When handed a lemon..

WHAT DO YOU DO WITH A LEMON?
A commentary on the defective taxable benefit legislation
Inherited by the Conservative Government
Elected in February 2006
By Victor Drummond ©
March 2008


To say that the Conservative minority government inherited a lemon -- when they took office in February 2006 – is a masterpiece of understatement.

It seems a hidden defect in the Income Tax Act; taxable benefit legislation did not become apparent during the Hi-tech stock market boom years 1985 through 2000.

There was fierce competition in the communications industry for key personnel in the fiber-optics field where anyone who could pack more communications channels and/or achieve higher transmission speed could capture a major chunk of the lucrative telecommunications market.

Corporations in the fiber-optics field, such as JDS Fitel – later JDS Uniphase, (JDSU), grew from an ordinary home garage operation to become a multi-billion dollar corporation in about 15 years.

The phenomenal number of new corporations that sprang up – and began to compete for the scarce top rated personnel – created a serious tug-of-war for these people. American corporations competed with Canadian corporations and -- on both sides of the USA Canadian border -- corporations were raiding each others talent pool.

One strategy – corporations in Canada and the USA -- then adopted was to encourage key personnel to own shares in their own company. The thinking being that if an employee is also a shareholder then they have an incentive to work harder to make the company a success – and thereby share in the company’s profits -- and in addition they would not be so easily enticed away by competitors in the field.

To entice key employee’s to purchase their shares corporations adopted – one or both – of the following contract plans. One plan known as:- The Employee Share Purchase Plan, (ESPP) offered key employees the privilege of contracting to buy company shares – at a small premium nominally 15% below the average closing price of the shares over the previous few days. This average closing price was known as the Fair Market Value, (FMV).

An alternative scheme offered employees to purchase “Call Options” at a small premium below the FMV. The problem with Call options being that they expire on – or about – the third Friday of their Option Month. An option that has an expiry month over a year in the future is known as a “leap”. The scheme of selling employees shares options became known as ESO plans.

Several methods of payment were often allowed – from payroll deduction – to cash or check.
The plans placed a limit on the number of shares an employee might purchase at any given offer time and the offer was frequently repeated such that employees could purchase, second and even a third or more times. Over a period of years even a low paid employee might acquire tens of thousands of shares.

Shares purchased on an ESPP plan were not issued or delivered at the time of purchase. Delivery was scheduled for up to a year after the purchase date and because of this delay purchases and deliveries frequently overlapped.

The employee had no control over the shares purchased until they were actually delivered.
There was little, or no, information given the employee as to whether or not they should, or must, sell their shares at the time they received them. A serious oversight that later became a major factor in the problem that developed.

For reasons not apparent to the layman the legislation applicable to shares acquired via an ESPP or an ESO plan were not classed as an investment in the traditional sense of the word.

These shares are classed as a “Taxable Gift” from the employer to the employee – and as such the premium discount at the time the shares are purchased – and any positive difference between the
Shares adjusted cost base and the FMV calculated on the shares -- at time of delivery to the employee -- are reported – at the year’s inclusion rate -- by the employer to Revenue Canada as the employees:- “Earned Income”.

Although this tax scheme resulted in the participating employee’s being taxed -- at an inflated rate of income – if they could sell their shares for anything close to the calculated FMV – there was no serious hardship imposed on the taxpayer.

After all -- a taxpayer who can sell their shares -- at a handsome profit – can absorb the few extra dollars tax produced by being taxed on an artificially inflated income. If the taxpayer liquidated a large number of shares at a significant gain then they paid both a Capital Gains Tax and a taxable benefit tax on the same shares.

The tech-market crash of July 2000 revealed the trap hidden in the defective taxable benefit legislation. We now had thousands of Canadian taxpayers levied horrendous taxes on shares that were delivered – and the taxable FMV calculated – at the peak of the tech-market boom.

Ordinary employees, with real incomes below $ 60,000 per year -- were being levied taxes on theoretical “Earned Incomes” running into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. In many cases the tax alone exceeded the person’s income by 500% or more.

Instead of applying plain ordinary common sense – and correcting the defective legislation -- the government of the day compounded the felony by merely offering the victimized taxpayers up to a $100,000 per year share purchase tax deferment. Even this token relief had some flaws in it.

For example the taxpayer had to apply for the deferment every year from then on.
Secondly the deferment would expire promptly if:-

(1) The taxed shares were sold, traded or exchanged.
(2) The corporation went out of business or was taken over, sold etc.
(3) The taxpayer moved out of Canada.
(4) The taxpayer died.

Finding the authorities were immune to appeals for fair treatment the victims did everything in their power to pay the devil his due.

They mortgaged their homes. They cashed in their RRSP’s. They borrowed money from the bank if they could. Many couldn’t borrow any money because there employment was terminated during the corporate downsizing that took place following the market crash.

Well how about that for something to give you a stress heart attack, and/or keep you awake nights, and/or give you a mental breakdown.

The victims gave up their futile appeals and made whatever changes in their life plan that was necessary to carry on.

When the federal election of 2006 arrived the Conservative Party campaigned on the promise of fair taxation. They must have known about this taxable benefit fiasco but perhaps did not know the full extent of the problem.

After pushing through a Tax Remission Order for a few SDL Optics/JDSU victims in the British Columbia -- Saanich-Gulf Islands riding of Conservative Member of Parliament Gary Lunn -- and making a few speeches about providing Fair and Equal Taxation for All Canadians – the Conservatives fell silent on the issue.

True there was the implementation of a Taxpayers Bill of Rights – but no one with a mandate to enforce it.

True there was the appointment of a Taxpayers Ombudsman – limited to recommending the Tax Collectors treat all taxpayers civilly.

These were mere token moves that did absolutely nothing to relieve those victimized by those outrageous taxes – and deferred taxes that they can’t possibly pay.

After all the fanfare about fair taxation for all Canadians – why has no one taken up the issue in government. They all know it is an unreasonable situation and demands correction.

It seems no one knows just how many victims there are.
If they do know they are not telling anyone.

It seems no one knows how much money is involved.
If they do know they are not telling anyone.

It seems our opposition party’s are equally ignorant of the facts or at least too timid to criticize the government for inaction on this issue. Surprising silence from those that were ready to face the Taliban not so long ago.

This issue is not now – or ever -- going to go away.

Those victimized are not all top level corporate executives – with millions of dollars stashed away.
The far greater majority are ordinary people financially ruined by this insidious tax.

If the Conservative government was blind-sided by the financial magnitude of this fiasco – then like the victims themselves – they have a real lemon of a situation to deal with.

Victims had only two options – if they could beg, borrow and/or sell their assets -- for enough money to pay the unjustified tax – that was their lemonade.

If they fell short of being able to pay all the tax – perhaps they could apply the T1212 option and live the rest of their lives under a hanging threat of pre-mature expiry of their deferment – and that was their lemonade.

The government also has two choices. They can keep silent and lose what credibility they had while they renege on all the fine promises they made, i.e. to provide all Canadians with Fair and Equal treatment under the law.

And hope to be re-elected to power.

Or they can put some substance to the promises they made – change the taxable benefit legislation – compensate those previously and presently victimized – and have a real platform of performance upon which to campaign for re-election with a majority government.

Then all Canadians will share in the governments:- REAL LEMONADE.

See you at the next federal election voting polls O’Grady. (Ref. prior posting:- O’Grady sez.)

Victor Drummond ©

A Political ..

A LITMUS TEST FOR POLITICIANS
A commentary on the election of your representative
at all levels of government.
By Victor Drummond ©
March 2008


Every student of chemistry knows the ways and means of a “Litmus Test”.

This test is used to determine which of the three possible characteristics -- i.e. acidic, base, or neutral -- that any item of interest possesses.

While the rest of the worlds citizens go blithely on their way unknowing -- and for the most part uncaring – those that on are guard against possible detrimental effects of everyday items -- from face creams to foods – are applying litmus tests of one kind or another.

For example what is the risk of using road salt on a concrete highway?
How about using glycerin in a skin cream?
What about using sea-water to top up your car battery?

Anyone in Canada – who has a concrete driveway – knows road-salt rapidly erodes the concrete – in addition to accelerating the rust of their automobile.

In spite of this knowledge, however, road-salt appears to be the lesser of the evils when roads are ice covered.

Glycerin is widely used -- in one form or another – as an additive to skin creams and food products. It seldom -- if ever – produces an allergic reaction in humans.

Sea-water contains salt – in addition to a multitude of other chemicals – none of which would do a car battery any good. Sea-water is definitely not recommended for that purpose.

A litmus test of distilled water will indicate it is neutral – neither acidic nor alkaline, (base).

If you wish to obtain maximum service from your car battery then only use distilled water to top it up.

Materials – if they are to be of any use for a specific purpose – require either a neutral, alkaline, or acidic quality. Using a car (lead-acid) battery for an example – the three main ingredients:- lead, water and acid – must all be present and work in harmony before the device can be charged with electricity – and become a useful, essential automobile component.

The same thing is true of life situations.

People we come in contact with fall into -- one of three -- categories. They may be neutral, (benign strangers), or friends, (base), or dangerous, (acidic).

The acidic people only stand out visually when they happen to be wearing a balaclava over their heads and/or brandishing a weapon and/or acting aggressively.

Acidic people – with a well developed character – honest, fair, and highly intelligent, -- are by far the most valuable asset a society can have.

They get things done. And they have a low tolerance for people who contribute nothing to their social environment.

They have an even lower tolerance for those useless individuals will standby and twiddle their thumbs while innocent, hard working, fellow citizens are abused and victimized.

These are the kind of people Canadians must search out – and support as their elected representatives in government. For far too long now Canadians have blithely voted for the biggest loudmouth, the prettiest candidate, or the party making the most outlandish promises – without putting their candidate to the litmus test.

Consequently our past and present Members of Parliament fail to effectively represent their supporters and standby uselessly while thousands of Canadian taxpayers are legally robbed and terrorized.

If you feel your elected representative to government should protect you – and your fellow Canadians – from unjustified, unfair, taxation which has recently also been applied unequally – then put them to the political litmus test.

Tell them straight out:- You personally support a strict policy of Justified Taxation on real Income and as such you support the group called:- “Canadians for Fair and Equitable Taxation” (CFET).

Tell them you require a commitment from your candidate -- for election in the coming federal election – to fully support CFET objectives.

If you fail to receive such a commitment -- from the person you would normally vote for – then they have failed the political litmus test and you should definitely not vote for them.

It is never too soon to apply the political litmus test. So begin today. Send E-mails to every political party candidate -- in your riding and put them to the political litmus test.


Victor Drummond ©

A TIME FOR...

A TIME FOR RENEWED HOPE
A commentary on the significance of Easter 2008
To victims of the Canadian taxable benefit legislation.
By Victor Drummond ©
March 2008


Christians the world over celebrate Easter week-end as an annual reminder of a better life to come.

They look forward to the day when anxiety, oppression, abuse and distress -- of all kinds -- will be removed from their daily lives – and true equality, fairness and justice will be the norm.

People of every race creed and culture have hopes of achieving a better living environment.
A time -- and place -- free of all forms of evil, illness and death.

For Christians that place is named Heaven. For the ancient Vikings it is named Valhalla.
For many North American First Nations people is called a Happy Hunting Ground.
For many others it is named Paradise. They all have one thing in common.

All of these idyllic places are beyond the reach of living breathing humans.
So in this life everyone strives to create – or find -- their own best place to live.

For many people -- today -- the closest thing on earth -- to Paradise/Heaven/Valhalla/Happy Hunting Ground -- is the United States of America, (USA) or Canada, (Ca).

To be sure the history of both these country’s include events of violence, atrocities, oppression, and depression. But they both strive to achieve the closest to an ideal living conditions as it possible to realize.

Under influence of the newcomers – originally mainly from Europe and the Orient -- both Canada and the USA have surpassed most other – longer established -- societies both in power -- and standard of living. And this supremacy was achieved in less than 300 years.

In all fairness much of this rapid financial growth -- and social evolution -- in North America is due to the tremendous amount and variety of the continent’s natural resources.

Immigrants to Canada and the USA left their original homeland for various reasons.
Many – like the Pilgrims – left for reasons of religious oppression. Others came here because they were looking for greater opportunities to become successful entrepreneurs.

By far the greater majority of the original new comers -- to North America -- arrived with a determined mind-set to establish a better social structure with a democratic form of government.

Undoubtedly Canada’s founding politicians intended this country’s citizens to have the best possible standard of living. A land of freedom. A land of equal opportunity. A land where ordinary people are entitled to the protection and support of their elected representatives.

And for the most part they succeeded in building a Nation with one of the best living standards in the world.

But unfortunately humans are not perfect and neither are some items of legislation our lawmakers implement.

A perfect example of an insidious, abusive and unjust law -- presently operating in Canada -- is legislation that authorizes huge fines – under the guise of a tax -- on phantom income – imposed on honest, hard working Canadians.

A penalty that financially devastates many of its victims.

Even professional magicians, such as David Copperfield -- and/or Houdini -- would be hard pressed to produce tons -- of real money -- out of thin air.

But our government appears to believe ordinary Canadians -- who participated in ESPP/ESO plans -- are quite capable of doing just that.

What is there in the Ottawa air -- and/or water -- that produces such a hallucination in our government officials?

A week prior to this Easter week-end – some saner members of our government – participated in a Finance Committee Meeting, (FINA), to focus on the issue of the SDL/JDSU Tax Remission Order, (TRO).

According to the transcript -- of that meeting -- a review of the taxable benefit law is under way – and the need to change that law is being studied.

It should take all of one heartbeat to reach that decision.

Is the FINA meeting a prelude to resurrection of the RIGHT to “Fair and Equal Taxes” for All Canadians?

Is it the equivalent to a taxation Good Friday?

Every victim of the defective taxable benefit legislation – in fact every decent Canadian – is hoping that it is.

And when the tax equivalent of Easter Sunday arrives may our RIGHT to truly fair and equal taxes – dead for at least six years now -- be restored to us all alive and well.

Victor Drummond ©

IT IS NOT A QUESTION OF SHOULD..

IT IS NOT A QUESTION OF SHOULD.
IT IS A QUESTION OF WHEN AND HOW.
A Commentary on Canada’s Taxable Benefit Legislation.
By Victor Drummond ©
March 2008


When cartoonists wish to depict a villain -- performing a dastardly deed – they frequently resort to the mustached, sneering, image of a man in a long black coat, and wearing a top-hat while tying a helpless young woman to a railroad track.

That visual image just about tells it -- the way it actually -- is for victims of the flawed Canadian Taxable Benefit legislation.

They feel as helpless as the woman lashed to the railroad track – and some of them can now hear the whistle of an approaching train.

For those victims -- who had deferred ESPP/ESO Taxes that have now become due and payable -- by the next tax returns deadline – the train is fast approaching and there is no rescuing hero in sight.

There are however plenty of useless by-standers in positions of authority who -- at the stroke of a pen -- could stop that on-coming train in its tracks.

All that would be required is for the government to issue a stay-of-execution order to extend all expired tax deferment options for another year -- while the government determines whether or not the insidious taxable benefit legislation should be changed.

Making that decision must be really a challenge for most federal politicians as it is like pulling teeth to get any of them to even discuss the problem.

If there should be a law forbidding tying people to a railroad track then there should also be a law forbidding taxing people into financial ruin on income that only existed in theory.

Why should Canadians vote for people -- to represent them in federal government -- that can not – or will not -- protect them from exploitation and unjustified ruinous taxes?

Are our present Ministers of National Finance and National Revenue having a problem deciding whether or not the law should be changed? That decision is easy.

What may be a bit more difficult is when and how the law should be changed.

If a person has no price on their integrity, and, has a minimum sense of fair play then those questions are not difficult either.

When should the law be changed? Answer Immediately.

How should the law be changed?

In all fairness it should be changed in such a way that everyone who has been -- or will be -- taxed on a phantom income – has all past-paid taxes and related penalties refunded and/or outstanding taxes cancelled with -- the interest applicable to overpaid taxes included.

Would it be reasonable to change the law retroactively but leave it up to those victimized to request a re-assessment – as opposed to the government having all tax records from the year 2001 to 2007 reviewed for victims?

To be truly fair the government should screen all tax returns -- from the year 2000 to the year 2007 -- for taxes levied on phantom income with the above refund policy applied.

BUT if that were to impose an unbearable distress on the National Budget then it might be justifiable to only respond to those Canadians that ask to have their tax records and assessments reviewed -- according to the corrected taxable benefit legislation.

There are likely a large percentage of victims that would not have been overtaxed by enough money to justify applying for a refund. An example of this situation is the Saanich JDSU employee whose refund was less than $5.00

If you agree – (1) there is a problem – and (2) the solution(s) suggested above THEN contact your Member of Parliament and inform him or her you support the objective of the “Canadians for Fair and Equal Taxes” (CFET).

With your help we can rescue every victim of this obscene tax – especially those presently tied to the railroad track.

Victor Drummond ©

The tip of...

THERE IS MORE TO THIS THAN MEETS THE EYE
A Commentary on the Canadians for Fair and Equal Tax (CFET)
Organization -- by Victor Drummond ©
March 2008

The incentive -- for Canadians victimized by outrageous “Income” taxes levied on them
above and beyond any real “Income” they received – to become organized and fight for true and fair taxation is clearly explained in the preceding series of Victor Drummond postings.

Things that may leave non-victims wondering are questions such as:- who is making an issue of this unjust tax? And why now?

If the problem with outrageous taxation became obvious seven years ago – why wasn’t the fight for fair taxation settled long ago?

And why should Canadians need to fight for a fair deal in the first place?

That last question, above, is the core question. And according to the image Canada’s Government presents to us – and to the rest of the world -- no Canadian should ever need to fight for fair and equal taxation.

A hidden defect in the taxable benefit legislation did not become apparent while the stock markets were running normally -- with corporation shares fluctuating within the normal range of plus or minus a few percentage points each trading day.

In fact between the years 1995 to 2000 the shares of many high tech corporations were experiencing growth of 100% , and greater, from one year to the next.

Investors in the shares of most Hi-tech corporations were having a field day -- with whopping profits -- and laughing all the way to the bank.

This included a few corporate employees who had purchased their employer’s shares through Employee Shares Purchase Plans, (ESPP’s) and/or Employee Shares Options Plans, (ESO’s)

But not all. Many, possibly most, were blind-sided by an obscure flaw in the taxable benefit legislation.

Be aware – most of the people caught in this trap are not market savvy individuals.
They are assembly line workers, clerks, secretaries, -- ordinary people who were encouraged by their bosses and co-workers to participate in the employers ESPP and/or ESO stock plans.

People, who acquired their shares via an ESPP and/or an ESO, plan were a bit more handicapped than ordinary stock market investors/speculators due to restrictions integral to the plans.

While ordinary investors could buy, hold, sell and even short sell their chosen stocks -- on a minute to minute basis -- shareholders who purchased shares via an ESPP/ESO often had to wait up to a year before receiving their shares and were additionally handicapped by plan blackout periods during which they could neither buy nor sell shares.

Regular investor speculators had a well defined cost of acquisition, per share, and a well defined selling price, per share, from which real gains or losses could be determined accurately.

Taxes levied on regular investors were applied equally, and fairly, based upon any real gain, or any real loss that could then be applied to previously taxed gains -- and/or future profit.

These investors only paid tax when the shares were sold and the tax levied was then applied at the inclusion percentage for that specific year.

There would be no problem IF shareholders were all treated alike. But they are not.

Many shareholders -- who acquired their shares by way of an ESPP/ESO -- are taxed on the basis of unfounded assumptions and a calculated Fair Market Value, (FMV).

The generated FMV may not be anywhere near the actual value of the shares when bought and/or sold.

Even though the taxable benefit legislation operated to generate taxation in such a hit and miss manner ESPP/ESO shareholders -- who ended up with real gains -- were not too badly abused as they had tangible profits from which they could pay the taxes levied.

That is until the year 2000 when an overdue -- stock market -- correction hit Hi-tech stocks, around the world -- with a vengeance.

Suddenly ESPP/ESO shareholders were levied taxes on potential profit – a gain THEY MIGHT HAVE REALIZED -- IF -- they had an opportunity to sell their shares at the moment they took control over them. A nebulous – non-existent -- pie-in-the-sky profit.

Those who did not -- or could not -- sell their ESPP/ESO shares on the date of delivery
were ASSUMED – by the Canada Revenue Agency, (CRA) -- to have made a deliberate decision to play the markets – at their own risk -- in the hope of making even more profit.

The Treasury Board and CRA – based upon the unfounded assumption further assumed the right to tax ESPP/ESO shareholders as though they had somehow actually received income equal to those unrealized gains.

Any logic inherent to that sequence of events totally escapes me – as I am sure it also escapes any reasonable, intelligent person.

Based on an unproven assumptions the CRA then levied taxes on a further ASSUMED FMV per share which by tax time 2001 was well above the real value per share of the stocks held.

The end result being that thousands of conscientious, hard-working, Canadians were taxed on money they never received and many were left in severe financial distress.

Many victims had their retirement bank account(s) – built up over decades of savings – wiped out in an instant.

Others had to sell, or mortgage their homes, and still could not pay-off the taxes levied against them.

The government of the day recognized there was some kind of problem and offered a patch-up fix by way of allowing -- up to $100,000 dollars worth of shares purchased (per year) -- to have the outrageous tax levied -- deferred until the shares were sold, traded or the taxpayer moved out of Canada -- or better still -- died.

Just thinking about the kind, considerate, compassionate attitude of the authors/operators of this punitive, abusive tax operation just chokes me all up.

Those in a position to correct this monstrous miscarriage of justice successfully resisted doing the right and decent thing for the next six years.

No wonder there was a change of government in 2006.

Victims of this outrageous tax -- appealed, went to court, hired lawyers to represent them – all to no avail.

Individually they had no power and the government authorities knew that – so they did nothing to correct the problem.

It mattered not to those -- who could provide relief -- what distress this insidious tax imposed upon its victims. Apparently all that mattered to them was MONEY. They had conjured up a ridiculous rationale to bleed taxpayers dry and they were using it to its full capacity.

So what is different now? There has been a change of government and the new team has opened the door for possible correction of the previous administrations taxpayer abuse.

First – prior to the 2006 federal election -- the Conservative Party put forward an election platform that included a commitment to provide fair taxation.

Second – Shortly after winning a minority government position the new government provided -- a few victims in British Columbia – some improvement in their tax situation – by having a Tax Remission Order, (TRO) implemented.

The TRO gave some substance to the conservative’s pre-election commitment of fair taxation and other victims were given further encouragement by statements of Fair taxation for all Canadians contained in several different speeches made by high ranking conservative members.

Jamie Golombek -- a journalist for the National Post newspaper published an article on January 13 2007 with the title:- “What about the rest of us?” which brought this whole issue back to the public’s attention.

Victims and other interested people contacted Jamie to find out what the public reaction was to his article. One victim went so far as to leave his name, address, telephone number and E-mail address with Jamie and requested him to give out his contact information to everyone who inquired about the article.

Seeds of the present group:- “Canadians for Fair and Equal Taxes”, (CFET) were planted at that moment. First there was one person. Within a week there were three -- which quickly grew to six.

Then there was a long interval – possibly 6 months when the group had no new members.
Member’s they did have, however, became active in searching for additional victims and/or supporters.

One member found a reference to blogscanada.ca in an old issue of Readers Digest and began exploring this blog web page. He found a listing for a group titled:- “E-Group” Political Punditry and decided to contact the administrator – Jim Elve.

Jim was very accommodating and assisted with the posting of several articles on the E-group blog page under the pen-name Victor Drummond.

Victor’s articles had a singular focus – fix the defective taxable benefit legislation and compensate those already victimized.

Articles all having the same focus were not really a good fit with the E-group blog page so it shortly came to pass that Jim suggested Victor should open his own blog page.

Victor took Jim’s advice and opened a blog page under the title:-
Buyerbeware--caveatemptor.blogspot.com -- and proceeded to write and post a series of articles – all oriented toward informing readers of the insidious, unfair, unwarranted, punitive, abusive qualities of the current taxable benefit legislation.

Furthermore Victor’s articles implored readers to contact their friends and for everyone to contact their elected representatives in Canada’s Parliament and demand this outrageous legislation be amended and all victims to-date properly compensated.

Victor posted over 60 articles between the blog page start-up in April and December 31 2007. Articles are still being posted as of March 11 2008.

A new blog page with the title:- “letter-to-the-editor.blogspot.com” has also been created recently to store template:- “letters to the editor” articles – in preparation for a media blitz if there is no indication that anyone in government intends to take action on this tax issue by the time a federal election gets under way.

One of the organizations contacted -- in mid 2007 -- for advice and support in dealing with the government -- suggested our victims group hold a press conference in the Parliament Hill Press Theatre – to bring this issue to the public’s attention.

In January 2008 contact was made with the Ottawa Press Club to begin proceedings for such a conference. It turns out there are some requirements to be met before a group can book the Parliament Hill Press Theatre.

For one -- the group must have a recognized title. Second a maximum of seven members of a group may actually be present at the conference.

Another requirement being that the purpose of the meeting, agenda etc. must be submitted in advance in the form of a press information kit.

It took over a month to set up the place, date and time of the conference – but it finally took place at 11h00 – 11h45 on Thursday morning February 21 2008. At that moment the group:- “Canadians for Fair and Equal Taxes” (CFET) was born.

One of the very first questions asked of the CFET members at the press conference was:- How large is your organization? How many members do you have?

In terms of geographic size the CFET members attending this meeting come from places as far apart as Victoria British Columbia and Ottawa Ontario.

That space also includes members -- not in attendance – living in other places such as Toronto, Brampton Ontario, Calgary Alberta and Vancouver British Columbia.

Our membership is actually intangible. We are here today to speak on behalf of every Canadian that has been levied taxes on non-existent income.

We can name a dozen or two such victims who have come forward and allowed themselves to be publicly identified.

We are also in contact with another half-dozen victims that do not wish to be publicly identified for fear of possible government reprisal.

As to how many actual members do we have? We know of the members who have actually contacted us and we know they are just the tip of the iceberg.

It doesn’t make sense that any Canadian taxpayer is not in favour of “Fair, Just, Equal” taxes so we speak on behalf of those Canadians – both victimized – and not victimized – but who support our taxation policy.

Our membership iceberg is less than 1% visible – at the moment. There much more to the CFET than meets the eye.

Victor Drummond ©

Federal Election Game..

THE FEDERAL ELECTION GAME
How to avoid being another loser.
A commentary by Victor Drummond ©
March 2008

Within the next twelve months there is a high prospect a federal election will be called.

Even before that actually happens the newspapers, radio and television programs will be polluted with attack ads, political rhetoric and promises of social benefits too numerous and likely too ridiculous to mention.

Ordinary citizens like to believe promises made by their favourite candidate and will often decide to vote for that person – even if he or she is not running for their favourite party.

As most experienced voters know election promises are classed in the same category as pie crust. e.g. that being something that is made to be broken.

Unfortunately you can not eat a broken promise – and although not eaten -- a broken promise does leave voters with a bitter taste in their mouth.

Most issues chosen by politicians, (spin doctors), for the promise:- “I will fix this.”
are high profile items, such as:- Global Warming, Environmental Protection, Homeless Street People – Low Cost Housing, Child Poverty, High Taxes – and the list goes on and on.
Issues that for the most part no one person -- or political party --can do very much about.

Promises made by the Conservative Party – before – during – and after the last federal election focused on “Fair and Equal Taxation for All Canadians.”

And perhaps they tried to deliver.

The efforts of Gary Lunn -- MP for Saanich Gulf Islands – assisted by the Prime Minister and Governor General – merely helped improve a horrendous miscarriage of justice for some 30+ victims of the defective taxable benefit legislation – in that one riding.

But it made matters worse in the long run. Their efforts left thousands of similar victims with false hope but without relief from their own – personal -- financial disaster.

The current taxable benefit legislation is an insidious piece of legislation which conjures up an excuse for taxing thousands of Canadians on a potentially huge income that is purely imaginary.

Although ordinary common sense proclaims taxing phantom income is unreasonable, unfair, illogical, cruel, obscene, ridiculous, punitive, distressing, unwarranted, and DENIES all Canadians their RIGHT to fair and equal taxation – this issue is completely ignored by every political party and every candidate for federal office at the present time.

If you as a Canadian voter do not want to be a loser in this game of:- “Elect me and I will look after your interests.”-- then notify you favourite candidate -- in the coming federal election:-
“State your policy on correcting the taxable benefits disaster.”
Then I will decide if you will get my vote. No policy commitment = No Vote.

This is something your candidate – as a Member of Parliament -- can actually do something about – and it affects every Canadian.

See you at the Federal Election voting polls – O’Grady

Victor Drummond ©

Canada's Watchdogs W5

CANADA’S – WATCHDOGS -- W5
The Who, What, When, Where, Why
Of Canada’s Justice System
Commentary by Victor Drummond ©
March 2008

WHY
There are a large number of situations where vigilance and aggressive action are required if society is to be relatively free of oppression, exploitation, abuse, robbery, and a host of other undesirable situations.

WHO
At the home level there should be a male member who provides family income, and at least a minimum level of physical protection.

The home level may also have supplemental protection provided by a family pet.
A Doberman can be a great asset toward protecting a family from both external and internal danger.

At the street level we have municipal and provincial police.
Next there is the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and above them all is the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, (CSIS).

All of these protective organizations go into action immediately -- at the first indication of criminal activity.

WHERE
Unfortunately pets, police and/or CSIS can not be everywhere. Streets are patrolled day and night, the internet is monitored 24/7, and municipal high crime areas are under constant surveillance.

Still people are victimized by carjackers, muggers, identity thieves, and our own government.

What else can you call it but legalized robbery when Canadian taxpayers are levied huge taxes on a theoretical -- but non-existent income?

A person might think the people they elect -- to represent them in Canada’s Parliament would be self monitoring and – would automatically take action to protect their constituents from government abuse. Not So.

With the possible exception of The Honourable Gary Lunn that kind of elected representative action seldom happens.
Where does your MP stand on this outrageous situation?

Even the Federal Ethics Commissioner’s mandate does not extend to pulling the government up short for unethical conduct. That office is limited to commenting on the conduct of individual members of government.

If there is any form of watchdog monitoring taxpayer abuse -- by our own government -- it must be the kind of mutt that would sit there silently and watch the burglar ransack the house and take off with the loot.

WHAT
What justification can anyone conjure up for abusing innocent, honest, hard working, citizens in this way? There is no logical justification – but the crime continues unabated and unchallenged by any of the agencies dedicated to serving and protecting Canadians.

WHEN
When is someone in authority going to take up this issue and re-establish every Canadian’s RIGHT to fair and equal treatment under the laws of Canada?

When is the Supreme Court of Canada going to recognize this outrageous tax situation and strike down the taxable benefit legislation which contravenes every Canadian’s rights as guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?

A tax? That is founded upon defective taxable benefits legislation and the interpretation of that legislation which allows taxpayers to be fined huge amounts of money on the basis of guilt by assumption?

Innocent, hard working honest Canadians -- burdened with deferred taxes unto death.
Denied the right to move out of Canada penalty free. What other civilized country has such unfair and punitive tax legislation – co-existent with guaranteed Rights and Freedoms?
Name one if you can.

NOTHING
This unjust, unfair and punitive fine – under the guise of a tax – will likely continue until real pressure is brought to bear on our law makers, (Members of Parliament), and/or our Supreme Court Justices – who are apparently hobbled in some way – from initiating corrective action spontaneously.

NOTHING is likely to change unless Canadian voters become concerned enough to let their Members of Parliament know they will no longer tolerate this outrageous situation.


O’GRADY
Let you MP know there is one more level of protection for Canadians – We the Voters.

By making our vote conditional upon a commitment to restore every Canadians RIGHT to truly “Fair and Equal Taxes” we all, in effect, become O’Grady and members of Canadians for Fair and Equal Taxes. (CFET)

Remember --“What O’Grady sez goes. -- (See prior posting:- O’Grady Sez)

See you at the next federal election voting polls O’Grady.

Victor Drummond © (CFET)

All for one and..

ALL FOR ONE AND ONE FOR ALL
A commentary on unity
By
Victor Drummond ©
March 2008

Canadians who are old enough to remember Nelson Eddy and Marie McDonald will also
remember these words to a song he made famous and very popular in that era.

As I recall the chorus went something like this.:-

Give ten thousand men who are stout hearted men who will fight for the RIGHT they adore – give me ten thousand men and Ill soon give you ten thousand more.

Back in those days that concept would have rang true. Today individual RIGHTS are guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms so no one need fight for them any longer .. RIGHT?

If so you could fool me. I have read the Charter and I have seen it’s guarantee per article 15(1) violated thousands of times – and no one does a thing about it.

The government in power – having once recognized the insidious aspect of the flawed taxable benefit legislation – took token action to give a paltry few victims some relief by way of a tax remission order.

This same government now ignores the plight of thousands of Canadians who have been treated just as bad, or even worse, than those few who had their taxable benefit taxes and penalties dismissed.

In the past year there has been a growing number of Canadians – some victimized but also supported by others who will fight for the RIGHTS of all Canadians.

This group began with three or four victimized people – the group size doubled in the first six months and has doubled again in the last three months.

They have taken the name:- “Canadians for Fair and Equal Taxes, (CFET), and are becoming more visible day by day.

A press conference took place in Ottawa with CFET members, last month, and a web page:- cfet.ca is currently under development.

Journalists have been publishing articles -- for over a year -- berating this unfair tax legislation and the way that it is being applied. (see previous article titled:- MY GOVERNMENT WOULDN’T DO THAT)

Perhaps the theme of Nelson Eddy’s song is still valid – Three or four 12 months ago – eight 6 months ago – 16 last month – next month ???

Hopefully there are still a large number of Canadians who will fight for the RIGHT they adore.

See you at the next federal election polls – O’Grady

Victor Drummond ©