adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

News

Why Attorney General should intervene in Meng Wanzhou extradition case – CBC.ca

Published

 on


This column is an opinion by Mo Vayeghan, a Vancouver-based criminal defence lawyer and a former Crown prosecutor in British Columbia. He holds a Master’s degree in law from Columbia Law School in New York City, and is the founder of Vayeghan Litigation, a criminal defence and immigration law firm in Vancouver. For more information about CBC’s Opinion section, please see the FAQ.

The extradition case of Meng Wanzhou has raised troubling questions about undue U.S. political influence on the hearings in Vancouver. Let’s be clear about one thing: Meng’s case is anything but normal, and its unusual nature risks compromising the integrity of Canada’s justice system.

To resolve this conundrum, intervention by Canada’s Attorney General is needed.

300x250x1

Meng, the chief financial officer and heiress to China’s telecom giant Huawei, is being sought by United States prosecutors for violating that country’s sanctions against Iran. They have asked Canada to extradite Meng to face trial in New York on fraud charges. The court battle in Vancouver will determine whether Meng should be legally handed over to the U.S. under the applicable laws governing U.S.-Canada extradition requests.

Canada’s extradition treaty with the United States serves important law enforcement interests in both countries. In an ideal scenario, extraditions are free from political influences. The charges facing an accused person are not motivated by foreign policy calculations or trade negotiations.

Unfortunately, and through no fault of Canadian prosecutors, Meng’s extradition hearing has been unquestionably consumed by politics. It is to bury one’s head in the sand to deny this, and Canada’s Attorney General must take note.

Huawei chief financial officer Meng Wanzhou arrives at B.C. Supreme Court Sept. 30. The U.S. wants her extradited to face charges of fraud and conspiracy. (Ben Nelms/CBC)

First, some important context.

How unusual is this case? Very – the move by the United States government to bring criminal charges against the top executive of a multinational corporation is rare.

Consider for a moment the 2015 probe of Deutsche Bank by U.S. financial regulatory agencies. In that case, similar to the current accusations facing Huawei, Deutsche Bank was accused of violating U.S. sanctions against Iran. But instead of indicting top executives and seeking their extradition, the U.S. government fined the German banking giant $258 million and merely required it to fire six of its employees.

Why the different treatment? Look no further than President Trump’s own words.

During an interview with Reuters on Dec. 11, 2018, just days after Meng’s arrest at Vancouver International Airport on an extradition warrant, President Trump expressed openness to using Huawei’s top executive as a bargaining chip in trade negotiations with China. When asked if he would intervene in her case, Trump said: “Whatever’s good for this country, I would do.” He then went on to state: “If I think it’s good for what will be certainly the largest trade deal ever made – which is a very important thing – what’s good for national security, I would certainly intervene if I thought it was necessary.”

Some may say that this is the usual bluster of a president who has a tendency to speak off the cuff. But those who closely monitor the conduct of the United States Department of Justice under Trump’s administration know that there is real meaning behind the president’s remarks. A number of legal analysts have persuasively argued that the U.S. Justice Department does not operate as a truly apolitical body under Trump.

As demonstrated through the unprecedented and lopsided treatment of Trump’s close confidants, Michael Flynn and Roger Stone, it is hard to convincingly argue that U.S. prosecutors enjoy unfettered independence in criminal cases that have attracted Trump’s personal attention.

U.S. President Donald Trump, left, expressed openness to using Huawei’s top executive Meng Wanzhou, right, as a bargaining chip in trade negotiations with China. (Leah Mills/Jennifer Gauthier/Reuters)

Canada’s extradition treaty with the United States is based on the implicit understanding that extradition requests by the U.S. government will not be politically motivated. In situations where the U.S. fails to meet this threshold, Canada should not oblige such requests.

Meng’s extradition has the appearance of being a politically charged move by the Trump administration to gain leverage in the midst of a contentious U.S. trade dispute with China.

The Canadian prosecutors litigating the Meng extradition case in Vancouver at the request of U.S. authorities have attempted to maintain the integrity of Canada’s judicial system by shunning politics. However, Trump’s explosive comments have cast a dark shadow over these proceedings that is hard to remove, and this may have done irreparable harm to the legitimacy of these hearings.

It is within this environment that, since December 2018, Canadians Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor have been arbitrarily detained in China in what Human Rights Watch has referred to as an “act of retaliation” by the Chinese government against Canada for the arrest of Meng.

This is the human tragedy of a U.S. extradition request that lacks the perception of legitimacy. Not only does fulfilling this request risk harming the integrity of Canada’s justice system, but it also comes at the cost of two innocent Canadians who have been held in conditions that are reportedly “tantamount to torture.”

At this juncture, the judge presiding over the Meng case in Canada is considering whether to accept an argument by her lawyers that the United States misled Canadian officials about the details of the fraud allegations facing her. However, irrespective of this specific ruling, it has been nearly two years since Meng’s arrest and this case is bound for a protracted court battle that could take years more before it reaches a conclusion.

This means Canada could be caught in the middle of the U.S.-China trade dispute – and an extradition case that throws the impartiality of Canada’s justice system into question – for a very long time.

Pursuant to the Extradition Act, Canada’s Attorney General David Lametti has the power to pull the plug on Meng’s extradition case at any point during the court process. Lametti has so far refused to intervene, arguing that the judicial phase must play its course.

David Lametti, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, has stated that he would not intervene in extradition proceedings for Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou during the court process. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press)

However, the circumstances surrounding the case are now such that no matter what its outcome, it will be difficult to say that the proceedings are free from outside political influence.

In these circumstances, the Attorney General should take the bold step of exercising his lawful power to end Meng’s extradition proceedings in Canada.

This would allow Meng to go free and return to China. This is the right thing to do in order to clear Canada’s justice system from the political stain of the United States’ extradition request for Meng. Such a move could also help secure the release of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor.

As has been noted in our case law, the integrity of our system of prosecution is eroded when the public has the perception that criminal charges are politically influenced. Let us not forget the wise words that Canadian courts frequently quote: “Justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done.”


Let’s block ads! (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

News

Canada Child Benefit payment on Friday | CTV News – CTV News Toronto

Published

 on


More money will land in the pockets of Canadian families on Friday for the latest Canada Child Benefit (CCB) installment.

The federal government program helps low and middle-income families struggling with the soaring cost of raising a child.

Canadian citizens, permanent residents, or refugees who are the primary caregivers for children under 18 years old are eligible for the program, introduced in 2016.

300x250x1

The non-taxable monthly payments are based on a family’s net income and how many children they have. Families that have an adjusted net income under $34,863 will receive the maximum amount per child.

For a child under six years old, an applicant can annually receive up to $7,437 per child, and up to $6,275 per child for kids between the ages of six through 17.

That translates to up to $619.75 per month for the younger cohort and $522.91 per month for the older group.

The benefit is recalculated every July and most recently increased 6.3 per cent in order to adjust to the rate of inflation, and cost of living.

To apply, an applicant can submit through a child’s birth registration, complete an online form or mail in an application to a tax centre.

The next payment date will take place on May 17. 

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

News

Capital gains tax change draws ire from some Canadian entrepreneurs worried it will worsen brain drain – CBC.ca

Published

 on


A chorus of Canadian entrepreneurs and investors is blasting the federal government’s budget for expanding a tax on the rich. They say it will lead to brain drain and further degrade Canada’s already poor productivity.

In the 2024 budget unveiled Tuesday, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said the government would increase the inclusion rate of the capital gains tax from 50 per cent to 67 per cent for businesses and trusts, generating an estimated $19 billion in new revenue.

Capital gains are the profits that individuals or businesses make from selling an asset — like a stock or a second home. Individuals are subject to the new changes on any profits over $250,000.

300x250x1

The government estimates that the changes would impact 40,000 individuals (or 0.13 per cent of Canadians in any given year) and 307,000 companies in Canada.

However, some members of the business community say that expanding the taxable amount will devastate productivity, investment and entrepreneurship in Canada, and might even compel some of the country’s talent and startups to take their business elsewhere.

WATCH | The federal budget hikes capital gains inclusion rate: 

Federal budget adds billions in spending, hikes capital gains tax

3 days ago

Duration 6:14

Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland unveiled the government’s 2024 federal budget, with spending targeted at young voters and a plan to raise capital gains taxes for some of the wealthiest Canadians.

Benjamin Bergen, president of the Council of Canadian Innovators (CCI), said the capital gains tax has overshadowed parts of the federal budget that the business community would otherwise be excited about.

“There were definitely some other stars in the budget that were interesting,” he said. “However, the … capital gains piece really is the sun, and it’s daylight. So this is really the only thing that innovators can see.”

The CCI has written and is circulating an open letter signed by more than 1,000 people in the Canadian business community to Trudeau’s government asking it to scrap the tax change.

Shopify CEO Tobi Lütke and president Harley Finkelstein also weighed in on the proposed hike on X, formerly known as Twitter.

Former finance minister Bill Morneau said his successor’s budget disincentivizes businesses from investing in the country’s innovation sector: “It’s probably very troubling for many investors.”

Canada’s productivity — a measure that compares economic output to hours worked — has been relatively poor for decades. It underperforms against the OECD average and against several other G7 countries, including the U.S., Germany, U.K. and Japan, on the measure. 

Bank of Canada senior deputy governor Carolyn Rogers sounded the alarm on Canada’s lagging productivity in a speech last month, saying the country’s need to increase the rate had reached emergency levels, following one of the weakest years for the economy in recent memory.

The government said it was proposing the tax change to make life more affordable for younger generations and fund efforts to boost housing supply — and that it would support productivity growth.

A challenge for investors, founders and workers

The change could have a chilling effect for several reasons, with companies already struggling to access funding in a high interest rate environment, said Bergen.

He questioned whether investors will want to fund Canadian companies if the government’s taxation policies make it difficult for those firms to grow — and whether founders might just pack up.

The expanded inclusion rate “is just one of the other potential concerns that firms are going to have as they’re looking to grow their companies.”

A man with short brown hair wearing a light blue suit jacket looks directly at the camera, with a white background behind him.
Benjamin Bergen, president of the Council of Canadian Innovators, said the proposed change could have a chilling effect for several reasons, with companies already struggling to access and raise financing in a high interest rate environment. (Submitted by Benjamin Bergen)

He said the rejigged tax is also an affront to high-skilled workers from low-innovation sectors who might have taken the risk of joining a startup for the opportunity, even taking a lower wage on the chance that a firm’s stock options grow in value.

But Lindsay Tedds, an associate economics professor at the University of Calgary, said the tax change is one of the most misunderstood parts of the federal budget — and that its impact on the country’s talent has been overstated.

“This is not a major innovation-biting tax change treatment,” Tedds said. “In fact, when you talk to real grassroots entrepreneurs that are setting up businesses, tax rates do not come into their decision.”

As for productivity, Tedds said Canadians might see improvements in the long run “to the degree that some of our productivity problems are driven by stresses like housing affordability, access to child care, things like that.”

‘One foot on the gas, one foot on the brake’

Some say the government is sending mixed messages to entrepreneurs by touting tailored tax breaks — like the Canada Entrepreneurs’ Incentive, which reduces the capital gains inclusion rate to 33 per cent on a lifetime maximum of $2 million — while introducing measures they say would dampen investment and innovation.

“They seem to have one foot on the gas, one foot on the brake on the very same file,” said Dan Kelly, president of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business.

WATCH | Could the capital gains tax changes impact small businesses?: 

How could capital gains tax increases impact Canadian small businesses? | Power & Politics

2 days ago

Duration 12:18

Some business groups are worried that new capital gains tax changes could hurt economic growth. But according to Small Business Minister Rechie Valdez, most Canadians won’t be impacted by that change — and it’s a move to create fairness.

A founder may be able to sell their successful company with a lower capital gains treatment than otherwise possible, he said.

“At the same time, though, big chunks of it may be subject to a higher rate of capital gains inclusion.”

Selling a company can fund an individual’s retirement, he said, which is why it’s one of the first things founders consider when they think about capital gains.

LISTEN | What does a hike on the capital gains tax mean?: 

Mainstreet NS7:03Ottawa is proposing a hike to capital gains tax. What does that mean?

Tuesday’s federal budget includes nearly $53 billion in new spending over the next five years with a clear focus on affordability and housing. To help pay for some of that new spending, Ottawa is proposing a hike to the capital gains tax. Moshe Lander, an economics lecturer at Concordia University, joins host Jeff Douglas to explain.

Dennis Darby, president and CEO of Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters, says he was disappointed by the change — and that it sends the wrong message to Canadian industries like his own.

He wants to see the government commit to more tax credit proposals like the Canada Carbon Rebate for Small Businesses, which he said would incentivize business owners to stay and help make Canada competitive with the U.S.

“We’ve had a lot of difficulties attracting investment over the years. I don’t think this will make it any better.”

Tech titan says change will only impact richest of the rich

A man sits on an orange couch in an office.
Ali Asaria, the CEO of Transformation Lab and former CEO of Tulip Retail, told CBC News that the proposed change to the capital gains tax is ‘going to really affect the richest of the rich people.’ (Tulip Retail)

Toronto tech entrepreneur Ali Asaria will be one of those subject to the expanded capital gains inclusion rate — but he says it’s only fair.

“It’s going to really affect the richest of the rich people,” Asaria, CEO of open source platform Transformer Lab and founder of well.ca, told CBC News.

“The capital gains exemption is probably the largest tax break that I’ve ever received in my life,” he said. “So I know a lot about what that benefit can look like, but I’ve also always felt like it was probably one of the most unfair parts of the tax code today.”

While Asaria said Canada needs to continue encouraging talent to take risks and build companies in the country, taxation policies aren’t the most major problem.

“I think that the biggest central issue to the reason why people will leave Canada is bigger issues, like housing,” he said.

“How do we make it easier to live in Canada so that we can all invest in ourselves and invest in our companies? That’s a more important question than, ‘How do we help the top 0.13 per cent of Canadians make more money?'”

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

News

Canada Child Benefit payment on Friday | CTV News – CTV News Toronto

Published

 on


More money will land in the pockets of Canadian families on Friday for the latest Canada Child Benefit (CCB) installment.

The federal government program helps low and middle-income families struggling with the soaring cost of raising a child.

Canadian citizens, permanent residents, or refugees who are the primary caregivers for children under 18 years old are eligible for the program, introduced in 2016.

300x250x1

The non-taxable monthly payments are based on a family’s net income and how many children they have. Families that have an adjusted net income under $34,863 will receive the maximum amount per child.

For a child under six years old, an applicant can annually receive up to $7,437 per child, and up to $6,275 per child for kids between the ages of six through 17.

That translates to up to $619.75 per month for the younger cohort and $522.91 per month for the older group.

The benefit is recalculated every July and most recently increased 6.3 per cent in order to adjust to the rate of inflation, and cost of living.

To apply, an applicant can submit through a child’s birth registration, complete an online form or mail in an application to a tax centre.

The next payment date will take place on May 17. 

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending