7 environmental charities face Canada Revenue Agency audits
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
Sorry, this Canuck is unfamiliar with the IRS scandal; obviously Snowdon is not doing his job, otherwise we'd've been there to help. Look for a white horse, a white hat, and a heart three sizes too large!
How is the government attacking any groups? I have had both business and personal tax audits, is this not the same thing? Or was I being attackd by a left leaning government?
Oh, I don't know if I'd take the general opinion of this board as representative of Canada. These political chat sites are more like talk radio.
You can't use the machinery of government to prosecute political ends. I suspect that the Conservatives willl rediscover this, as they have a horrible record when taken to task in the courts.
Actually you can and it happens quite often. It was really bad under the NDP in BC back in the 90s.
As you must know, there is considerable time and expense involved in an audit.
Singling out specific groups for extra attention for political reasons is illegal. They can't use taxpayer paid employees to exact political revenge.
Is it Suzuki as a private citizen, or the activities of his charity? The lines are a bit blurred when your charity is also your namesake. It's quite a different thing to oppose a government's policies than it is to oppose a political party. To go back to the Frasier Institute, they made specific criticisms of the Liberal BC government's decision to return to PST from HST, as well as comments on the statutory Family Day holiday, and on the government's activities with regards to pipelines. Is it criticism of policies, which is allowed? I think so.
I think this system we have is convoluted, and rife with opportunities for ugly politics . More to the point, I think it's wrong to specifically target charities that focus on a specific policy area. The IRS scandal was a non-scandal, after it was revealed that liberal and progressive charities were targeted as well, and the only charity to have it's tax exempt status revoked was a Democratic branded charity. But, if it was in fact Obama's IRS targeting only his policy adversaries, that would have been an abuse of power, and most clearly wrong.
SO how do you prove this is what they are doing? They can just say they are investigating a sector.
It is obviously tough to prove. In the US example they had a smoking gun, but it would be surprising to find something like that here.
Given the track record of this government though, it is not hard to see why people are skeptical of their motives here.
Can you provide any specific examples?
Or any proof apparently
The rules are very clear. This is not an attack, it is enforcing the same rules that apply to everyone
C'mon ES; after all, they were fighting the good-fight... Just ask 'em
Suzuki was the one that took that chance in blurring the lines. In the radio spots that I heard, he spoke both his opinion as well as strong references to his charity.
The acid test on this will be if he used funds from the foundation to engage his cross-country agenda and/or wrote-off those expenses through the charity.
Suzuki withdrew from the foundation as a result of this circumstance. My belief is that he probably broke the rules and resigned as part of a damage-control strategy
There is a big difference between speaking out on public policy and telling the public who they should or shouldn't vote for
You're dead right, but the rules are clear and the majority of eco-charities play by those rules, as such they are not being audited.... The ones that like to play fast and loose are now being held to account
The entire planet so western capitalist societies can live off the plunder of the Earth while the vast majority of humanity chokes in our waste and receives almost none of the booty. But carry on.
I know trees have crotches and tree huggers can get a little freaky but pillage doesn't fit your theme.