case are as follows: On September 18, 2000, Caisse populaire Desjardins de l’Est de Drummond (Caisse Drummond)

Case Comment: Grant Estate et al. v. MICC [On making demand and collateral mortgages]

By Sam Billard of Aird & Berlis LLP

The Grant Estate case [312 D.L.R. (4th) 366 (R.S.O. 1990 C.L.15)] is, on its face, a decision relating to the Limitations Act (R.S.O. 1990 C.L.15) of Ontario which has since been replaced and so is of little interest. However, it is a sensible commercial judgment by the Ontario Court of Appeal of the sort we like to see. It makes a couple of points that affirm assumptions many have made about how the law works or should work, and is of some interest for that reason.