Disclaimer:
This unedited legislative summary of a budget implementation bill is made available to parliamentarians, parliamentary staff and the public to ensure timely access to the information, research and analysis needed to study the bill in question. This document concerns only the version of the bill tabled at first reading and will not be revised to reflect amendments made to the bill as it moves through the legislative process.
Bill C‑69, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 16, 2024 (short title: Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1),1 was introduced in the House of Commons on 2 May 2024 by the Honourable Chrystia Freeland, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance. As suggested by the long and short titles, the purpose of the bill is to implement the government’s overall budget policy, presented to the House of Commons on 16 April 2024. Bill C‑69 is the first budget implementation bill of 2024. According to established legislative practice, a second similar bill may follow in fall 2024.
The bill has four parts:
This Legislative Summary provides a brief description of the main measures proposed in the bill. For ease of reference, the information is presented in the same order as it appears in the summary of the bill. Unless otherwise specified, provisions in this bill come into force on Royal Assent.
A key feature of the taxation of income from a business or property is the intention to generally only tax “net income,” which can be synonymous with “profit.” As such, relevant costs and expenses are generally deductible. The income a taxpayer receives from operating short‑term rental accommodation will be characterized as income from a business or property for tax purposes and the taxpayer will generally be allowed to deduct any reasonable expense incurred for the purpose of earning that income. For example, these deductible expenses can include financing costs such as the interest on a mortgage, the cost of repairs, or services provided to tenants.
Clause 16(1) of Bill C‑69 adds new section 67.7 to the Income Tax Act (ITA)2 to introduce expense deduction denial for operators of short‑term rentals that do not comply with the registration, licensing and/or permit requirements that apply in the province or municipality in which the short‑term rental is located.
New section 67.7(2) introduces the denial, such that no amount is deductible in calculating income in respect of a non‑compliant short‑term rental for a taxation year. New section 67.7(1) introduces definitions that are relevant to the application of this denial, such as “non‑compliant short‑term rental,” being a short‑term rental in a province or municipality that:
A “short‑term rental” is defined as a residential property that is rented or offered for rent for a period of less than 90 consecutive days.
Clause 16(2) deems this measure to apply to expenses incurred after 2023, but new section 67.7(2) introduces transitional provisions where a rental unit will not be deemed non‑compliant throughout the 2024 tax year if it complies with all registration, licensing and permit requirements before 2025.
Section 81(1) of the ITA exempts certain amounts from income tax, including a non‑resident’s income from international shipping. International shipping companies managed in Canada can access this exemption by being deemed non‑resident if they meet the conditions in section 250(6) of the ITA, which requires that they be incorporated outside of Canada.
International shipping income is exempt from this the Global Minimum Tax Act (GMTA) introduced in Part 2 of Bill C‑69 in accordance with the multilaterally agreed framework. However, international shipping companies managed in Canada that have structured their operations to align with the design of Canada’s current international shipping exemption in the ITA would generally not be able to benefit from the exclusion in the proposed GMTA.
Clause 17(1) of Bill C‑69 adds new section 81(1)(c.1) to the ITA to make the exemption for income from international shipping available to certain Canadian resident corporations, allowing international shipping companies managed in Canada to access the exemption without incorporating outside of Canada, as well as allowing international shipping companies that are subject to the GMTA to access both the exemption in the ITA and the exclusion in the GMTA.
To be eligible for the exemption, a corporation must be resident in Canada under the general common law test of central management and control, its principal business must consist of the operation of ships used primarily in transporting passengers or goods in international traffic, and all or substantially all of its gross revenue for the year must be from the operation of ships in transporting such passengers and goods.
Clause 17(4) deems this amendment to apply to taxation years that begin on or after 31 December 2023.
A revised final settlement agreement totalling over $23 billion was reached by the Assembly of First Nations, Moushoom and Trout class actions plaintiffs, the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society, and Canada to compensate those harmed by discriminatory underfunding of the First Nations Child and Family Services program and those impacted by the federal government’s narrow definition of Jordan’s Principle.
Section 81(1)(g.3) of the ITA provides for an exemption from income tax for trusts established under certain settlement agreements. Clause 17(3) of Bill C‑69 adds to this list the Settlement Agreement entered into by the Crown, dated effective as of 19 April 2023, in respect of the class actions relating to the First Nations Child and Family Services, Jordan’s Principle and Trout Class.
Clause 17(5) deems this measure to have come into force on 1 January 2024.
The Volunteer Firefighters Tax Credit and the Search and Rescue Volunteer Tax Credit allow eligible volunteer firefighters and search and rescue volunteers to claim a 15% non‑refundable tax credit based on an amount of $3,000. Clauses 26(1) and 27(1) amend sections 118.06(2) and 118.07(2) of the ITA, respectively, to increase the amount that may be claimed under each tax credit from $3,000 to $6,000. Clauses 26(2) and 27(2) deem these changes to apply to the 2024 and subsequent taxation years.
The Canada Child Benefit (CCB) is a non‑taxable benefit that is generally payable to the parent who resides with the qualified dependant under the age of 18 in Canada and is the dependant’s principal caregiver. The amount of the CCB depends on an eligible individual’s “adjusted income” (i.e., family net income), the number of qualified dependants, and the age of the qualified dependants.
If an eligible individual ceases to be eligible for the CCB for reasons other than the qualified dependant attaining the age of 18, such as upon the death of the qualified dependant, the individual must notify the Minister of National Revenue (in practice, the Canada Revenue Agency) before the end of the first month they become ineligible under section 122.62(4) of the ITA. Failing to do so causes subsequent CCB payments to be “overpayments” that would have to be repaid by the taxpayer.
Clause 31(1) of Bill C‑69 adds new sections 122.62(9) and 122.62(10) to the ITA to deem a deceased child to be a qualified dependant, and deem an eligible individual to remain characterized as such, respectively, for each of the six months following the death of the child where the child was under 18 years of age and was a qualified dependant immediately prior to their death. These provisions allow an eligible individual to continue receiving the CCB for a deceased child for up to six months following the child’s death. New section 122.61(11) provides for the calculation of the CCB in these circumstances to be determined by the age the qualified dependant would have been had they not died. Consequential amendments are made by new section 122.61(12), which allow the disability supplement – an additional amount provided to families caring for a child eligible for the Disability Tax Credit which is included in CCB payments – to continue for each of the six months following the death of the child.
Clause 31(2) deems this measure to apply in respect of the death of a person that occurs after 2024.
Section 125.6 of the ITA contains the labour tax credit for journalism organizations, which provides a refundable tax credit in respect of “qualifying labour expenditures” – generally the salary or wages payable by the organization to the employee – paid after 2018 by a “qualifying journalism organization” in a taxation year in respect of “eligible newsroom employees.” The credit is computed by multiplying 25% by “qualifying labour expenditures” paid in a taxation year, subject to a maximum amount of $55,000 per “eligible newsroom employee” and the maximum annual tax credit per eligible employee is $13,750.
Clause 33 of Bill C‑69 amends sections 125.6(1) and 125.6(2) of the ITA to increase the “qualifying labour expenditure” limit from $55,000 to $85,000 and temporarily raise the credit rate from 25% to 35% for a period of four years, after which it would return to 25% in 2027.
Clause 33(4) deems the changes to come into force on 1 January 2023. As corporations are generally free to choose their own tax years – as opposed to being a calendar year – transitional rules in new sections 125.6(2)(a) and 125.6(2)(c) of the ITA apply for qualifying journalism organizations with taxation years that include a period within the 2022 and 2027 calendar years, respectively, as the rate and credit applicable will vary by calendar year.
Coordinating amendments are made to section 125.6(2.1) of the ITA with respect to partnerships.
Flow‑through shares facilitate the financing of exploration by allowing companies to transfer (renounce) unused tax deductions to investors. In addition to claiming regular flow‑through deductions, individuals (other than trusts) who invest in flow‑through shares of a corporation can claim a 15% non‑refundable tax credit in respect of specified mineral exploration expenses incurred by the corporation and transferred to the individual under a flow‑through share agreement.
Clauses 34(1) and 34(2) of Bill C‑69 amend the definition of “flow‑through mining expenditure” in section 127(9) of the ITA to extend the operation of Mineral Exploration Tax Credit by one year to include eligible expenses incurred by a corporation after March 2024 and before 2026, where the expenses are renounced under a flow‑through share agreement entered into after March 2024 and before April 2025.
Clause 34(6) deems the measure to apply to expenses renounced under a flow‑through share agreement entered into after March 2024.
The federal fuel charge is implemented by the federal government in provinces and territories that request it or that do not have a carbon pricing system that meets the federal benchmark. These “designated provinces” currently include Alberta, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward Island and Saskatchewan.
Clause 35 of Bill C‑69 adds new section 127.421 to the ITA to create the Canada Carbon Rebate for Small Businesses.
New section 127.421(2) provides a method for calculating the amount of the carbon rebate for the 2019 to 2023 calendar years. The amount determined for a corporation for a designated province for a calendar year is calculated by multiplying the “fuel return” specified by the Minister of Finance for the designated province for the calendar year by the total number of persons employed by the corporation in the calendar year in the designated province. An eligible corporation will receive the rebate for these years provided that it files a tax return on or before 15 July 2024 for a taxation year ending in 2023. New section 127.421(3) provides the same method for calculating the amount of the carbon rebate for 2023 and subsequent tax years.
New section 127.421(4) authorizes the Minister of Finance to specify the fuel return specified for a designated province for a calendar year. New section 127.421(5) provides that if the Minister of Finance does not specify the fuel return specified for a designated province for a calendar year under section 127.421(4), the rate for that calendar year for that province is deemed to be zero.
Eligible corporations are Canadian‑controlled private corporations that employ fewer than 500 employees at any time in the calendar in the designated province by virtue of the carbon rebate calculations in sections 127.421(2) and 127.421(3) of the ITA.
Clause 60(3) makes consequential amendments to section 164(3) of the ITA.
Clause 37(1) of Bill C‑69 adds new section 127.48 to the ITA to create a refundable Clean Hydrogen Investment Tax Credit (CHITC). Portions of section 127.48 are duplicated from Bill C‑59, An Act to implement certain provisions of the fall economic statement tabled in Parliament on November 21, 2023 and certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 28, 2023,3 which are common to the CHITC and other investment credits contained in that bill. In particular, the investment tax credit for investments in carbon capture, utilization and storage, as well as the investment tax credit for eligible investments in clean technology equipment. Furthermore, Bill C‑69 contains duplicated provisions to account for both circumstances where Bill C‑59 is enacted (clause 80(80)) and where this is not the case (clause 37). The following description is relevant to either clause or circumstance as each adds new section 127.48 to the ITA.
The definition of “eligible clean hydrogen property” in new section 127.48 makes the CHITC available for property that is acquired and that becomes available for use on or after 28 March 2023. The CHITC would generally be available for property situated in Canada that is used to produce hydrogen through electrolysis of water, or from eligible hydrocarbons so long as carbon dioxide is captured using carbon capture, utilization, and storage technology (see definition of “eligible pathway”).
In general, the CHITC full credit rate varies between 15%, 25% and 40% depending on the expected “carbon intensity” of the hydrogen to be produced by the clean hydrogen project. The 15% rate applies to an expected carbon intensity equal to or greater than two, but less than four. The 25% rate applies to an expected carbon intensity equal to or greater than 0.75 and less than two, and the 40% for an expected carbon intensity of less than 0.75 (see definition “specified percentage” in new section 127.48(1)). A separate credit rate of 15% applies for certain clean ammonia equipment described in the definition of “eligible clean hydrogen property” provided certain conditions are met. “Carbon intensity” is defined as the quantity in kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent created per kilogram of hydrogen produced by a clean hydrogen project. Accordingly, projects with a carbon intensity of four kilograms or higher of carbon dioxide equivalent per kilograms of hydrogen produced would not be eligible.
The definition of “specified percentage” in new section 127.48(1) reduces the aforementioned credit rates by half for 2034 and would no longer be available after 2034. Taxpayers will also only receive the aforementioned applicable credit rate if they satisfy the labour requirements in section 127.46 of the ITA. For taxpayers that do not elect to meet the labour requirements, each tax credit rate may be reduced by 10 percentage points (clauses 80(71) and 80(71)).4
In addition, the amount of the capital cost of property that is eligible for credit is reduced by an amount equal to any other government or non‑government financial assistance provided for its purchase under new section 127.48(11) of the ITA.
Clause 38(1) of Bill C‑69 adds new section 127.49 to the ITA to create a refundable Clean Technology Manufacturing (CTM) Investment Tax Credit for acquisitions of certain clean technology manufacturing property (CTM property) that is used in qualifying manufacturing and processing activities or the extraction and processing of certain critical minerals. New section 127.49(19) notes the “purpose of [section 127.49] is to encourage the investment of capital in Canada for a CTM use.”
Under the definition of “specified percentage” in new section 127.49(1) of the ITA, the credit may apply to CTM property that is both acquired and becomes available for use on or after 1 January 2024. The credit rate is 30% for property acquired in 2024, but before 2032, 20% for property acquired in 2032, 10% for property acquired in 2033, 5% for property acquired in 2034, and zero for property acquired after 2034.
The definition of “CTM property” in new section 127.49(1) specifies that property eligible for the credit must be situated in Canada and be intended for use exclusively in Canada, must be included in certain classes of property under the Income Tax Regulations (ITR)5 (listed in the paragraph d of the definition of “CTM property”), must be new equipment, and in the event that it is leased to another taxpayer or partnership, that taxpayer or each partner must be a taxable Canadian corporation (definition of “qualifying taxpayer”). Additionally, the property must be used for “CTM use” as defined in new section 127.49(1), generally being for qualified zero‑emission technology manufacturing activities or in a “qualifying mineral activity” (also defined in subsection 127.49(1)) producing “qualifying materials” that include lithium, cobalt, nickel, copper, rare earth elements and graphite.
Similar to the CHITC, the amount of the capital cost of property that is eligible for credit is reduced by an amount equal to any other government or non‑government financial assistance provided for its purchase under new section 127.49(5)(c) of the ITA.
Clause 38(2) deems the measure to come into force on 1 January 2024.
Bill C‑69 introduces several amendments to the ITA to clarify when loans from the government are not considered government assistance.
Section 12 of the ITA lists those amounts that must be included when computing the income of a taxpayer. Clause 5(3) adds section 12(1)(x)(ix) to the ITA to exclude from the calculation of income amounts received as an “excluded loan.”
Clause 5(4) adds the definition “excluded loan” to section 12(11) of the ITA to describe loans, other than forgivable loans, made in writing, that are:
Clause 6(4) adds new section 13(7.1)(b.2) to the ITA, which provides reductions in the capital cost of a depreciable property for certain types of government assistance, to exclude an amount received that is an “excluded loan.”
Clause 34(3) amends the definition of “government assistance” in section 127(9) of the ITA, which lists the various investment tax credits, to exclude an “excluded loan.”
Clauses 5(3), 5(4), 6(4) and 34(3) are deemed to have come into force on 1 January 2020 and apply to loans made after 31 December 2019.
Bill C‑69 introduces several changes to the alternative minimum tax regime, which is found in Division E.1 of the ITA. In general, tax owing by individuals and trusts is calculated under the normal income tax and the alternative minimum tax regimes. The taxpayer will owe whichever calculation is higher, which in most cases is the amount of tax calculated under the normal income tax calculation. For high income earners, the alternative minimum tax may prevent them from paying little to no tax in a given taxation year.
Clause 40 makes three amendments to section 127.51 of the ITA, which provides the formula to calculate the alternative minimum tax. Clause 40(1) increases the tax rate percentage, represented by the letter A, from “the appropriate percentage for the year,” which is currently the lowest tax bracket percentage of 15%, to 20.5%. Clause 40(2) increases the basic income exemption amount, represented by the letter C, from $40,000, to “the first dollar amount for the year” referred to in section 117(2)(d) of the ITA. Section 117(2)(d) describes the fourth income tax bracket, and the first dollar amount is $173,205. Clause 40(2) also amends the letter C to provide that the basic exemption applies to a qualified disability trust.
Clause 41 amends section 127.52 of the ITA, which sets out what amounts should be included and what deductions are permitted when calculating a taxpayer’s “adjusted taxable income” for the purposes of the alternative minimum tax. Briefly, the amendments are as follows:
Clause 42 amends section 127.531 of the ITA, which sets out an individual’s basic minimum tax credit for a taxation year for the purposes of the alternative minimum tax. The basic tax credit includes 50% of the amounts deducted in relation to the disability tax credit, the transfer of unused tuition credits, and amounts claimed in relation to other tax credits, except for the charitable donation tax credit and other amounts that arise upon emigration from Canada.
Clauses 43(1) to 43(3) clarify the definitions for “foreign taxes” and “foreign income” in section 127.54(1) of the ITA and update the formula used to calculate the special foreign tax credit in section 127.54(2)(b)(ii) to include the new 20.5% tax rate.
Clause 44 amends section 127.55(f) of the ITA to exclude many types of trusts from the application of the alternative minimum tax.
Clauses 40, 41, 42, 43(2), 43(3) and 44 apply to taxation years that begin after 31 December 2023.
The Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP) – Home Buyers’ Plan allows individuals to make withdraws from their RRSPs to buy or build a qualifying home. Individuals have up to 15 years to repay the amounts withdrawn from their RRSP. Budget 2024 announced an increase to the withdrawal limit for the Home Buyers’ Plan as well as a temporary extension of the repayment period.6
Clauses 49(1) and 49(2) amend paragraph (h) of the definition of “regular eligible amount” and paragraph (g) in the definition of “supplemental eligible amount,” respectively, in section 146.01(1) of the ITA to increase the withdrawal limit for the Home Buyers’ Plan from $35,000 to $60,000.
Clause 49(3) amends section 146.01(4) of the ITA, which sets out the minimum annual amount that must be repaid into the RRSP beginning the second taxation year after the withdrawal, to include reference to new section 146.01(4.1).
Clause 49(4) adds new sections 146.01(4.1) and 146.01(4.2) to the ITA. These sections defer for an additional three years the start of the 15‑year repayment period for individuals who make the first withdrawal from their RRSPs between 1 January 2022 and 31 December 2025. Consequently, during this period, an individual would not have to begin repayment until five taxation years after their first withdrawal.
Clauses 49(1) and 49(2) apply to the 2024 and subsequent taxation years in respect of amounts received after 16 April 2024.
Clauses 49(3) and 49(4) apply to the 2024 and subsequent taxation years.
Clause 73(1) amends section 238(1) of the ITA, which provides a penalty for persons who fail to file or make a return under the Act, to exclude information returns made under sections 237.3 or 237.4 of the ITA. These sections govern information returns for reportable and notifiable transactions and already include specific penalties for failures to make these returns.
Clause 73(2) indicates that clause 73(1) is deemed to have come into force on 22 June 2023.
Bill C‑59, An Act to implement certain provisions of the fall economic statement tabled in Parliament on November 21, 2023 and certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 28, 2023, introduced the taxation rules that would apply when using an employee ownership trust to acquire and hold shares of a qualifying business. Bill C‑69 further adds a $10 million capital gains tax exemption on the sale of a business to an employee ownership trust, which is in effect for the 2024, 2025, and 2026 tax years.
Clause 80(37) introduces new section 110.61 to the ITA, which sets out the rules governing the $10 million capital gains deduction for a “qualifying business transfer.” A “qualifying business transfer,” as defined in Bill C‑59, is a transaction involving the sale of shares of an active business corporation to an employee ownership trust.
New section 110.61(1) of the ITA lists the conditions that need to be met for the sale to be eligible for capital gains deduction:
New section 110.61(2) of the ITA sets out the formula for claiming the capital gains deduction, taking into account if more than one individual is entitled to claim the deduction.
New sections 110.61(3) and 110.61(4) of the ITA indicate that the capital gains deduction can be denied when a “disqualifying event” occurs, which could be an event that causes the trust to no longer be an employee ownership trust or if the qualifying business of the trust has less than 50% of the fair market value of the shares attributable to assets used principally in an active business. If the disqualifying event occurs within 24 months of the sale, the capital gains deduction is deemed to have never applied to the sale of shares. If the disqualifying event occurs after 24 months, then the trust will realize a capital gain equal to the elected amount of the deduction.
New section 110.61(5) of the ITA is an anti‑avoidance rule which states that the deduction does not apply if the purpose of the transaction or series of transactions is to involve the trust in the sale of the shares in order to allow an individual to claim the capital gains deduction that would otherwise not be available to the individual, or if the purpose is to organize or reorganize a corporation, partnership or trust in a manner to allow the deduction to be claimed.
New sections 110.61(6) to 110.61(10) of the ITA indicate those circumstances where the capital gains deduction would not be permitted, including:
New section 110.61(11) of the ITA sets out the rules with respect to related persons for the purposes of the capital gains deduction.
Clause 80(144) of the bill indicates that clause 80(37) is deemed to have come into force on 1 January 2024.
A number of clauses in Part 1 of Bill C‑69 make technical amendments to the ITA and the ITR in order to provide clarity or correct errors in the legislation.
The following clauses make technical amendments for clarification purposes:
The following clauses make amendments to better align the French and English versions of the ITA:
In addition, clause 25 amends sections 116(5)(a), 116(5.01)(a) and 116(5.3)(a) of the French version of the ITA, which address sales of property by non‑residents, to replace “sérieuse” with “raisonnable.”
Clause 54 amends section 149.1(14.1) of the French version of the ITA, which governs registered journalism organizations, to correct typographical errors.
Clause 80 also consists of over 200 coordinating amendments to the ITA and the ITR that would apply if Bill C‑59, An Act to implement certain provisions of the fall economic statement tabled in Parliament on November 21, 2023 and certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 28, 2023, receives Royal Assent. A brief discussion of these amendments follows:
The implementation of a global minimum tax is the second pillar of the international tax reform put forward by the Organisation for Economic Co‑operation and Development (OECD) / Group of 20 Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (the Inclusive Framework).
Broadly speaking, the global minimum tax “is intended to reduce the incentive for [multinational enterprises (MNEs)] to shift profits into low‑tax jurisdictions and, at the same time, … [set] a floor”11 on international tax competition by “ensur[ing] that large [MNEs] are subject to a minimum effective tax rate of 15 per cent on their profits in every jurisdiction in which they operate.”12
To facilitate the coordinated and uniform implementation of Pillar Two, the Inclusive Framework adopted the Global Anti‑Base Erosion Model Rules (the GloBE Rules). These rules, which are “the product of extensive international negotiation,”13 provide details of the two main mechanisms through which the global minimum tax is levied, namely:
In addition, countries can also levy a domestic minimum top‑up tax (DMTT) on their national entities, subject to certain conditions.
It is in this context that clause 81(1) of Bill C‑69, which enacts the Global Minimum Tax Act (GMTA), implements the IIR and the DMTT in Canada.14 In accordance with clause 81(2), the GMTA applies to fiscal years beginning on or after 31 December 2023. However, in accordance with clause 81(3), any penalty imposed under the general anti‑avoidance rule set out in section 54 of the GMTA applies only in respect of transactions occurring on or after the first day on which this bill and Bill C‑59, An Act to implement certain provisions of the fall economic statement tabled in Parliament on November 21, 2023 and certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 28, 2023, receive Royal Assent.
The GMTA is the responsibility of the Minister of National Revenue15 (the Minister) and comprises 141 sections divided into six parts.
Unless otherwise indicated, terms in quotation marks in this part of the Legislative Summary are defined in section 2(1) of the GMTA.
Part 2 of the GMTA implements the global minimum tax. The following subsections summarize the main points.
As explained by the government,
[i]n general terms, if the country where the ultimate parent entity of an MNE is located has implemented the IIR, it has the primary right to impose a top‑up tax on the ultimate parent entity with respect to income from the MNE’s operations in any jurisdiction where it is taxed at an [effective tax rate (ETR)] below 15 per cent. The additional tax increases the ETR of this low‑taxed income to 15 per cent. If the ultimate parent jurisdiction has not implemented the IIR, the right to impose the top‑up tax under the IIR shifts to the jurisdiction with the highest‑level intermediate parent entity within the MNE’s structure that has adopted the IIR.16
In general, the GMTA applies to “MNE groups,” i.e., “groups” comprising at least one “entity” or “permanent establishment” that is not located in the jurisdiction where the group’s “ultimate parent entity” is located and whose entities’ financial statements are included in the “consolidated financial statements” of the ultimate parent entity.
Thus, a “person” (including a “corporation,” partnership or trust) must pay tax in respect of an MNE group when the following two conditions are met:
Division 4 of Part 2 of the GMTA contains provisions for calculating the effective tax rate (ETR) of an MNE group, for a given jurisdiction and fiscal year. In general, and subject to adjustments in certain situations, the ETR is calculated by dividing the MNE group’s “jurisdictional adjusted covered taxes” by the MNE group’s “net GloBE income.”
The jurisdictional adjusted covered taxes are determined by adding together the “adjusted covered taxes” for the fiscal year of a “standard constituent entity” of the MNE group located in the jurisdiction. Division 3 of Part 2 of the GMTA contains the rules for computing the adjusted covered taxes of a constituent entity of an MNE group for a fiscal year. Generally speaking, it is the current tax expense, in respect of “covered taxes,” to which certain adjustments are made. Of note, rules are established for allocating covered taxes to permanent establishments, “fiscally transparent entities,” controlled foreign companies and “hybrid entities.” There are also rules for post‑filing adjustments to a particular constituent entity of an MNE group and tax rate changes.
As for net GloBE income, it is determined by subtracting the “GloBE loss” of a standard constituent entity of the MNE group located in the jurisdiction from the “GloBE income or loss” of such an entity. Division 2 of Part 2 of the GMTA contains rules for computing the GloBE income or loss of a constituent entity. Generally speaking, it is the “financial accounting income,” to which certain adjustments are made. In addition, specific calculation rules are laid down, which vary according to the nature of the entity (e.g., whether it is a permanent establishment or a “flow‑through entity”) and the source of the income (e.g., a constituent entity’s “net income or loss from international shipping” is excluded).
The top‑up amount of particular standard constituent entity of an MNE group that is located in a jurisdiction for a particular fiscal year is generally determined by multiplying the “jurisdictional top‑up amount” for the MNE group by the “GloBE income” of the particular standard constituent entity; this result is then divided by the total GloBE income of each of the standard constituent entities of the MNE group that is located in the jurisdiction.
Generally speaking, the jurisdictional top‑up amount for a fiscal year is the difference between 15% (the “minimum rate”) and the ETR of the MNE group for the jurisdiction, multiplied by the “excess profit” for the jurisdiction. Certain adjustments are then made to this result, including a deduction for any amount payable under a “qualified domestic minimum top‑up tax” of the jurisdiction.
The excess profit is determined by subtracting the “substance‑based income exclusion amount” (SBIEA) of the MNE group for the jurisdiction from the net GloBE income of the MNE group for the jurisdiction otherwise calculated. Generally speaking, the SBIEA is equivalent to a deduction of 5% of the total of the “eligible payroll costs” and the “eligible tangible asset” amount of the standard constituent entity. Specific calculation rules are provided for each of these items. This exclusion “is intended as a measure of the MNE’s substantive economic activities in the jurisdiction.”19 Of note, Division 9 of Part 2 of the GMTA provides transitional rules for the tax attributes and rates applicable to the substance‑based income exclusion.
In addition, special rules are provided for certain types of entities, including “investment entities” and “joint venture entities.” Divisions 5 to 7 of Part 2 of the GMTA also provide special rules relating to reorganizations and asset transfers, “multi‑parented MNE groups” and elections in relation to investment entities, respectively, which are not dealt with in this legislative summary.
Finally, Division 8 of Part 2 of the GMTA implements permanent and transitional safe harbours. Permanent safe harbours include a deeming provision whereby the top‑up amount of a constituent entity of an MNE group is deemed to be nil, in particular where a qualified domestic minimum top‑up tax is levied and such tax has exempt status as determined by the Inclusive Framework and published on the OECD website.
In general, the amount of tax payable by a person in respect of an MNE group for a fiscal year is equal to the constituent entity’s top‑up amount multiplied by the relevant parent entity’s “inclusion ratio” for the constituent entity, which ratio is calculated on the basis of certain sources of GloBE income of the constituent entity. From this amount is subtracted any portion of the constituent entity’s top‑up amount for the fiscal year that is included both in this allocable share and in the allocable share of a relevant parent entity of the MNE group through which the person or relevant parent entity, as the case may be, indirectly holds an ownership interest in the constituent entity.
Part 3 of the GMTA implements a domestic minimum top‑up tax. In general terms, and as explained by the government, this tax
allows a jurisdiction to collect the top‑up tax applicable to any low‑taxed income of its domestic entities, rather than allowing the top‑up tax to accrue to the treasuries of other countries under the IIR or UTPR.20
The GMTA further provides that the provisions of this part are to be interpreted consistently with the requirements outlined in the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy – Commentary to the Global Anti‑Base Erosion Model Rules (Pillar Two), published by the OECD on 14 March 2022, as amended from time to time.21
Generally speaking, a person must pay a tax in respect of a constituent entity of an MNE group equal to the constituent entity’s “domestic top‑up amount” for the fiscal year when
Generally speaking, the domestic top‑up amount is equal to the amount that would be the entity’s top‑up amount for the fiscal year, calculated in accordance with the provisions of the GMTA, if that amount were required to be determined and certain rules applied. In addition, the domestic top‑up amount of a constituent entity of a MNE group located in Canada is deemed to be nil in certain situations where an MNE group is in the initial phase of international activity.
Part 5 contains provisions for the implementation, administration and enforcement of the GMTA.
The following paragraphs briefly and generally describe some of the provisions of Part 5 of the GMTA, as well as some of the specific provisions of parts 2, 4 and 6 of the GMTA.
Note that the GMTA also includes provisions on interest, penalties, refunds, administrative charges under the Financial Administration Act,23 objections to assessments, appeals, inspections, offences and punishment, evidence and procedure, confidentiality of information, and collection. Most of these provisions are modelled on those of other existing tax laws.
In accordance with Division 2 of Part 5 of the GMTA, an information return in respect of a qualifying MNE group for a fiscal year, referred to as a “GIR,” must be filed with the Minister in the prescribed manner on or before the GIR due date, which is the later of either 30 June 2026, or 15 or 18 months, as the case may be, after the last day of the fiscal year. The return must be filed by the ultimate parent entity, the filing entity or each constituent entity of the MNE group located in Canada, as the case may be. Returns pertaining to the global minimum tax and the domestic minimum top‑up tax must also be filed with the Minister at the same time as the GIR, in the prescribed manner, by any person liable to pay these taxes. These returns must contain, among other things, an estimate of the tax payable. It is also possible to designate entities for different purposes: a “designated local entity,” a “designated notification entity” or a “Canadian filing entity.”
In accordance with Division 2 of Part 5 of the GMTA, tax payable under the GMTA by a person in respect of a fiscal year must be paid in Canadian dollars at the same time as the GIR is filed. Payment must generally be made electronically when the amount payable is $10,000 or more. Cases of joint and several or solidary liability are also covered in this division.
In accordance with Division 7 of Part 5 of the GMTA, every person must keep and retain for a certain period of time all “records”24 that are necessary to determine whether the person has complied with the GMTA, whether the person is or was a constituent entity of an MNE group and whether other constituent entities of the group have complied with the GMTA.
Finally, in accordance with Division 8 of Part 5 of the GMTA, the Minister may assess a person, vary an assessment, reassess a person or make additional assessments to determine any tax or other amount payable by a person under the GMTA. To do so, the Minister sends a notice of assessment to the person. The limitation period for assessments is seven years after the later of the following days: the day on which the return to which the tax or amount payable relates was filed and the day on which the Minister receives the GIR.
The GMTA contains several anti‑avoidance rules, including rules that apply to certain non‑arm’s length transfers of property. In addition, in accordance with Part 4 of the GMTA (which contains only one section), the general anti‑avoidance rule found in section 245 of the ITA applies in the context of the GMTA, with any modifications that the circumstances require.
Part 6 of the GMTA authorizes the Governor in Council to make certain regulations, including regulations prescribing anything that, by the GMTA, is to be prescribed, determined or regulated by regulation, as well as to make regulations generally to carry out the purposes and provisions of the GMTA.
Further to the enactment of the GMTA, consequential amendments are made to several statutes to add references to the GMTA. More specifically, clauses 83 to 110 amend the following statutes:
With the exception of the amendment to the Access to Information Act, which is deemed to have come into force on 31 December 2023 (clause 82(2)), all the amendments to the other acts come into force upon Royal Assent of the bill.
Clause 112 of Bill C‑69 repeals sections 2 to 5 of Schedule VI to the ETA in respect of supplies made after April 2024.
These items had been added to Schedule VI of the ETA by section 114 of the Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 137 in order to temporarily zero‑rate38 certain supplies of masks, respirators and face shields made after 6 December 2020. The goal was to “support public health during the COVID‑19 pandemic”39 and continue doing so “until their [these masks and face shields’] use is no longer broadly recommended by public health officials for the COVID‑19 pandemic.”40
As indicated in budget 2024, the excise duty on tobacco products is increasing “in addition to the automatic inflation adjustment … that took effect on April 1, 2024.”41
Clause 120(1) of Bill C‑69 amends certain provisions of Part 3.1 of the Excise Act, 2001, which imposes a tax on “inventories of cigarettes.”42 Pursuant to clauses 119(1) and 120(1), this tax is increased by $0.02 per “taxed cigarette”43 of a person held on 17 April 2024. Clauses 121(1) and 122(1) also provide that a return must be filed with the Minister of National Revenue, and where tax is payable, it must be remitted to the Receiver General no later than 30 June 2024.
Additionally, clauses 126(1), 127(1), 128(1), 129(1) and 130(1) increase the rates of duty on tobacco products and the additional duty on cigars provided for in schedules 1 and 2, respectively, of the Excise Act, 2001.
Pursuant to clauses 119(2), 120(2), 121(2), 122(2), 126(2), 127(2), 128(2), 129(2) and 130(2), these changes are deemed to have come into force on 17 April 2024.
As indicated by the government, these measures are designed to
protect the next generation from harmful, cancer‑causing habits.
…
In addition to raising revenues, a more robust federal excise duty framework for tobacco and vaping products could help to lower smoking rates towards Canada’s target of less than five per cent tobacco use by 2035, as well as lower vaping rates among younger Canadians.44
Clauses 117(1) and 117(2) and 118(1) and 118(2) amend sections 38 and 58, respectively, of the Excise Act, 2001 to empower the Minister of National Revenue to specify brands and “tobacco products”45 not commonly sold in Canada and cigarettes exported under certain brand names that
The government indicates that replacing the existing process of prescribing through regulation with the Minister’s new power to specify will “improve the administration of the current process.”48 As such, clauses 133(1) and 135(1) repeal the Regulations Relieving Special Duty on Certain Tobacco Products49 and the Regulations Respecting Prescribed Brands of Manufactured Tobacco and Prescribed Cigarettes, respectively.50
Under clauses 117(3), 118(3), 133(2) and 135(2), these changes come into force on the first day of the month after the month in which the bill receives Royal Assent.
Clause 125 amends section 211(6)(e)(x) of the Excise Act, 2001 to allow an “official” to provide any “confidential information,” as those terms are defined in section 211(1) of the same Act, to another official for the administration or enforcement of the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act.51
This amendment comes into force on the date of Royal Assent and is intended to “enhance collaboration between the Canada Revenue Agency and Health Canada in their respective responsibilities with regard to tobacco and vaping products.”52
Clause 134(1) amends section 4.01 of the Stamping and Marking of Tobacco, Cannabis and Vaping Products Regulations53 to “require tobacco prescribed persons to file information returns for tobacco excise stamps.”54
Pursuant to clause 134(2), this measure comes into force on the first day of the month after the month in which the bill receives Royal Assent. The goal is to harmonize the obligations of prescribed persons that are issued vaping excise stamps with those of prescribed persons that are issued tobacco excise stamps, in order to “improve controls and accountability for tobacco excise stamps.”55
Clauses 131(1), 131(2), 132(1) and 132(2) increase by 12% the duty on “vaping products”56 provided for in Schedule 8 to the Excise Act, 2001.
Pursuant to clauses 131(3) and 132(3), this increase comes into force or is deemed to have come into force on 1 July 2024, “along with the implementation of a coordinated taxation regime in Ontario, Quebec, the Northwest Territories, and Nunavut.”57
Clauses 113(1), 123(1) and 124(1) add sections 170.2(2.2) and 170(2.3) to the Excise Act58 and sections 123.1(2.2), 123.1(2.3), 135.1(2.2) and 135.1(2.3) to the Excise Act, 2001, respectively. As a result of these changes, the rate used in each of the relevant formulas to calculate the annual adjustment of the duty on beer, malt liquor, ethyl alcohol, spirits and wine is temporarily capped at 2% for the years 2024 and 2025.
Clauses 113(2), 123(2) and 124(2) specify that these changes are deemed to have come into force on 1 April 2024.
Clauses 114(1), 115(1) and 116(1) temporarily cut by half the rates of duty applicable to a hectolitre of beer or malt liquor under Part II of the Excise Act for the first 15,000 hectolitres of beer or malt liquor brewed in Canada. Pursuant to clauses 114(3), 115(3) and 116(3), this change is deemed to have come into force on 1 April 2024.
Pursuant to clauses 114(2), 114(4), 115(2), 115(4), 116(2) and 116(4), this reduction ends as of 1 April 2026.
In general, the underused housing tax (UHT) is an annual 1% tax on the value of residential real estate considered to be vacant or underused. Obligations to file documents and/or pay the tax will apply to property owners unless they are explicitly “excluded” by certain criteria in the Underused Housing Tax Act (UHTA), such as being a registered charity, or a Canadian company listed on a stock exchange. Residential property owners who are Canadian citizens or permanent residents are also excluded so long as they do not own the property through their capacity as a trustee of a trust (other than a personal representative in respect of a deceased individual) or as a partner of a partnership.
Properties that are not excluded may nevertheless be “exempt” from the tax in certain situations, such as being occupied at least 180 days in the calendar year, being inhabitable due to renovations for certain periods, or being inaccessible during certain times of the year. Individuals and corporations that are not explicitly excluded must still file an underused housing tax return even if no tax is payable because they meet a listed exemption during that calendar year.
Clause 136(1) amends section 2 of the UHTA to broaden the definition of “excluded owners” to also include trustees of “specified Canadian trusts,” partners of “specified Canadian partnerships,” “specified Canadian corporations,” and Canadian corporations with all or substantially all of the shares being owned or controlled by a trust and/or corporation that are excluded owners. Specified Canadian trusts, partnerships and corporations are already defined in section 2 of the UHTA for the purposes of exempting them from tax liability under the Act. Clarifying amendments are also made to the definitions of “specified Canadian partnership” and “specified Canadian trust” in section 2 by clause 136(4) and 136(5), respectively.
Clause 136(6) deems this measure to have come into force on 1 January 2023, and accordingly would apply in respect of 2023 and subsequent years.
Under section 47(1) of the UHTA, failing to file the required return under the UHTA carries a penalty equal to the greater of a fixed value of $5,000 for individuals – or $10,000 if the owner is not an individual – and 5% of the tax levied under the UHTA applicable for that calendar year, and 3% of the tax levied under the UHTA applicable to the property for the calendar year for each calendar month the declaration is past due.
Clause 141(1) amends section 47(1)(a) of the UHTA to reduce the fixed value portion of these penalties from $5,000 to $1,000 if the person is an individual, and from $10,000 to $2,000 if the person is not an individual.
Clause 141(3) deems this measure to have come into force on 1 January 2022.
Properties that are not excluded from the application of UHTA may nevertheless be exempt from the tax in certain situations that are found in sections 6(7) to 6(9) of the Act. In particular, section 6(7)(m) of the UHTA specifies that no tax will be payable under the Act for a residential property that is located in a prescribed area under prescribed conditions.
Clause 146(3) amends section 2(3) of the Underused Housing Tax Regulations59 to add to the prescribed areas and prescribed conditions applicable to section 6(7)(m) persons – called “operators” – who are carrying on a business in Canada and are holding residential property primarily to provide a place of residence or lodging to their employees, contractors, and/or subcontractors in a location where they are required for the performance of their duties.
Clause 146(6) deems this measure to apply to the 2023 and subsequent calendar years.
Clauses 147(1) to 147(3) of Bill C‑69 amend section 107 of the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act (GGPPA)60 in order to enable federal officials to provide other federal officials with confidential information in respect of a provincial Crown, or its provincial Crown agent, that is not in compliance, or has publicly stated an intention of non‑compliance with the fuel charge.
Clauses 147(4) and 148 add sections 107(9.1) and 107(9.2) and amend section 134(2) of the GGPPA to authorize the public disclosure by the Minister of National Revenue of certain information in respect of a provincial Crown, or its provincial Crown agent, that is not in compliance with the federal fuel charge requirements or has publicly stated an intention of non‑compliance with those requirements. Once publicly disclosed by the Minister of National Revenue, the information is no longer considered confidential. Examples of information that may be published include the value of an amount payable, or the quantity of fuel or combustible waste delivered, imported or brought into a listed province, used or otherwise quantified for purposes of the GGPPA.
Clause 149 of Bill C‑69 amends section 237(2) of the Budget Implementation Act, 2022, No. 161 in order to extend the temporary prohibition on foreign investment in the Canadian housing sector from 1 January 2025 to 1 January 2027. The legislative change amends the repeal of the Prohibition on the Purchase of Residential Property by Non‑Canadians Act62 from the second to the fourth anniversary of the Act’s coming into force, which was on 1 January 2023.
Section 11 of the National Housing Act (NHA)63 stipulates that the total of the outstanding insured amounts of all insured loans may not exceed $300 billion and any additional amounts authorized by Parliament under an appropriation Act or other Act of Parliament on or after 1 April 1997. Additionally, for greater clarity, section 11.1 of the NHA sets the maximum total of the outstanding insured amounts of all insured loans at $750 billion.
Clause 150 of Bill C‑69 amends section 11 of the NHA so that the total of the outstanding insured amounts of all insured loans may not exceed $800 billion (instead of $300 billion previously) and any additional amounts authorized by Parliament under an appropriation Act or other Act of Parliament on or after the day on which this bill comes into force.
Clause 151 repeals section 11.1 of the NHA regarding the $750‑billion limit for the maximum total of the outstanding insured amounts of all insured loans.
Separately, the COVID‑19 Emergency Response Act (CERA),64 which came into force on 25 March 2020, contains provisions (sections 47(2), 49 and 50) stipulating that the $300‑billion limit in section 11 of NHA be amended to $150 billion (section 47(2)) and section 11.1 be repealed (section 49) five years after the CERA comes into force (section 50). Clause 153 of Bill C‑69 provides coordinating amendments related to the CERA. If clause 150 of Bill C‑69 comes into force before section 47(2) of the CERA, all three aforementioned CERA provisions are repealed. If section 49 of the CERA comes into force before clause 151 of Bill C‑69, clause 151 is deemed never to have come into force and is repealed. Finally, if section 49 of the CERA comes into force on the same day as clause 151 of Bill C‑69, all three aforementioned CERA provisions are deemed never to have come into force and are repealed.
Section 4 of the Borrowing Authority Act (BAA)65 stipulates the maximum amount of money that the government is allowed to borrow and the types of borrowing that are included in the borrowing limit. Specifically, section 4(b) states that the money borrowed by way of the issue and sale of Canada Mortgage Bonds that are guaranteed by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation counts towards the borrowing limit.
Clause 152 of Bill C‑69 amends section 4(b) of the BAA to exclude Canada Mortgage Bonds that are purchased by Minister of Finance and are not resold from the calculation of the borrowing limit except for the purpose of providing a source of temporary liquidity.
Clause 154 authorizes the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development to enter into bilateral agreements with provinces regarding a national school food program. Clause 154 also provides that any amount payable for the 2024–2025 fiscal year under such an agreement is payable out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund and that the maximum aggregate amount that may be paid for all provinces is $70.1 million.
Canada Student Loan forgiveness is available to eligible health professionals working in underserved rural or remote communities. Eligible professions include:
Through this program, family doctors or residents can receive up to $60,000 in loan forgiveness over five years, and nurses and nurse practitioners can receive up to $30,000.66
Division 4 of Part 4 amends the Canada Student Loans Act (CSLA)67 and the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act (CSFAA)68 to extend eligibility for Canada Student Loan forgiveness to additional professions in child care, health and social services. When announcing this measure in budget 2024, the government highlighted its intention to “increase access to early learning and child care in rural and remote communities,”69 as well as to address “workforce challenges in rural and remote communities … so that all Canadians can benefit from greater access to the full suite of health and social services they need.”70
The CSLA applies to loans issued to students up to 1 August 1995, while the CSFAA applies to financial assistance issued to students as of 1 August 1995.
Clause 156 of Bill C‑69 amends section 11.1(1) of the CSLA to allow the Minister of Employment and Social Development to forgive portions of guaranteed student loans for eligible borrowers in 10 additional professions:
Similarly, clause 160 amends section 9.2(1) of the CSFAA to allow the Minister to forgive portions of student loans for the same 10 professions.
Further, clause 157 amends section 17(r) of the CSLA to allow Governor in Council to make regulations defining each of the 10 professions added by the bill. Similarly, clause 158 amends section 2(2) of the CSFAA to indicate that each of the 10 professions have meanings assigned in the Canada Student Financial Assistance Regulations.71
Clause 161 indicates that these changes come into force on a day fixed by an order of the Governor in Council.
A Registered Education Savings Plan (RESP) is a federal‑government‑sponsored long‑term savings account that allows individuals to save for a child’s, or their own, education after high school. The Canada Learning Bond (CLB) is a benefit that an eligible child may receive in their RESP. Eligible adults born in 2004 or later may also receive the CLB for themselves until the age of 21. The CLB can provide a lifetime maximum of $2,000.72 Among other requirements, the beneficiary must be from a family with low income.73
In budget 2024, the federal government committed to “introduce automatic enrolment in the CLB for eligible children who do not have a RESP opened for them by the time the child turns four,”74 noting that it would allow 130,000 additional children to receive the CLB. It also announced that it would “extend the age from 20 to 30 years to retroactively claim the Canada Learning Bond,” allowing “those who start their post‑secondary education later to benefit from the government’s contribution to their education savings.”75
Clause 163(2) of Bill C‑69 adds new sections 6(1.1) to 6(1.4) to the Canada Education Savings Act (CESA)76 to provide for automatic enrolment in the CLB for eligible children. Specifically, new section 6(1.1) stipulates that if a child is born after 2023, the child’s Social Insurance Number has been provided to the Minister of Employment and Social Development, and the child is not a beneficiary under an RESP, but would otherwise be eligible for a CLB, then the Minister must notify the child’s primary caregiver that the child is eligible and that an RESP will be opened for the child for the purpose of paying the CLB.
New sections 6(1.2) to 6(1.4) of the CESA outline requirements pertaining to the opening of an RESP by the Minister. Section 6(1.2) specifies when the Minister must open an RESP for an eligible child. If the child is younger than three years old on the day the Minister determines they are eligible, the Minister must open the RESP no earlier than the day the child turns four, or no earlier than another day determined by the Minister (section 6(1.2)(a)). If the child is three years old or older, the Minister must open the RESP no earlier than 365 days after the Minister determines the child to be eligible, or no earlier than another day determined by the Minister (section 6(1.2)(b)).
New section 6(1.3) indicates that a child’s primary caregiver or the primary caregiver’s cohabiting spouse or common‑law partner may refuse the payment of a CLB, in which case the Minister must not open an RESP in respect of that child. However, new section 6(1.4) clarifies that this refusal does not prevent an application for the CLB from being made in respect of the child. In addition, section 6(1.3) indicates that the Minister must not open an RESP for a child if that child is already a beneficiary.
Clause 163(3) adds section 6(1.5) to the CESA, clarifying that if the Minister opens an RESP as described above, the Minister may make CLB payments into the RESP. Further, clause 165 adds new section 7.01 to the CESA to specify that a CLB paid by the Minister as a result of automatic RESP enrolment may only be paid in respect of a beneficiary who is resident in Canada immediately before the payment is made.
Clause 166 adds new section 7.1 to the CESA, indicating that the Minister may enter into an agreement with a person regarding the administration of an RESP, and providing for payment from the Minister to the person responsible for the administration of the RESP. This applies to RESPs opened by the Minister under the new automatic enrolment provisions, or “any other registered [RESP] identified by the Minister.” Clause 167 amends section 9 of the CESA to specify that payment made under such an agreement must be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
Clause 168 adds new section 12.2 to the CESA permitting the Minister to collect the Social Insurance Number of a person who would be eligible for the CLB if they were a beneficiary, and – if that person is a child – of their primary caregiver and the primary caregiver’s cohabiting spouse or common‑law partner.
Clause 169 adds new sections 13(c.1) to 13(c.5), as well as section 13(c.31), to the CESA to give regulatory powers to the Governor in Council pertaining to the new provisions on automatic enrolment.
Clause 170 makes consequential amendments to the definitions of “education savings plan” and “subscriber” in section 146.1(1) of the Income Tax Act.
Clause 163(1) amends section 6(1) of the CESA to extend the maximum age that a person can apply for a CLB from 20 to 30.
Clause 171 indicates that the amendments in clauses 162, 163(2), 166, 167, 168, 169(1) and 170 come into force on a day to be fixed by an order of the Governor in Council. Clauses 163(1), 163(3), 163(4), 164, 165 and 169(2) come into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council that is later than the day fixed in relation to the clauses listed above, and is also later than 31 March 2028.
Clause 172 amends section 8.3(5) of the Bretton Woods and Related Agreements Act.77 The maximum amount of financial assistance that may be provided under section 8.3(5)(a) of the Act in respect of any particular foreign state is increased from $7 billion to $15 billion. The maximum amount of financial assistance that may be provided under section 8.3(5)(b) of the Act in respect of all foreign states is increased from $14 billion to $22 billion.
Clauses 173, 174 and 175 amend the Bretton Woods and Related Agreements Act, the International Development (Financial Institutions) Assistance Act,78 and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development Agreement Act,79 respectively.
Clause 173 amends section 7 of the Bretton Woods and Related Agreements Act. The amount of the payment that the Minister of Finance may provide to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in respect of Canada’s quota is increased from 11,023,900,000 Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) to 16,535,900,000 SDRs. The SDR is an international reserve asset created by the IMF. Its value is based on five currencies: the United States dollar, the euro, the Chinese renminbi, the Japanese yen and the British pound sterling. Quotas determine the maximum amount of financial resources a member is obliged to provide to the IMF.80
Clause 174(1) amends section 3(c) of the English version of the International Development (Financial Institutions) Assistance Act to refer to “His” Majesty.
Clause 174(2) amends section 3 of the Act to increase the range of financial instruments that the Minister of Foreign Affairs may use to provide financial assistance under section 3 to the international financial institutions listed in the Act’s Schedule. The amendments make provision for the Minister of Foreign Affairs, with the written concurrence of the Minister of Finance, to provide such financial assistance by way of the issuance of guarantees and in any other manner that the Minister of Foreign Affairs considers appropriate.
Clause 175 amends section 6(2) of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development Agreement Act. Clause 175(1) amends section 6(2) of the Act to replace a provision for the Minister of Finance to “provide further payments to the Bank, in respect of supplementary subscriptions of shares” with a provision for the Minister to “provide financial assistance to the Bank.”
Clause 175(2) amends section 6(2) of the Act to increase the range of financial instruments that the Minister of Finance may use to provide financial assistance to the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development under section 6 of the Act. The amendments make provision for the Minister of Finance to provide such assistance through the purchase of shares on behalf of the Crown, the issuance of guarantees, and in any other manner that the Minister of Finance considers appropriate.
Clause 175(3) amends section 6(3) of the Act, which sets limits on the payments the Minister of Finance may make for the purposes of section 6(2). The limit on payments of US$85,988,945.20, or any greater amount that is specified in an appropriation Act, is replaced by an aggregate amount not exceeding, in any given period, the amount specified in respect of that period in an appropriation by Parliament.
Clause 176 adds new section 7.1 to the International Financial Assistance Act,81 which provides that foreign exchange losses accrued in transactions made under sections 3, 4 or 5 of the Act must be charged to the Consolidated Revenue Fund.82
Clause 176 also adds new section 7.2 to the International Financial Assistance Act, which authorizes the Minister of International Development to make payments to Development Finance Institute Canada (FinDev) in relation to programs referred to in sections 4 and 5 of the Act. These payments may not exceed $720 million in the aggregate, or any greater amount specified in an appropriation Act, and are to be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund. FinDev is required to maintain a separate account of all amounts received in this way, as well as certain related amounts and disbursements, and may be required to pay any such amount to the Receiver General for credit to the Consolidated Revenue Fund. New section 7.2 also adds a definition of FinDev.
Clause 177 adds new section 9 to the International Financial Assistance Act. New section 9 authorizes the Governor in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister for International Development and with the concurrence of the Minister of Finance, to regulate payments made under new section 7.2.
Clause 178(1) amends section 24(1) of the Export Development Act by lowering the limit for total liabilities and obligations allowed in respect of Canada Account83 transactions from $115 billion to $100 billion. The Canada Account is used to support export transactions that exceed the financial or risk capacity of Export Development Canada’s corporate account, but that have been determined by the Minister for International Trade to be in Canada’s national interest.
Clause 178(2) repeals sections 24(1.1) and 24(1.2) of the Act, which made provision for the Minister of Finance to determine the limit for total liabilities and obligations under section 24 of the Act and to have that limit published in the Canada Gazette.
Division 10 of Part 4 amends section 85(2) of the Financial Administration Act (FAA) to exempt Crown corporations incorporated or acquired by or on behalf of the Communications Security Establishment from divisions I to IV of the FAA. Division I of the FAA concerns the corporate affairs of Crown corporations, including their accountability to Parliament; Division II concerns Crown corporations’ directors and officers; Division III concerns Crown corporations’ financial management and control; and Division IV concerns general provisions for Crown corporations, including provisions for commercially detrimental information, sanctions and fraud.
Section 85(2) of the FAA currently allows the same exemptions for Crown corporations incorporated or acquired by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and by “any service established by an Act of Parliament to collect information and intelligence respecting the security of Canada.”
The FAA “provdes the cornerstone of the legal framework for financial management within the Government of Canada.”84 Specifically, section 35 of the FAA provides a definition of “instruction for payment,” while section 159 provides a definition of “other financial institution” that accepts or receives an instruction payment pursuant to section 35, as well as prohibits any charge for certain cheques except arrangements between the Government of Canada and a bank or other financial institution concerning compensation for its services or interest on deposits of the Government of Canada. Section 160 allows the Governor in Council to make regulations with respect to the provisions of the FAA.
Clause 180 of Bill C‑69 adds new section 159(4) to the FAA to require deposit‑taking financial institutions to disclose information as prescribed by the regulations in customer account statements and other transaction records.
Clause 181 adds new section 160(2) to the FAA to allow the Governor in Council to make regulations prescribing classes of financial institutions information disclosure requirements as referred to in section 159(4).
In its 7 February 2023 plan regarding health funding to provinces and territories, the federal government indicated that it would guarantee that the Canada Health Transfer (CHT) will grow at a minimum rate of 5% per year over the 2023–2024 to 2027–2028 period, which “will be provided through annual top‑up payments as required.”85 Previously, CHT payments have been growing in line with the three‑year moving average of nominal GDP growth, but not less than 3% per year.
Section 24.1 of the Federal–Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act (FPFA)86 provides the formula for calculating total annual CHT payments. Clause 182 adds new section 24.1(1)(a)(vi), which provides a formula for calculating an annual CHT top‑up payment to qualifying provinces and territories so that CHT payments grow at a minimum rate of 5% per year over the 2024–2025 to 2027–2028 period. It also adds new sections 24.1(1)(a)(vii) and 24.1(1)(a)(viii) to provide that the last CHT top‑up payment grows in line with the three‑year moving average of nominal GDP growth, but not less than 3% per year, in 2028–2029 and subsequent fiscal years. The term qualifying province, defined under new section 24.1(1.1), is a province or territory that has taken steps to implement certain measures respecting the collection, sharing and use of certain health information in accordance with the plan announced on 7 February 2023, as confirmed by the federal Minister of Health to the Minister of Finance before 1 December 2024.
Lastly, clause 183 adds new section 24.21(2) to provide that the new annual CHT top‑up payments are to be allocated on an equal per capita basis among provinces and territories, like existing CHT payments, and make other clarifying amendments to section 24.21.
Fall Economic Statement 2023 announced the federal government’s intentions to introduce legislation that will “require large federally‑regulated pension plans to disclose the distribution of their investments, both by jurisdiction and asset‑type per jurisdiction, to the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions ” According to the fall economic statement, “[t]his information will be made publicly available, and the government will engage with provinces and territories to discuss similar disclosures by Canada’s largest pension plans in a simple and uniform format.”87
Clause 184 adds section 40.1 to the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 198588 to require that the Superintendent of Financial Institutions publish certain information relating to pension plan investments of federally regulated pension plans. It is assumed that forthcoming regulations will clarify the level of detail the information will contain and whether it will, indeed, require disclosure of distribution of investments by jurisdiction and asset type as stated in the fall economic statement.
Clause 185 adds section 43.1 to the Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act89 to require that plan administrators of federally regulated pooled registered pension plans provide information related to a member’s right to terminate their membership as well as other required information about the plan that is set out in the Pooled Registered Pension Plans Regulations90 when they become members of a pooled registered pension plan. This amendment ensures that members who join a federally regulated pooled registered pension plan, through other means than through their employer, receive this information, as these individuals are not currently covered by this provision in the legislation.
Clause 186 specifies that these changes come into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.
Division 14 of Part 4 introduces amendments to the Canada Pension Plan (CPP)91 as recommended by federal and provincial finance ministers following their 2022–2024 triennial review of the plan.92
Clauses 187(1) and 187(2) of Bill C‑69 revise the definitions of “child” and “dependent child” in section 42(1) of the CPP to include parenting time and decision‑making responsibility, on the one hand, and part‑time attendance at a recognized educational institution, on the other. The definition for “decision‑making responsibility” is derived from the Divorce Act, while clause 187(3) amends section 42(1) of the CPP to clarify that “parenting time” includes time under the care of the parent when that parent is not physically present.
Clause 188 adds new section 44.2 to stipulate that, as of 1 January 2025, the survivor pension is not payable after a legal separation (without divorce) where there has been a division of their CPP pensionable earnings.
Clause 189 adds new section 57(1.2) to grant a $2,500 top‑up to the death benefit (for a total death benefit of $5,000) for a death after 31 December 2024 in cases where the contributor had not received a CPP or provincial retirement or disability pension and no survivor pension is payable.
Clause 190 amends section 59 to specify that the monthly benefit for a disabled contributor’s dependent child (or orphan) who is a part‑time student amounts to half the benefit of a full‑time student.
Clause 191, by amending sections 60(3) and 60(5)(b) of the CPP, replaces “custody and control” of a child with “decision‑making responsibility,” and specifies that a person with a disability who has decision‑making responsibility for a child must share at least 20% of parenting time for that child in order to receive the benefit. The clause also adds new section 60(11.1) to remove the time limit for applying for the disabled contributor’s child benefit in cases where the contributor is deemed “incapable of forming or expressing an intention to make an application.”
Clause 194(1) amends section 76(1)(c) to maintain eligibility for the disabled contributor’s child benefit after the contributor transitions from the disability benefit to the Old Age Security benefit at age 65.
Clause 195 makes consequential amendments to definition of “child” in the Canada Pension Plan Regulations.93
Clause 196 notes that these amendments will come into force on a day to be fixed by the Governor in Council, except those relating to the new terminology and application time limit for child benefits, which would come into force on Royal Assent of this bill.
Since 1 April 2000, the Public Sector Pension Investment Board (PSPIB) has managed the amounts transferred to it by the Government of Canada on behalf of the three public sector pension plans: the public service pension plan, the Canadian Forces pension plan and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police pension plan. Pension benefits for beneficiaries of the public sector pension plans are paid by active contributions from the employer and plan members. Net contributions are then sent to the Public Service Pension Investment Board for investment in capital markets.
Clause 197 adds section 5.2(1) to the Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act94 to provide a mechanism for the recall of funds from the Public Sector Pension Investment Board to the Consolidated Revenue Fund under the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act,95 the Public Service Superannuation Act,96 and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act.97 Section 5.2(2) is also added to specify that the respective ministers of the pension plans be consulted prior to a recall occurring.
Consumer‑driven banking, sometimes referred to as open banking, is a framework that allows individuals to transfer their financial data through an application programming interface (API) to approved service providers, such as financial services companies, when they choose to do so. According to the Department of Finance, consumer‑driven banking “enables consumers to securely use data‑driven financial services that can help them better manage their finances and improve their financial outcomes.”98 In 2018, an Advisory Committee on Open Banking was tasked by the government to conduct a review into the merits of open banking. It released its report on 4 August 2021.99
On 9 November 2023, Ryan Williams, Member of Parliament for Bay of Quinte, Ontario, introduced Bill C‑365, An Act respecting the implementation of a consumer‑led banking system for Canadians,100 which would require the Minister of Finance to table a report in the House of Commons and the Senate if the federal government had not introduced legislation implementing consumer‑driven banking within six months of the introduction of Bill C‑365. In Fall Economic Statement 2023, the federal government announced its intentions to introduce legislation through budget 2024 to establish a consumer‑driven banking framework.101
As part of budget 2024, the federal government released its plan for the implementation of a consumer‑driven banking framework with six core framework elements: governance, scope, accreditation, common rules, national security and a technical standard.102 The document also noted that legislative implementation will occur in two phases with the governance, scope, and criteria and process for the technical standard being included in the first phase and that the remaining elements of the framework will be introduced in the fall of 2024. Division 16 of Part 4 of Bill C‑69 contains the first of these two phases with the establishment of the Consumer‑Driven Banking Act (CDBA) and amendments to the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada Act (FCACA).103
Clause 198 establishes the Consumer‑Driven Banking Act and sets out elements pertaining to the scope and process for the designation of the technical standards body. Section 4 of the CDBA specifies that it applies in respect of data that relates to the following financial products:
The CDBA explicitly excludes “derived data,” defined in section 2 as data that has been enhanced by a participating entity to significantly increase its usefulness or commercial value. Section 5 also specifies that data is to be shared “in a manner that does not enable the participating entity that receives the data to edit the data on servers that are used by the participating entity that provides the data.” Furthermore, section 7 of the CDBA requires the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada (FCAC) to maintain a public registry of participating entities in the consumer‑driven banking framework.
Section 8 of the CDBA also authorizes the Minister of Finance to designate a technical standards body responsible for creating, maintaining, and overseeing the technical standards that facilitate secure data flow within the scope of the CDBA. This body will set the rules for data exchange between participating entities. According to section 8(3) of the CDBA, the process for designating the technical standards body is by order, which must be published in the Canada Gazette. Other key obligations of the technical standards body in section 8 of the CDBA include submitting annual reports to the newly created Senior Deputy Commissioner of the FCAC and promptly notifying of any significant changes impacting the technical standards body or the technical standards. When designating the technical standards body, section 8(2) indicates that the Minister of Finance must consider the following principles:
Sections 9 and 10 of the CDBA specifies that this designation must be reviewed every three years by the Minister of Finance and that the designation may be revoked on the advice of the Senior Deputy Commissioner, if the Minister is of the opinion that the designation poses a risk to national security or to the integrity or security of the financial system in Canada, or if it is no longer consistent with the principles outlined above.
The FCAC has existing supervision powers under the FCACA to safeguard consumers in their interactions with financial institutions. These powers include imposing penalties, seeking a sentence of imprisonment, publicly naming violators and directing banks to take specific actions to rectify violations. Division 16 of Part 4 broadens its mandate to capture activities under the consumer‑driven banking framework and the technical standards body.
Clause 199 adds the definition of “participating entity,” “Senior Deputy Commissioner,” and “technical standards body” to section 2 of the FCACA. Clause 200 amends section 2.1 of the FCACA, outlining the purpose of the Act, to add participating entities and the technical standards body to the list of entities supervised by the FCAC, and adds the “safety and security of consumer‑driven banking” to the list of items to which the FCAC contributes protection. Clause 201 adds section 3(4) to the FCACA to include the objects of the FCAC in relation to consumer‑driven banking:
Clause 202 adds consumer‑driven banking to the items of concern in section 5.1(1) for which the Minister of Finance may give written direction to the FCAC.
Clause 203 adds a new section 7.2 to the FCACA, which creates a “Senior Deputy Commissioner for Consumer‑Driven Banking,” who will be responsible for the supervision of the framework. While the Commissioner of the FCAC retains full administrative control of the FCAC and will continue to report to the Minister of Finance and to Parliament, the new Senior Deputy Commissioner is responsible for the supervision of consumer‑driven banking, with powers to collect necessary personal information and to publish prescribed information in respect of consumer‑driven banking. Given that the consumer‑driven banking framework will permit credit unions regulated by provincial governments to opt into the federal framework, the Senior Deputy Commissioner would regulate such entities solely for the purpose of consumer‑driven banking and would not subject them to direct oversight by the FCAC.
Clauses 204 to 207 provide the Senior Deputy Commissioner with the powers necessary for human resources and personnel, for the establishment of necessary advisory committees and for remuneration. Clauses 209 to 211 amend sections 14 and 16 of the FCACA to include the Senior Deputy Commissioner to the sections that prohibit the Commissioner of the FCAC in holding interest in, receiving grants or gratuities from any of the organization for which it is responsible.
Clause 212 adds new sections 17(5) and 17(6) to the FCACA to specify that specified information received from a participating entity, the external complaints body, or the technical standards body in performing his or her duties under the Act is confidential.
Clause 213 amends section 18(1) of the FCACA to provide for the assessment and collection of expenses with respect to participating entities.
Clauses 214 to 226 provide for the powers of the Senior Deputy Commissioner with respect to violations of the CDBA and to determine respective penalties under the FCACA and other authorities of the FCAC such as the publication of the violations. They also prohibit non‑participating entities from claiming that they are part of the framework and any participating entity from knowingly providing false or misleading information.
Clauses 213 to 221 and 224 come into force on dates to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.
After the global financial crisis, the Financial Stability Board recommended reform of major interest rate benchmarks to ensure their robustness and reliability. As part of this reform, the Canadian Alternative Reference Rate Working Group, which is co‑chaired by representatives from the Bank of Canada and the banking sector, is replacing the Canadian Dollar Offered Rate (CDOR) with the Canadian Overnight Repo Rate Average, known as CORRA, effective 28 June 2024. Budget 2024 proposes changes to the Bank Act104 to update certain definitions to reflect the phase‑out of CDOR.
Clause 228(1) amends the definition of “deposit‑type instrument” in section 627.01(1) of the Bank Act to replace “bankers’ acceptance rate” with “interest rate benchmark.” Clause 228(2) proposes the same amendment for the definition of “principal‑protected note” in section 627.01(1) of the Bank Act.
Clause 228(3) defines “interest rate benchmark,” which is added to section 627.01(1) of the Bank Act, as:
a rate that is determined from time to time by reference to an assessment of one or more underlying interests, is made available to the public, either free of charge or on payment, and is used for reference for determining the interest payable, or other sums that are due, under loan agreements or other financial contracts or instruments.
Clause 229 amends sections 627.78(1)(b)(ii) and 627.78(1)(b)(iii) of the Bank Act, which address the issuance of deposit‑type instruments, principal‑protected notes or another prescribed product, to also replace “banker’s acceptance rate” with “interest rate benchmark.”
Clause 230 amends section 17(3) of the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions Act105 to increase the maximum amount that can be advanced to the Office from the Consolidated Revenue Fund from $40 million to $100 million.
Section 18 of the Bank of Canada Act sets out the business and powers of the Bank of Canada (the Bank). In particular, section 18(c) and 18(d) provide that the Bank may buy and sell securities issued or guaranteed by the Government of Canada, any province, the United States, Japan, the United Kingdom, or any member state of the European Union. Section 18(g) describes the circumstances under which the Bank may buy and sell from or to any person, securities and any other financial instruments for the purposes of conducting monetary policy or promoting the stability of the Canadian financial system. Clause 231 adds new section 18.01 to clarify that the Bank may enter into a repurchase, reverse repurchase or buy‑sellback agreement in exercising these powers. Clause 231 also adds new section 18.02 which states that no act of the Bank, including a transfer of property, is invalid only because the Bank was without the capacity or power to so act.
Clauses 232 and 233 of Bill C‑69 increase the maximum fine from $5,000 to $100,000 for a corporation that is found guilty of an offence under the Canada Business Corporations Act106 relating to the register and disclosure of information regarding individuals with significant control, (amended sections 21.1(6) and 21.31(5)). This ensures that penalty provisions are consistent with those under section 21.21 of the Canada Business Corporations Act.
Clause 234 amends section 21.4(5) of the Canada Business Corporations Act to align it with Canada’s criminal sentencing policy.107 The clause distinguishes between punishment terms on summary conviction and on indictment for a person who commits an offence under section 21.4, relating to sending information regarding individuals with significant control.
The Canada Labour Code (CLC)108 is divided into four parts: Part I (Industrial Relations), Part II (Occupational Health and Safety), Part III (Labour Standards) and Part IV (Administrative Monetary Penalties). Parts I to IV of the CLC apply to workplaces in the federally regulated private sectors. The federally regulated public sector, which includes the federal public service and Parliament, is only covered under Parts II and IV of the CLC.109
Clauses 235, 239 and 242 of Bill C‑69 amend the application provisions of Parts I, II and III of the CLC to introduce provisions related to a presumption of employee status. These presumption provisions state that “a person who is paid remuneration by an employer is presumed to be their employee unless the contrary is proved by the employer” (new sections 6.1(1), 123.2(1) and 167.01(1)).
For the purposes of Part I of the CLC, the presumption does not apply to a person who performs management functions or is employed in a confidential capacity in matters relating to industrial relations (new section 6.1(1)). In addition, the presumption does not apply for the purposes of a prosecution under Part I, II or III of the CLC (new sections 6.1(2), 123.2(2) and 167.01(2)).
These clauses also provide that if, in any proceeding other than a prosecution, or in any proceeding under Part IV regarding a violation related to Part II or III of the CLC, an employer alleges that a person is not their employee, the burden of proof is on the employer (new sections 6.2 and 123.3, and amended section 167.2).
Clauses 236, 240 and 242 introduce or modify prohibition provisions, whereby “an employer is prohibited from treating an employee as if they were not their employee” (new sections 96.1 and 125.4, and amended section 167.1). Note that the current version of section 167.1 prohibits the employer from treating their employee as if they were not their employee “in order to avoid their obligations under this Part or to deprive the employee of their rights under this Part.” The requirement that the employer prove that they intended to misclassify the employee is therefore removed.
Clauses 237, 238 and 241 of the bill introduce or amend provisions with regard to complaints under Parts I and II of the CLC, as follows.
Clause 237 of the bill amends section 97(1)(a) of the CLC to allow a person or an organization to make a complaint in writing to the Canada Industrial Relations Board about the contravention of the new prohibition provision under Part I of the CLC. Clauses 238(1) and 238(2) allow the Board, through an order, to require the employer to cease the contravention and to pay the employee a sum that is equivalent to the salary that would have been paid to that person but for the contravention (amended section 99(1) and new section 99(1)(g)).
Clause 241(2) of the bill introduces new section 127.1(8.1) to allow an employee to make a complaint in writing to the Head of Compliance and Enforcement if they believe that their employer has contravened the new prohibition provision under Part II of the CLC. They must do so within six months of learning about the action or circumstance giving rise to the complaint. Clause 241(1) amends section 127.1(1) of the CLC to allow an employee to exercise this recourse without having to first make the complaint to their supervisor. Finally, clause 241(3) amends section 127.1(9) to require the Head to investigate the complaint unless it relates to an occurrence of harassment and violence.
Clauses 243 and 244 of the bill are transitional provisions stipulating that the presumption of employee status and the burden of proof provisions do not apply to any proceedings started before the bill receives Royal Assent, and that the amended prohibition provision under Part III of the CLC only applies to proceedings regarding a contravention occurring on or after the date of Royal Assent.
Clause 248 of Bill C‑69 introduces a new division under Part III of the CLC: Division I.2, entitled “Policy on Disconnecting – Work‑related Communication” (new sections 177.2 to 177.8). New Division I.2 requires an employer to establish a policy on disconnecting, which must include the following elements listed under new section 177.2(1) of the CLC:
The employer must update the policy every three years (new section 177.3). The development and update of the policy must be done in consultation with employees or, where employees are unionized, with the trade union (new sections 177.4(1) and 177.4(3)). The employer must also keep a record of information related to the consultation process and to the policy development and updates (new section 177.5). Finally, the employer must post the policy where it can be easily accessed and provide a copy of the policy (in paper, electronic form, or other accessible format) to every employee (new section 177.6).
The employer may exclude from the application of the policy any employees who are already exempted from certain hours of work provisions under Division I of Part III of the CLC or to whom Division I does not apply (new section 177.2(2)). The new division will not apply to employees subject to collective agreements where the parties agree, in writing, that the collective agreement meets the policy requirements under new section 177.2(1) of the CLC (new section 177.2(3)).
New section 177.8 stipulates that the Governor in Council may make regulations to prescribe the form of the policy and any updates, any other elements that are to be included in the policy and the way the policy is to be posted. Clause 255 of the bill provides that the Governor in Council may also make regulations defining the terms “disconnect,” “scheduled hours of work,” and “work‑related communication” for the purposes of Part III of the CLC (new section 264(1)(g.1)).
Clause 258 of the bill provides that clause 248 setting out new Division I.2 will come into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.
The bill also makes amendments to Division X (Individual Terminations of Employment) and Division XI (Severance Pay) of Part III of the CLC.
Clauses 249 and 250 of the bill introduce clarification provisions to stipulate that the employer’s obligation to give notice or wages in lieu of notice in the case of an individual termination of employment, and to provide severance pay, apply regardless of whether there are options for redress available to the employee, including the right to make an unjust dismissal complaint (new sections 230(1.01) and 235(1.1)).
Clauses 251, 253 and 254 indicate that, for greater certainty, employer compliance with Divisions X and XI does not affect the rights of an employee to make an unjust dismissal, reprisal or genetic testing complaint, or prevent the Canada Industrial Relations Board from making a determination in this regard or from issuing the appropriate orders (new sections 240(1.01), 246.1(1.1) and 247.99(1.1)). Clause 252 of the bill provides that, when making an order for compensation within the context of an unjust dismissal, the Board may consider any amount paid by the employer related to the individual termination of employment or severance pay (new section 242(5)).
Pursuant to clause 256 of the bill, the new clarification provisions must be considered in monetary complaints related to severance pay or pay in lieu of notice of termination of employment that were still ongoing when the relevant provisions came into force, and in any new monetary complaints with respect to a termination of employment that happened before the relevant provisions came into force.
Clause 257 provides that, on the day on which both clause 249 of the bill and section 480 of the Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 2,110 are in force, a new clarification provision will also apply with respect to group termination of employment (new section 212.1(1.1)). Furthermore, on the day that both provisions are in force, the Board may also consider any amount paid by the employer related to the group termination of employment when making an order for compensation within the context of an unjust dismissal (amended section 242(5)).
Clauses 245, 247 and 255 of the bill introduce new regulation‑making powers for the Governor in Council. These include the power to make regulations specifying a time limit for filling a vacant health and safety representative position under Part II of the CLC (new section 136(11)(d)), defining the terms “shift” and “work period” for certain hours of work provisions under Part III of the CLC (new section 175(1)(b.2)), and specifying the activities that are or are not considered work for the purposes of Part III of the CLC (new section 264(1)(g)). Clause 258 indicates that these amendments come into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.
Effective since 2018, additional weeks of Employment Insurance (EI) regular benefits are provided to eligible seasonal workers in 13 EI economic regions with highly seasonal economies.111 Division 23 of Part 4 of Bill C‑69 amends the Employment Insurance Act (EIA) to extend these temporary provisions set to expire on 26 October 2024. Through this measure and according to Schedule V of the EIA, eligible claimants have access to a maximum entitlement of 45 weeks of EI regular benefits.112
Section 12(2.3)(a)(i) of the EIA establishes the time period within which a seasonal claimant’s benefit period must occur for that claimant to be entitled to additional weeks of benefits. Division 35 of Budget Implementation Act, 2023, No. 1 previously extended the prescribed period from 28 October 2023 to 26 October 2024.113 Clause 259 of Bill C‑69 further amends section 12(2.3)(a)(i) to extend the end of this period from 26 October 2024 to 24 October 2026, thereby allowing eligible seasonal workers to access additional weeks of benefits by approximately two years.
Division 24 of Part 4 of Bill C‑69 amends section 61 of An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada’s Official Languages.114 This Act, which received Royal Assent on 20 June 2023, provides for the enactment of the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act (UFFRPBA).115 The latter has not yet come into force, as no Governor in Council order has been made in this regard.
The amendment set out in Division 24 of Part 4 adds a reference to sections 18(1.1) and 18(1.2) of the UFFRPBA in section 19(1). This amendment corrects an omission that occurred during the parliamentary process leading to the adoption of Bill C‑13, An Act to amend the Official Languages Act, to enact the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act and to make related amendments to other Acts,116 which resulted in the enactment of An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada’s Official Languages.
Section 19(1) of the UFFRPBA makes it possible for an employee of a federally regulated private business located in Quebec, when the UFFRPBA comes into force, to make a complaint to the Commissioner of Official Languages about their language rights at work in the same way as an employee of a federal institution. If the business breaches their rights, the employee may seek legal recourse once the complaint has been investigated. In addition, section 61 of An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada’s Official Languages provides for a subsequent amendment to section 19(1) of the UFFRPBA so that it applies to businesses located in a region with a strong francophone presence117 two years after the UFFRPBA comes into force.
As Bill C‑13 was being considered, section 18 of the UFFRPBA was amended to include sections 18(1.1) and 18(1.2), which address former and potential employees, and subjected them to the application of section 19(1) for businesses located in Quebec. In other words, former employees and persons with a demonstrable interest in a position within the business have the same legal right to make a complaint to the Commissioner of Official Languages as current employees. However, clause 61 of Bill C‑13 was not amended in the same way. As written, it does not recognize the same legal rights for former and potential employees of a business located in a region with a strong francophone presence. Moreover, it creates a situation in which, two years after the UFFRPBA comes into force, former and potential employees of businesses located in Quebec would lose their legal right to make a complaint and seek legal recourse.
The amendment in Division 24 of Part 4 of Bill C‑69 ensures that all employees of federally regulated private businesses located in Quebec or a region with a strong francophone presence – whether current, former or potential – may make a complaint and seek legal recourse if the business violates the language‑of‑work rights set out in the UFFRPBA.
Clause 261(1) of Bill C‑69 authorizes a newly created corporation incorporated as a wholly owned subsidiary of the Canada Development Investment Corporation (the new subsidiary corporation) to issue and administer loan guarantees through an Indigenous loan guarantee program. This new subsidiary corporation will be an agent of the Crown, ensuring that the new subsidiary corporation can benefit from the Government of Canada’s credit and secure lower interest rates for borrowers.
As explained in budget 2024, the loan guarantee program will provide loan guarantees to Indigenous communities for natural resource and energy projects across Canada.118 Budget 2024 connects the loan guarantee program with economic reconciliation noting that, “Indigenous communities need to be able to share in the benefits of natural resource and energy projects in their territories and on their own terms.”119 Under the program, Natural Resources Canada will be responsible for capacity building and intake while the new subsidiary corporation would “provide due diligence on the applications and administer the portfolio of loan guarantees.”120
Clause 261(1) specifies that the total amount of the loan guarantees including principal and interest must not exceed $5 billion or any greater amount that may be authorized by the Governor in Council following a recommendation of the Minister of Finance.
Clause 261(2) authorizes the Minister of Finance to pay amounts to the new subsidiary corporation from the Consolidated Revenue Fund as required for the payment of principal and interest of loan guarantees and for all other amounts required by the new subsidiary corporation to discharge its obligations under the loan guarantees, exercise rights or protect the interests of the Crown.
Clause 263(1) states the sections 91 and 100(1) of the Financial Administration Act (FAA) do not apply to the new subsidiary corporation or to any of the new subsidiary corporation’s wholly owned subsidiaries. Section 91(1) of the FAA lists a series of actions by parent Crown corporations or wholly owned subsidiaries of a parent corporation that require approval by the Governor in Council. Examples include procuring the “incorporation of a corporation any shares of which, on incorporation, would be held by, on behalf of or in trust for the corporation or subsidiary”; acquiring shares of a corporation which “on acquisition would be held by, on behalf of or in trust for the corporation of subsidiary”; selling or otherwise disposing of shares of a wholly‑owned subsidiary of the corporation; and acquiring all or substantially all of the assets of another corporation. Section 100(1) prevents agents of Crown corporations from using corporate property as security for debts or the performance of other obligations.
Clause 263(2) specifies that sections 89(1), 89(4), 89(6) and 89.1 of the FAA apply to the new subsidiary corporation as if it were a parent corporation. Section 89(1) of the FAA provides that if the Governor in Council believes it is in the public interest, it may, on the recommendations of the minister,121 give a directive to any parent Crown corporation. The appropriate minister must table any directive given to a parent Crown corporation in Parliament (section 89(4)). A parent Crown corporation is required to notify the appropriate minister following the implementation of the directive (section 89(6)). The directors of a parent Crown corporation must ensure any directives given are implemented promptly (section 89.1(1)).122 The directors are not accountable for consequences resulting from the implementation of the directive should they act in accordance with section 115 (section 89.1(1)). Section 115 describes the duty of care of directors and officers, including that they act honestly and in good faith to the best interests of the corporation. Compliance with a directive is considered in the best interests of the corporation (section 89.1(2)).
A Red Dress Alert system is an alert that notifies the public of a missing Indigenous woman, girl or person who is Two‑Spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual or who has other gender or sexual identity (2SLGBTQQIA+). Budget 2024 proposes to provide $1.3 million over three years to carry out engagement on a pilot project for the creation of a regional Red Dress Alert and for making direct payments to participating individuals and organizations. This is reflected in clause 264 of Bill C‑69. The funds are intended to support consultations and engagement with Indigenous people around the development of a pilot regional Red Dress Alert, as well as an assessment at the end of the pilot.
According to self‑reported and self‑identifying data collected by Statistics Canada, Indigenous women and girls are more likely to have experienced sexual assault and intimate partner violence after the age of 15, and are six times more likely to be murdered compared to non‑Indigenous women and girls.123 Many reports have flagged the disproportionate rates of violence and disappearance faced by Indigenous women, girls and 2SLGBTQQIA+ people, including the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls’ final report.124
In May 2023, the House of Commons unanimously adopted to a motion declaring that the murders and disappearances of Indigenous women and girls in Canada is an emergency.125 The motion called for “immediate and substantial investment, including in a red dress alert system, to help alert the public when an Indigenous woman, girl or two‑spirit person goes missing.”126
Budget 2024’s allocations for the Red Dress Alert build upon commitments made in budget 2023, where $2.5 million was allotted to hold discussions on the Red Dress Alert at the National Indigenous‑Federal‑Provincial‑Territorial Roundtable on Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls and 2SLGBTQQIA+ People.127 In his appearance before the House of Commons Standing Committee on the Status of Women in April 2024, Gary Anandasangaree, Minister of Crown‑Indigenous relations, stated that “over 16 engagements [sessions had been held] in the different regions of the country.”128 A “What we heard” report was produced following those discussions.129 They revealed priorities for Indigenous peoples with regards to the Red Dress Alert, including:
In April 2024, Minister Anandasangaree indicated that active discussions were being held with potentially interested provincial and territorial partners in relation to a pilot Red Dress Alert.130 News reports from May 2024 indicate that the federal government has partnered with Manitoba to launch a regional Red Dress Alert pilot.131
Clause 266 of Bill C‑69 establishes that VIA HFR – VIA TGF Inc. (VIA HFR), a subsidiary of VIA Rail Canada Inc., is an agent of the Crown. VIA HFR was established to manage the development of a high‑frequency rail project between Toronto and Québec City.132
This status of agent of the Crown means that the Government of Canada is fully liable for all actions taken by the agent while it is operating under its mandate. Meanwhile, the agent enjoys the same constitutional immunities, privileges and prerogatives as the Crown.133
It is also possible for a Crown corporation to be granted a partial agent status, that is, a status that is applicable only in certain circumstances and with certain exceptions. Such an exception is made under clause 267, which stipulates that VIA HFR may enter into contracts, agreements, or other arrangements (such as leases) with the Government of Canada. This is typically not permitted for agents of the Crown.
Under clause 268, the above‑mentioned status and exception are both retroactively deemed to have been in force since VIA HFR’s incorporation on 29 November 2022.
The Impact Assessment Act (IAA),134 which relates to federal environmental assessment of projects, was introduced in 2018 through the former Bill C‑69, An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts,135 which received Royal Assent in June 2019. The IAA replaced the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012.136
Alberta’s Lieutenant Governor in Council referred two questions about the constitutionality of the IAA and the Physical Activities Regulations137 made pursuant to the IAA to the Alberta Court of Appeal. The majority of that court found the IAA was unconstitutional in its entirety,138 and the Attorney General of Canada appealed that advisory opinion. In October 2023, the Supreme Court of Canada released its opinion in Reference re Impact Assessment Act,139 concluding that parts of the IAA intruded on provincial jurisdiction. While confirming that Parliament can enact legislation to protect the environment, Chief Justice Wagner (for the majority) concluded that:
The pith and substance of [the] designated projects scheme is to assess and regulate designated projects with a view to mitigating or preventing their potential adverse environmental, health, social and economic impacts. In my view, Parliament has plainly overstepped its constitutional competence in enacting this designated projects scheme. This scheme is ultra vires for two overarching reasons. First, it is not in pith and substance directed at regulating “effects within federal jurisdiction” as defined in the IAA because these effects do not drive the scheme’s decision‑making functions. Second, I do not accept Canada’s contention that the defined term “effects within federal jurisdiction” aligns with federal legislative jurisdiction. The overbreadth of these effects exacerbates the constitutional frailties of the scheme’s decision‑making functions.140
Since this was a reference to the Supreme Court of Canada, the majority’s opinion did not result in the provisions that intruded on provincial jurisdiction being struck down. Division 28 of Part 4 of Bill C‑69 is the Government of Canada’s response to the Supreme Court of Canada’s opinion.
Key amendments contained in Division 28 relate to definitions. Clause 271 replaces two definitions contained in section 2 of the IAA in order to narrow their scope from “effects” to “adverse effects.” Specifically, the phrase “direct or incidental effects” is replaced by “direct or incidental adverse effects,” and a reference to “non‑negligible adverse effects” is also added to that definition. The phrase “effects within federal jurisdiction” is replaced by “adverse effects within federal jurisdiction.” Similar to the revised definition of “direct or incidental adverse effects,” the new definition “adverse effects within federal jurisdiction” adds a reference to “non‑negligible adverse effects” to some of the existing descriptions listed under “effects within federal jurisdiction.”
The definition of “mitigation measures” is also amended to, among other things, specify that the section relates to adverse effects “within federal jurisdiction” (clause 271(2)).
The IAA’s long title is An Act respecting a federal process for impact assessments and the prevention of significant adverse environmental effects. This title is replaced by a new title, “An Act respecting a federal process for impact assessments and the prevention or mitigation of significant adverse effects within federal jurisdiction” to reflect the narrowed scope of the law and to include a reference to mitigation (clause 269). The narrowed scope of the IAA is also reflected in changes to the Preamble which, among other things, is revised to qualify that Parliament’s (formerly, the Government of Canada’s) commitment to an impact assessment process relates to one “that prevents or mitigates significant adverse effects within federal jurisdiction” (clause 270).
Clause 272 shortens the “Purpose” section of the IAA, including by deleting section 6(1)(c), which refers to ensuring that impact assessments of designated projects take into account all possible effects of a project – both positive and negative. The revised “Purpose” is now “to prevent or mitigate significant adverse effects within federal jurisdiction.” The revised “Purpose” also refers to “significant direct or incidental effects that may be caused by designated projects and significant adverse environmental effects.”
Clause 273(1) amends section 7(1) of the IAA, which provides that certain projects are prohibited if they might cause one of the effects listed in sections 7(1)(a) to 7(1)(e), unless one of the criterion in section 7(3) is met. The exceptions listed in section 7(3) include, for example, that the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada has determined that no impact assessment is required (section 7(3)(a)). The amendment specifies that certain projects are prohibited if they might cause “adverse effects within federal jurisdiction,” rather than effects more generally (clause 273(1)). This is consistent with the revised definitions that refer to “adverse effects.” The exceptions in section 7(3) would continue to apply.
Budget 2024 states that amendments to the IAA “will provide certainty for businesses and investors through measures that include increasing flexibility in substitution of assessments to allow for collaboration and avoid interjurisdictional duplication.”141 Section 9 of the IAA provides that the Minister of the Environment can designate a project as one to which the IAA applies. Clause 275 amends the factors to be considered by the Minister before making such a designation to include whether there are alternatives to an impact assessment that would allow a jurisdiction to address the adverse effects within federal jurisdiction. In other words, where these alternatives exist, the Minister may decide to not require an assessment under the IAA, thereby avoiding interjurisdictional duplication. Clause 277(2) also adds a reference to alternatives to an impact assessment as a factor to be considered by the Agency when deciding whether an impact assessment is required (new section 16(2)(f.1)).
Existing section 14 of the IIA requires that the Agency provide the project proponent with a summary or relevant issues that need to be addressed. Section 15 requires the project proponent to notify the Agency as to how it will address those issues that have been raised. Clause 276 amends section 15 to specify that the project proponent must explain how it will address issues relating to adverse impacts on the rights of Indigenous peoples recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.
Finally, clauses 302 to 319 set out a number of transitional provisions, including for projects that are currently in the impact assessment process.
Section 24 of the Judges Act142 provides for a number of salaries to be paid to additional judges appointed to superior courts following the passage of provincial legislation. Division 29 of Part 4 of Bill C‑69 amends this section with a view to reallocating additional salaries paid to family court judges to judicial positions at superior trial courts. According to budget 2024, this reallocation results from the fact that “Alberta has been allocated judicial seats which they have chosen not to create,” leaving 17 judicial seats intended for unified family courts vacant.143
Thus, clause 320(1) amends current section 24(3)(b) of the Judges Act to increase the number of additional salaries payable to superior court judges from 62 to 79 salaries. Conversely, clause 320(2) amends section 24(4) of the Judges Act to reduce the number of additional salaries payable to family court judges from 75 to 58.
Division 30 of Part 4 of Bill C‑69 amends current section 17.1 of the Tax Court of Canada Act. Current section 17.1(1) of the Tax Court of Canada Act provides that parties to proceedings before the Tax Court of Canada under the general procedure may appear in person or be represented by counsel. Clause 321 amends this section to specify that it applies to individuals who are parties to proceedings before the Court. Clause 321 also creates new section 17.1(1.1), which provides that a party that is not an individual must be represented by counsel, unless the Court under special circumstances grants leave to the party to be represented by a director, officer, employee, member or partner of the party.
The Food and Drugs Act (FDA)144 applies to all food, drugs, cosmetics and medical devices sold in Canada. This Act and its associated regulations help to ensure the safety of such products by governing their sale and advertisement.145
Division 31 of Part 4 of Bill C‑69 amends the FDA to, among other things, authorize the Minister of Health to:
Section 2 of the FDA sets out definitions that apply in that Act. Clause 322(1) of Bill C‑69 amends section 2 to add the words “fabriqués, préparés ou” to paragraph (c) of the definition of “drogue” in the French version. This addition rectifies an inconsistency between the English and French versions.
In budget 2024, the government announced that it would amend the FDA “to expand the Governor‑in‑Council regulation‑making authority related to drug and medical device shortages to include foods for a special dietary purpose, such as infant formulas and human milk fortifiers.”146
Section 30(1.4) of the FDA authorizes the Governor in Council to make regulations to prevent shortages of therapeutic products in Canada or alleviate those shortages or their effects, to protect human health. Clause 325(3) of the bill amends this section to add that the Governor in Council may also make such regulations with respect to foods for a special dietary purpose. “Food for special dietary use” is defined in the Food and Drug Regulations to mean
food that has been specially processed or formulated to meet the particular requirements of a person
- in whom a physical or physiological condition exists as a result of a disease, disorder or injury, or
- for whom a particular effect, including but not limited to weight loss, is to be obtained by a controlled intake of foods.147
Clause 325(1) amends section 30(1) of the FDA by adding new section 30(1)(j.1), authorizing the Governor in Council to make regulations respecting orders referred to in new sections 30.01 and 30.02 (addressing unintended uses of therapeutic products and drugs meant for animals) and new sections 30.05 and 30.06 (exempting persons or products from certain requirements under the FDA and/or its regulations). These new sections are discussed below.
A “therapeutic product,” under the FDA, “means a drug or device or any combination of drugs and devices.”148 In budget 2024, the government announced that it would amend the FDA “to address and prevent unintended and harmful uses of therapeutic products, such as preventing addictive nicotine replacement therapies from being marketed to youth.”149
Clause 326 adds these new supplementary rules after section 30 of the FDA. New section 30.01 addresses unintended uses of therapeutic products:
New section 30.02 addresses drugs meant for animals. The provision states that if the minister believes that the use of a drug meant for an animal of a particular species may present a risk to human beings, animals of a different species or the environment, the minister may, by order, establish rules in respect of the importation, sale, conditions of sale, advertising, manufacture, preparation, preservation, packaging, labelling, storage or testing of the drug, to prevent or manage that risk. The minister may do so despite any uncertainty regarding the risk that the use may pose.
Clause 326 also adds new sections 30.03 and 30.04. Section 30.03 provides that an order made under section 30.01 or 30.02 that applies to only one person is not a statutory instrument within the meaning of the Statutory Instruments Act.150 According to new section 30.04, the minister must nevertheless ensure that any such order is publicly available, although it may exclude personal information and confidential business information.
In budget 2024, the government announced that it would amend the FDA to authorize the Minister
to exempt a person or product from certain requirements in the Food and Drugs Act and/or its regulations by Ministerial Order. This amendment would improve transparency when the Minister chooses to exempt health products, such as infant formulas, from certain Canadian requirements to increase supply in the event of a shortage.151
Thus, clause 326 of the bill adds new section 30.05(1), which provides that the Minister may, by order, exempt a class of foods, therapeutic products, persons or activities from the application of:
The Minister may, in the order, impose any conditions that the Minister considers necessary. However, this order cannot relate to cosmetics.
New section 30.05(2) stipulates that the Minister may make the order only if the Minister believes that:
Section 30.05 is, in turn, separately modified by clause 327, which comes into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council, according to clause 333. Clause 327(1) amends section 30.05 to add section 30.05(1.1), which mirrors section 30.05(1) in all respects, except that it pertains to the exemption of a person.
Clause 327(2) amends section 30.05(2) accordingly, to reflect the addition of this exemption in relation to a person.
Clause 327(3) adds, after section 30.05(3), new sections 30.05(4) and 30.05(5). These provisions state that an order made under section 30.05(1.1) that applies to only one person is not a statutory instrument within the meaning of the Statutory Instruments Act, and that the Minister must ensure that any such order is publicly available, although it may exclude personal information and confidential business information.
Finally, clause 323 amends section 23(1) of the FDA, which provides that, to ensure compliance with that Act or its regulations, inspectors may enter any place in which they believe, on reasonable grounds, that one of the three situations listed in that section applies. Clause 323 adds, through new section 23(1)(d), a fourth situation: that it is a place in which “an activity could be conducted as a result of an exemption that is under consideration by the Minister.”
In budget 2024, the government announced that it would amend the FDA to authorize the Minister “to rely on information or decisions of select foreign regulatory authorities in specific instances to satisfy requirements in the Food and Drugs Act and/or its regulations.”152
Thus, clause 322(2) of the bill amends section 2 of the FDA, which sets out definitions that apply in that Act, to add the term “foreign regulatory authority,” defined to mean “a government agency or other entity outside Canada that controls the manufacture, use or sale of therapeutic products or foods within its jurisdiction.”
Clause 328 amends the FDA by adding, after section 30.05, new section 30.06. Section 30.06(1) provides that the Minister may, by order, deem that a therapeutic product, or food that belongs to a specified class, meets requirements of the FDA or associated regulations, relying on information or a decision of a foreign regulatory authority.
New section 30.06(2) stipulates that the Minister may make the order only if the Minister believes that:
New section 30.06(3) authorizes the Minister to impose, in the order, any conditions that the Minister considers necessary.
Clause 328 also adds new section 30.07, which states that for the purposes of any provision of the FDA, other than sections 30.01, 30.02, 30.05 and 30.06, any reference to regulations made under this Act is deemed to include orders made under section 30.01, 30.02, 30.05 or 30.06.
Clause 329 amends section 30.1(5), which is a deeming provision specifying notably that, for the purpose of any FDA provision – excluding section 30.1 itself and section 30.05 – any reference to regulations made under this Act is deemed to include interim orders.
Clause 324 relates to section 29.2 of the FDA. Under section 29.1(1) of the FDA, the Minister may establish a list of prescription drugs, classes of prescription drugs or both. Section 29.2 provides that a regulation made under the FDA may incorporate this list by reference. Clause 324 repeals section 29.2.
Clause 325(2) repeals section 30(1)(r) of the FDA, pertaining to the Governor in Council’s power to make regulations respecting marketing authorizations. According to clause 333, clause 325(2) comes into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.
Clause 330 repeals the provisions on marketing authorizations (sections 30.2 to 30.4), together with the heading preceding those sections. According to clause 333, clause 330 comes into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council. As a transitional provision, clause 332 provides that marketing authorizations that had been issued under section 30.2 or 30.3 of the FDA (before the day on which section 330 comes into force) and that had not been repealed before that day are deemed to be made under section 30.05(1) of that Act.
In budget 2024, the government announced that it would amend the FDA
to make the process of updating performance standards documents related to the remittance of fees more efficient and less labour intensive by ensuring the Act always refers to the latest version of performance standards documents incorporated by reference, rather than static documents only effective as of a certain date.153
These technical amendments are carried out through changes made:
Division 32 of Part 4 amends the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act (TVPA) to support the administration of the Act and the implementation of a tobacco and vaping cost recovery framework. This framework was first announced in the 2021 mandate letter from the prime minister to the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions and Associate Minister of Health and was further elaborated in budget 2023 and the Fall Economic Statement 2023.154
Bill C‑59, which has not yet become law, amends the TVPA to provide the Minister of Health with the authority to make regulations respecting fees or charges to be paid by tobacco and vaping product manufacturers to recover the costs incurred by the Government of Canada in implementing the TVPA.
Clause 334 of Bill C‑69 adds new section 42.6 to the TVPA allowing the Minister of Health to request and receive “customs information,” as defined in the Customs Act, from the Minister of Public Safety for the purposes of administration and enforcement of the TVPA. In addition, new section 42.7 authorizes the disclosure of information collected under the TVPA to any other federal minister to verify compliance with other Acts of Parliament that apply directly or indirectly to tobacco or vaping products and activities using them.
Clause 335 introduces a coordinating amendment if Bill C‑59 receives Royal Assent. It amends section 42.5 of the TVPA to provide greater flexibility to the Minister of Health to update documents and forms related to the tobacco and vaping cost recovery framework without requiring amendments to the regulations.
Clauses 336(1), 336(2) and 337 amend sections 347(1), 347(2) and 347.1(2) of the Criminal Code to broaden the criminal interest rate offence to prohibit a person from offering to enter into an agreement or arrangement to receive interest at a criminal rate and from advertising an offer to enter into an agreement or arrangement that provides for the receipt of interest at a criminal rate.
Clause 336(3) repeals section 347(7) of the Criminal Code to remove the requirement to obtain the consent of the Attorney General prior to commencing criminal proceedings relating to the criminal interest rate offence.
Clauses 338 and 339 contain provisions to coordinate with the criminal interest rate amendments made in the Budget Implementation Act, 2023, No. 1, so that the amendments come into force, in a manner consistent with the associated regulations, on a date or dates to be fixed by the Governor in Council. Clauses 336(1), 336(2) and 337 come into force on a day to be fixed by order in council, and clause 336(3) comes into force on the 30th day after the day on which the bill receives Royal Assent.
Canada’s Anti‑Money Laundering and Anti‑Terrorist Financing Regime seeks to detect, deter, investigate and prosecute money laundering and terrorist financing activities. In essence, money laundering is the process used to disguise the source of money or other assets derived from criminal activities.
The Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (PCMLTFA)155 pursues these objectives in three main ways: by establishing record keeping and client identification standards, by requiring reporting from intermediaries, and by creating the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC) to oversee those intermediaries, which are referred to as “reporting entities.” They are listed in section 5 of the PCMLTFA.
Section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms156 enshrines reasonable expectations of privacy into Canadian law. Additionally, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA)157 addresses private‑sector organization’s collection, use and disclosure of personal information in the course of commercial activities across Canada.
The statutory framework for information sharing between private‑sector organizations is found in section 7(3) of PIPEDA, which permits such organizations to exchange personal information without informed consent in certain listed circumstances. In particular, section 7(3)(i) allows for this disclosure if “required by law.”
Clause 341 of Bill C‑69 adds new section 11.01(1) to the PCMLTFA to permit reporting entities to disclose an individual’s personal information to another reporting entity without the individual’s knowledge or consent if:
New section 11.01(2) allows the reporting entity receiving the disclosed information to use it so long as the information’s collection and/or use occurs in accordance with the regulations. New section 11.01(3) specifies that no criminal or civil proceedings may be brought against reporting entities for sending, receiving or using that information in good faith.
Clause 344 adds new section 73(1)(i.1) to the PCMLTFA to allow the Governor in Council to make regulations concerning the disclosure of information under section 11.01(1) or the collection or use of information under section 11.01(2), including the establishment and implementation of codes of practice by reporting entities and respecting the roles of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada and FINTRAC in relation to those codes.
Clause 347 makes consequential amendments to section 7 of PIPEDA. Clause 350 makes coordinating amendments to section 27.1 of the proposed Consumer Privacy Protection Act in the event that Bill C‑27158 receives Royal Assent prior to or after Bill C‑69 receives Royal Assent.
Clause 351(3) deems these measures to come into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.
FINTRAC is Canada’s financial intelligence unit; it is led by the Department of Finance Canada. Under the PCMLTFA, FINTRAC is authorized to disclose only “designated information.” In particular, section 55(3) allows FINTRAC to disclose designated information relevant to investigating or prosecuting a money laundering offence or a terrorist activity financing offence to certain agencies and ministers.
Clauses 342(1) and 343 of Bill C‑69 add new sections 55(3)(d.1) and 55.1(1)(c.1) to the PCMLTFA, respectively, to add the Department of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship to the list of entities to which FINTRAC is permitted to disclose designated information. To make such a disclosure, FINTRAC must determine that the information is relevant to the Department of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship’s determination regarding:
Clause 342(2) adds new section 55(3)(g.1) to the PCMLTFA to add “an agency or body that administers the civil asset forfeiture legislation of a province” to the list of entities to which FINTRAC is permitted to disclose designated information. Clause 351(2) deems this measure to come into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.
Since 2008, FINTRAC has had the legislative authority to issue administrative monetary penalties to reporting entities that are not complying with the PCMLTFA and associated regulations. In addition, if a reporting entity violates the PCMLTFA or defaults on a compliance agreement it has entered into with FINTRAC, section 73.22 of the PCMLTFA allows FINTRAC to make public the name of the reporting entity, the nature of the violation or default, and the amount of the penalty levied against the entity, if applicable.
Clause 345 of Bill C‑69 adds new section 73.22(2) to the PCMLTFA to specify that FINTRAC may also make public the reasons for its decision, including the relevant facts, analysis and considerations that formed part of the decision.
FINTRAC ensures that reporting entities, which are listed in section 5 of the PCMLTFA, comply with their obligations under that Act. These entities include businesses such as banks, credit unions, life insurance companies, money services businesses and accounting firms.
Clause 340(1) of Bill C‑69 amends sections 5(h) and 5(h.1) of the PCMLTFA to add, to the list of reporting entities, businesses that are engaged in transporting currency or money orders, traveller’s cheques or other similar negotiable instruments. This amendment applies to businesses that provide these services whether they have a place of business in Canada or they do not have a place of business in Canada but direct and provide their services to individuals or entities in Canada.
Clause 351(1) deems this measure to come into force on the later of 1 July 2024 and the day on which Bill C‑69 receives Royal Assent.
Clauses 353 and 355 add new section 231.31 to the Income Tax Act (ITA) and new section 290.1 to the Excise Tax Act to allow the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) to apply for a general warrant under section 487.01(1) of the Criminal Code. Under a general warrant, CRA investigators and analysts may use any device or investigative technique described in the warrant, other than video surveillance. The ITA and the Excise Tax Act currently authorize the CRA to obtain and execute search warrants to investigate offences under their respective legislation, such as tax evasion or tax fraud; these search warrants are generally limited to the search of a building or place and seizure of documents or other things. A general warrant under the Criminal Code could authorize the CRA to conduct a wider range of investigative activity, without relying on police assistance to obtain and execute a general warrant in its stead.
The same clauses also add new section 231.32 to the ITA and new section 290.2 to the Excise Tax Act to allow property that was seized under a warrant to be returned to its owner, without a court order.
Currently, section 487.013 of the Criminal Code outlines how, on ex parte application made by a peace officer or public officer, a justice or judge may order a person to preserve computer data that is in their possession or control when they receive the order. This section was added by former Bill C‑13 to create a new investigative tool to preserve evidence in electronic form, which may otherwise be easily destroyed or altered.160
Clause 356 of Bill C‑69 adds another investigative tool to the Criminal Code. New section 487.0131 introduces a tool by which, on ex parte application made by a peace officer or public officer, a justice or judge may order a person to keep an account specified in the order open or active unless the holder of the account requests that the person close or deactivate the account. The bill does not define the term “account.”
Bill C‑69 includes two forms, Form 5.0031 – Information To Obtain a Keep Account Open or Active Order and Form 5.0032 – Keep Account Open or Active Order. Before the justice or judge makes the order in Form 5.0032, they must be satisfied by the information in Form 5.0031 that there are reasonable grounds to suspect161 that an offence has been or will be committed, and that the open or active account will assist in the investigation of the offence (new section 487.0131(2) of the Criminal Code). Unless it is revoked earlier, the order expires 60 days after the day on which it is made (new section 487.0131(6)).
Division 35 of Part 4 of Bill C‑69 creates new offences in respect of motor vehicle theft, namely the possession and the distribution of an electronic device suitable for committing theft of a motor vehicle, vehicle theft with violence (commonly known as carjacking) and vehicle theft for a criminal organization. The bill provides for harsher prison sentences, increasing from 10 years to 14 years.
Clause 369 adds sections 333.1(3) and 333.1(4) to the Criminal Code to create a new offence of theft of a motor vehicle when violence is used, threatened or attempted. This offence is punishable by up to 14 years’ imprisonment. New section 333.1(4) establishes that anyone who commits vehicle theft for the benefit or at the direction of a criminal organization is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years. “Criminal organization” is defined in section 467.1(1) of the Criminal Code.
Clause 370 introduces section 333.2 to the Criminal Code. New section 333.2(1) prohibits the possession of an electronic device for the purpose of committing theft of a motor vehicle. The prosecution must demonstrate that the device may be used to commit vehicle theft, and that the intent to commit theft is present.
New section 333.2(2) prohibits making, repairing, selling, offering for sale, importing into Canada, exporting from Canada, distributing or making available an electronic device suitable for committing theft of a motor vehicle. The prosecution must demonstrate the accused’s knowledge that the device may be used to commit vehicle theft and his or her intention to use it to that end. The illegal nature of the device stems from its usefulness in committing theft, accompanied by the intention to use it for this purpose. The term “without lawful excuse” has been interpreted by the Supreme Court of Canada to include “all defences which are commonly considered to be lawful excuses.”162 The accused may therefore submit defences that are distinct from those generally provided for by law.
New section 333.2(3) stipulates that these new offences may be prosecuted either by indictment, leading to a maximum of 10 years’ imprisonment, or by summary conviction, leading to a maximum fine of $5,000 and imprisonment for a maximum of two years less a day, or both.
New sections 333.2(4) and 333.2(5) assign a new discretionary power to the court, allowing it to order the forfeiture of the electronic device used in the commission of the offence, but solely if it belongs to persons who were parties to any of the offences set out in sections 333.2(1) and 333.2(2).
Clause 371 creates the offence of money laundering for the benefit of or at the direction of a criminal organization, punishable by a maximum of 14 years’ imprisonment (new section 462.31(2.1) of the Criminal Code). An exception is provided to allow a peace officer to engage in money laundering activities for a criminal organization for the purposes of an investigation without being held criminally liable.
A consequential amendment is introduced in clause 376, amending section 2(1) of the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to include this new Criminal Code offence in the definition of “money laundering offence” in the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act.
Clause 377 amends section 9(3) of the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act (CAHWCA)163 to include a mention of the new offence of money laundering for the benefit of a criminal organization. Proceedings in connection with this new Criminal Code offence may be commenced where it is alleged that the proceeds of crime were obtained or derived from the commission of an offence under the CAHWCA.
Clause 374 adds section 718.2(a)(ii.2) to the Criminal Code to include as an aggravating circumstance, to be taken into consideration by the court at sentencing, evidence that the offender involved a person under the age of 18 years in the commission of the offence.
The bill also includes consequential amendments to the Criminal Code and other statutes to facilitate investigations into vehicle theft and money laundering.
Clauses 380 and 381 of Bill C‑69 amend the Radiocommunication Act164 to prohibit the manufacture, import, distribution, lease, offer for sale, sale or possession of certain devices that are specified by the Minister of Industry by way of an order (new sections 4(5) and 5.01). In doing so, the Minister may incorporate documents by reference, but shall ensure that they are accessible (new section 5.02). These amendments follow budget 2024’s announcement of the Government of Canada’s intention to regulate devices used in harmful or criminal activity such as auto theft.165
As announced in budget 2024, Bill C‑69 amends the Telecommunications Act166 to better support consumer choice within Canada’s telecommunications services market.167 Clause 383 of Bill C‑69 introduces new sections that:
Clause 384 indicates that these amendments to the Telecommunications Act come into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.
Division 38 of Part 4 of Bill C‑69 makes significant changes to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA)168 that affect Canada’s asylum system. These changes stem from findings in a 2019 report by the Auditor General of Canada169 and the conclusions of the 2023 Strategic Immigration Review conducted by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada.170
Clause 386 adds section 6.1(1) to the IRPA, allowing the Minister to appoint a representative for a minor or a person who, in the opinion of the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship or the Minister of Public Safety, is unable “to appreciate the nature of the proceeding or application” in any prescribed proceeding or application. New section 6.1(3) allows the Minister to prescribe in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (IRPR)171 the circumstances in which a representative may be appointed.
Clause 389 adds section 23.1 to the IRPA, allowing an officer to authorize a person to enter and remain in Canada if the person’s claim for refugee protection is determined to be eligible and he or she is not the subject of a report on inadmissibility. The issuance of a removal order against a claimant will therefore be deferred until the end of the refugee claim process, if the claim is rejected. However, under clause 397, which adds section 47(b.1) to the IRPA, a person who makes a claim for refugee protection in Canada loses his or her temporary resident status, if applicable.
Clause 408 repeals section 99(3.1) of the IRPA, removing the requirement for a person making a claim for refugee protection inside Canada “other than at a port of entry” to comply with different time limits and rules for providing documents. These claimants will therefore be subject to the same requirements as those who file their claims at an official port of entry operated by the Canada Border Services Agency.172
Clause 409 amends the section on “Examination of Eligibility,” renaming it “Consideration of Claims Prior to Referral.” Under clause 410(1), which replaces section 100(1) of the IRPA, if a claim is determined by an officer to be eligible, “the Minister must consider it further.” Under new section 100(3) of the IRPA, which is introduced by clause 410(4), after such consideration, the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship may determine that a claim is ineligible. The Minister will be able to specify the deadlines and rules for the production and submission of documents (e.g., electronic submission methods) under new section 100(4) of the IRPA, as amended by clause 410(5). Consideration by the Minister is mandatory for all claims referred to the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB), in accordance with new section 100.1(2), which is introduced by clause 411. The Minister may also require a foreign national to undergo an “examination” under new section 100.1(1)(c). Because clause 410(6) repeals section 100(4.1) of the IRPA, it is no longer the officer who refers the claim to the IRB, but rather the Minister after further consideration. The officer is no longer responsible for fixing the dates of IRB hearings.
Clause 412 also adds new sections 102.1 and 102.2 to the IRPA, allowing the Minister to transmit a claim for refugee protection to the IRB to determine whether the “proceeding” has been “abandoned” if the claimant fails to provide the required information or appear for an examination in the context of the Minister’s consideration. Under new section 102.2(1) of the IRPA, while the claim is being considered by the Minister, the latter may determine that the claim has been withdrawn if the claimant provides the Minister with written notice of withdrawal.
Lastly, clause 414 adds section 104.1 to the IRPA, suspending the IRB’s consideration of claims for refugee protection and appeals (other than appeals brought by the Minister) in cases where the claimant is not “physically present” in Canada.
Clause 390 amends section 24(4) of the IRPA, prohibiting a foreign national from entering and staying temporarily in Canada if, within the last 12 months, the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship determined the person’s claim for refugee protection to be “withdrawn” (in accordance with section 170 of the IRPR), and no application was made for judicial review of the withdrawal.
Under clause 391, which amends section 25(1.2)(b) of the IRPA, the Minister may no longer consider the humanitarian and compassionate considerations relating to a foreign national in Canada who is inadmissible if his or her claim for refugee protection has been determined to be eligible to be referred to the IRB.
Clause 393 adds section 42.2 to the IRPA, which stipulates that a refugee claimant will be inadmissible if his or her claim is determined to be ineligible, is rejected by the IRB (including on appeal), or is determined to be withdrawn or abandoned. A removal order will be made against such inadmissible refugee claimants pursuant to clause 396, which adds section 45.1 to the IRPA. Under new section 45.1(3), this removal order is not subject to judicial review.
However, clause 395 adds section 44.1 to the IRPA, which states that when the Minister is of the opinion that an inadmissibility report that has been received is well‑founded, the Minister may not refer the matter to the IRB for an admissibility hearing if the person who is the subject of the report is not physically present in Canada.
Lastly, clause 400 amends section 53 of the IRPA, allowing the Minister to establish by regulation any definitions the Minister considers necessary for interpreting the IRPA and to modify the powers conferred on the government with regard to inadmissibility reports.
The bill clarifies the IRPA with regard to the enforcement of removal orders. Clause 398 clarifies and standardizes the provisions that trigger the enforcement of removal orders in certain circumstances related to the status of a refugee protection claim (set out in section 49 of the IRPA). In particular, it specifies when a removal order comes into force once a final determination is made by the IRB with regard to the claim for refugee protection. For example, new section 49(3)(c) states that a removal order comes into force 15 days after the IRB rejects a claim for which “there is no right to appeal.” In the case of a claim for refugee protection that is withdrawn, new section 49(3)(f) states that the removal order comes into force on the day the claim is determined to be withdrawn, rather than 15 days after.
Clause 401 amends section 55(3.1)(b) of the IRPA, specifying that where the Minister of Public Safety designates the arrival of a group of persons in Canada as an “irregular arrival” and the members of that group become “designated foreign nationals” (within the meaning of section 20.1 of the IRPA), an officer may arrest and detain those designated foreign nationals without having to obtain an arrest warrant. Furthermore, under clause 403, which introduces new section 57.1(4), the IRB is no longer required to review the reasons “for their continued detention” in the case of a designated foreign national who “is subsequently detained again.”
Clause 402, which amends section 56 of the IRPA, also allows an officer, the IRB or the Minister to impose conditions of release on a foreign national (refugee protection claimant or designated foreign national) who is 16 years or older “before the first detention review.” Conditions of release are prescribed in the IRPR, pursuant to new section 56(5). Under new section 56(6), the conditions of release remain in effect until the foreign national is detained, is removed or is, for all intents and purposes, no longer inadmissible (e.g., if the foreign national’s refugee protection claim or permanent residence application is allowed).
Clauses 415 and 416 repeal sections 109.1 and 110(2)(d.1) of the IRPA and remove the Minister’s power to designate by order certain countries of origin from which refugee claimants cannot request an appeal, or whose administrative time limits for claims are “different” from others.
The bill also amends certain provisions relating to the IRB’s administrative procedures for appeals. Under clause 416(2) of the bill, which repeals subsection 110(3.1) of the IRPA, the IRB may no longer depart from the prescribed time limits when an appeal hearing is held with regard to the credibility of evidence. Additionally, clause 417 introduces section 111(3) and establishes that, at the procedural level, IRB confirmation of the rejection of an appeal is “itself” an independent decision.
Clause 421 replaces section 159(1)(g) of the IRPA and adds that the IRB Chairperson is responsible for taking any action that may be necessary to ensure that IRB members carry out their duties properly, “specifying the manner in which decisions must be rendered and reasons for decisions must be given.”
Several clauses amend the English and French versions of the IRPA to standardize its application. Notably, in clause 385, the legislator adds to the list of terms defined in section 2 of the English version of the IRPA the term “prescribed” as meaning, “prescribed by regulation.” In the French version of the Act, this definition is not necessary, since the legislator already uses “réglementaire” or “par règlement.”
In clauses 426 to 430, the bill sets out transitional provisions for pending claims for refugee protection that will be affected by the coming into force of the amendments to the IRPA.
Bill C‑69 amends the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (Corrections Act)173 and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to establish a framework for the detention of persons for immigration‑related reasons in immigrant stations174 within federal penitentiaries. Such detention may be assured through arrangements between the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC).
Currently, immigrant stations used to detain persons under the IRPA refer to either a provincial correctional facility or a minimum‑security detention centre managed by the CBSA, commonly referred to as immigration holding centres (IHCs).175 These IHCs are located in Laval, Surrey and Toronto. In recent years, all the provinces have decided to end their agreements with the CBSA authorizing it to detain persons in provincial prisons.176
Section 142 of the IRPA is amended by clause 438 of Bill C‑69 to add a definition of “immigrant station.” An immigrant station is a facility for detaining persons that is operated by the CBSA or used by a peace officer, the “government of a province, a department or agency of the Government of Canada or any person or organization”177 under the terms of an agreement or arrangement between the CSC and the CBSA.
It is also noted that an area of a penitentiary can be an “immigrant station” only if it is so designated by the Commissioner of the CSC at the written request of the President of the CBSA.
Clause 436 of Bill C‑69 adds new provisions to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act that detail the various components of the arrangement that the Commissioner of the CSC may enter into with the CBSA under new sections 94.3(1) and 94.3(2).
Bill C‑69’s implementation impacts the “immigration detainee,” which is defined by new section 94.1 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act as a person who is detained under the IRPA. Under section 55 of the IRPA, persons may be detained for a variety of reasons, including inadmissibility, flight risk, danger to public safety or concealment of their true identity. Justified detention under the IRPA serves to prevent such persons from escaping the control of federal authorities.178
New section 94.2(1) of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act states that the purpose of the arrangement concerns the support the CSC may provide to the CBSA and its detention enforcement officers,179 including through the provision of services, to assist them in the performance of their respective duties and functions and, more specifically, those related to the detention of persons in immigrant stations located within a designated area of a federal penitentiary.
However, this support is limited by new section 94.2(2), which states that it does not allow a CSC officer to be placed in immediate charge or control of an immigrant station operated by the CBSA for the detention of persons, nor does it give a CSC officer the authority to search, escort, arrest or detain an immigration detainee except in exigent circumstances (new section 94.7(4)). A health care professional employed by CSC must also refrain from providing health care to an immigration detainee unless exigent circumstances exist (new section 94.7(5)).
To limit interaction between immigration detainees and the penitentiary’s inmate population, new section 94.5 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act prohibits a CSC officer or CBSA detention enforcement officer from giving immigration detainees of an immigrant station access to an area in the adjacent penitentiary. Exceptions to this rule are possible only if access to the area has been authorized by the institutional head so that the CSC can provide the CBSA with support, if the immigration detainee is escorted by a CBSA detention enforcement officer and if no inmate is present in the area of the penitentiary in question. However, the last condition will not apply to an immigration detainee at an immigrant station adjacent to the penitentiary if the institutional head declares under new section 94.7(1)(a) that exigent circumstances exist there.
Conversely, new section 94.6 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act prohibits a CSC officer or a CBSA detention enforcement officer from permitting a penitentiary inmate access to an adjacent designated immigrant station. However, this prohibition is lifted in the specific case where the institutional head has declared that exigent circumstances exist in the penitentiary, under new section 94.7(1)(b). A penitentiary inmate may therefore have access to the designated immigrant station only if the institutional head authorizes it and if the inmate is escorted by a CSC officer.
With regard to “exigent circumstances” that may arise in a penitentiary or in a designated immigrant station adjacent to one, new section 94.7 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act provides that the institutional head of a penitentiary may declare that such circumstances exist if he or she is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe180 that there is a clear and substantial danger to the life or safety of persons in either of these two places or to the security of the premises. If exigent circumstances are declared, the institutional head is responsible for immediately notifying the detention enforcement officers of the immigrant station, the officers of the adjacent penitentiary and the portion of the CSC that administers health care. When the institutional head is satisfied that the exigent circumstances no longer exist, he or she must also notify them immediately.
The obligation to notify all such employees, in accordance with new sections 94.7(2) and 94.7(3) of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, is important because the scope of the powers normally associated with their duties is expanded during this period. In fact, a declaration of exigent circumstances with respect to a designated immigrant station implies that the institutional head may, so long as he or she is satisfied that circumstances so require, authorize a CSC officer to search, escort, arrest or detain any immigration detainee at the immigrant station to assist CBSA detention enforcement officers in the performance of their duties. In such circumstances, any registered health care professional employed by the CSC may also provide care to immigration detainees at the immigrant station if he or she considers it necessary to preserve their lives or treat a serious injury.
New section 94.3(3) of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act notes that the arrangement must specify, among other things, its duration, the nature of the support the CSC provides to the CBSA and the name of the penitentiary covered by the arrangement. It must also set out a “procedure … for fairly and expeditiously resolving … complaints” that allows any immigration detainee to make a complaint, “without negative consequences,” with respect to activities carried out in immigrant stations during the exigent situations described in sections 94.7(4) and 94.7(5).
While new section 94.3(3) of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act states that the parties to the arrangement are required to include in it the terms mentioned above, new section 94.3(4) merely suggests the possibility (“may”) of providing in the arrangement for the recovery of costs incurred by the CSC in supporting the CBSA.
New section 94.8 echoes section 72 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, which gives senators, members of the House of Commons and judges of courts in Canada access to all areas of a penitentiary and the right to visit any inmate who consents. In the case of designated immigrant stations within penitentiaries, these individuals will have the same access and visiting rights.
New section 94.4(2) of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act is intended to facilitate the implementation of the arrangement for which CSC is responsible under new section 5(f) of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. Specifically, the President of the CBSA may make a written request to the Commissioner of the CSC to designate any area of the penitentiary named in the arrangement as an immigrant station. This designation deems the area of the penitentiary in question not to be a penitentiary.
Clause 441 of Bill C‑69 provides for the repeal of all the legislative amendments in Division 39 of the bill five years after receiving Royal Assent. However, the effects of the Act may be maintained for a maximum of 10 years after Royal Assent, if the Governor in Council approves the extension by order‑in‑council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Public Safety.
Once the legislative provisions have been repealed by the passage of time, any arrangement still in effect between the CBSA and the CSC will terminate, and any designation of a penitentiary area as an immigrant station will be revoked in accordance with clause 437.
The Financial Administration Act (FAA) “provides the cornerstone of the legal framework for financial management within the Government of Canada.”181 Specifically, section 41(1) of the FAA allows the Governor in Council to make regulations respecting conditions under which government contracts can be awarded, while section 44(3) allows the Minister of Finance to enter into any contract or agreement related to public debt and the borrowing of money.
Clause 442(2) of Bill C‑69 adds section 44(3.1) to the FAA to specify that the regulations made through section 41(1) do not apply to contacts entered into under section 44(3).
Clause 442(1) makes minor language changes in the French text of the section 44(3).
Parliament approves the maximum amount of money that the government is allowed to borrow through the Borrowing Authority Act (BAA).
Clause 443 of Bill C‑69 amends section 4 of the BAA to increase the maximum borrowing limit from $1,831 billion to $2,126 billion.
Clause 444 is a coordinating amendment that is conditional on whether section 4(b) of the BAA is also amended by the provisions in Division 2 of Part 4 of the bill. In Division 2, clause 152 amends section 4(b) of the BAA to exclude Canada Mortgage Bonds purchased by the Minister of Finance from the borrowing limit. Clause 444 stipulates that if section 4(b) of the BAA is not amended by that clause on the day of Royal Assent, the maximum borrowing limit is to be raised to $2,228 billion. In this case, clause 443 is deemed never to have come into force and is repealed.
Clause 445 adds section 162.1 to the Trust and Loan Companies Act182 to require the directors of a trust and loan company to make available to shareholders and the Superintendent of Financial Institutions information with respect to the diversity of directors and members of senior management at the same time that a notice of an annual meeting is sent. The Governor in Council is also given the authority to make regulations with respect to the disclosure of diversity information.
Clauses 446 and 447 add sections 214.1 and 801.1 to the Bank Act, and clauses 448 and 449 add sections 166.1 and 795.1 to the Insurance Companies Act183 to require the directors of banks, bank holding companies, insurance companies and insurance holding companies to make similar diversity‑related disclosures.
Clauses 445 to 449 come into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.
To ensure that financial sector legislation is reviewed regularly by Parliament, the sunset provisions of the Trust and Loan Companies Act, the Bank Act and the Insurance Companies Act indicate that companies incorporated under those statutes cannot carry on business in Canada after the date provided in those provisions. Clause 451 amends section 20(1) of the Trust and Loan Companies Act; clauses 452 and 453 amend sections 21(1) and 670(1) of the Bank Act; and clauses 454 and 455 amend sections 21(1) and 707(1) of the Insurance Companies Act to extend the sunset provisions of each statute to 30 June 2026.
Division 43 of Part 4 of Bill C‑69 amends a number of statutes to create an appeal process for decisions made under the Canada Disability Benefit Act (CDBA).184 The bill mainly gives the Social Security Tribunal jurisdiction to hear appeals of these decisions, except for appeals concerning income, which will be referred to the Tax Court of Canada. Finally, applications for judicial review of certain Social Security Tribunal decisions respecting the CDBA will be heard by the Federal Court rather than the Federal Court of Appeal.
Current section 28(1)(g.1) of the Federal Courts Act provides that the Federal Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to hear applications for judicial review of decisions of the Appeal Division of the Social Security Tribunal, except in certain cases.185 Clause 456 amends section 28(1)(g.1) to add to the list of exceptions appeals regarding the extension of the time allowed to make a request for review or reconsideration under the CDBA.
Clause 457 creates new section 12(1.1) of the Tax Court of Canada Act, which grants that court exclusive jurisdiction to hear appeals concerning income under the CDBA and referred by the Social Security Tribunal.
Clause 458 creates new section 18.29(1)(e) of the Tax Court of Canada Act. Current section 18.29(1) lists the regimes for which some aspects of the Tax Court of Canada’s informal procedure apply. New section 18.29(1)(e) adds to this list appeals involving decisions or determinations as to income under the CDBA.
Clause 459 creates new section 66 of the Department of Employment and Social Development Act.186 Under this new provision, the Social Security Tribunal has jurisdiction to dispose of appeals brought under the CDBA, except for decisions or determinations as to the appellant’s income. In those cases, appeals are referred for decision to the Tax Court of Canada.
Clause 460 is a coordinating provision that ensures the amendments that Bill C‑69 makes to section 28(1)(g.1) of the Federal Courts Act do not conflict with the amendments to the same section in the Budget Implementation Act, 2023, No. 1, once they are both in force.
Division 44 of Part 4 of Bill C‑69 repeals the current ministerial exemption provisions for supervised consumption sites (SCSs) under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA)187 while adding new regulation‑making powers that could be used to develop a regulatory authorization scheme for such sites.
Clauses 461(4), 462 and 463 of Bill C‑69 repeal the provisions through which SCSs are currently granted ministerial exemptions from various CDSA prohibitions regarding controlled substances.
In 2003, Canada’s first SCS, known as Insite, was granted an exemption under section 56 of the CDSA, which allows the Minister of Health to grant exemptions to the Act or regulations where it is “necessary for a medical or scientific purpose or is otherwise in the public interest.” In Canada (Attorney General) v. PHS Community Services Society (PHS)188 the Supreme Court of Canada ordered the Minister of Health, on constitutional grounds, to grant a second exemption under section 56 to allow for Insite’s continued operation. In the 2011 decision, the Court noted certain factors that must be considered by the Minister in making decisions about section 56 exemptions for SCSs going forward.189
In June 2015, following the PHS decision, Parliament passed legislation creating new section 56.1 of the CDSA, which established a separate exemption mechanism for activities involving substances obtained in an unauthorized manner (referred to as “illicit substances”).190 Because SCSs allow people to consume illegally obtained drugs in a supervised environment, they fell under this new section. The new section set out various criteria for SCS applications, including a list of required supporting documentation.
In May 2017, the new exemption provision was amended to refer specifically to SCSs, and the application criteria were simplified to primarily reflect the factors listed in the PHS decision.191 The 2017 amendments also added new section 56.2 to the CDSA, which allows a person supervising drug use at an SCS to offer the user alternative pharmaceutical therapy beforehand.
Clause 463 of Bill C‑69 repeals sections 56.1 and 56.2 of the CDSA. It thereby removes the separate ministerial exemption provision for SCSs and the accompanying application criteria that were added in 2015, as well as the provision regarding alternative pharmaceutical therapy that was added in 2017.
Clause 462 of Bill C‑69 repeals section 56(2) of the CDSA. Effectively, this section requires exemptions for activities involving illicit substances to be granted under section 56.1 rather than under section 56. Clause 461(4) also repeals section 55(1.2), which authorizes the Governor in Council to make regulations for carrying out the purposes of section 56.1. The repeal of these sections thus accords with the repeal of section 56.1.
Clause 461 of Bill C‑69 amends section 55 of the CDSA, which sets out the regulating‑making authorities of the Governor in Council for the purposes of the Act. It adds new authorities with respect to “authorizations.”
Under current section 55(1)(c) of the CDSA, the Governor in Council has the power to make regulations regarding licenses for the importation, exportation, production, packaging, sale, provision or administration of controlled substances. Clause 461(1) adds to this section the power to make regulations regarding “authorizations,” in addition to licences. It also broadens the range of activities to which a license or authorization may apply to include possession, transportation, sending, delivery, or “any dealing in” a substance.
Clauses 461(2) and 461(3) amend sections 55(1)(d.1) and 55(1)(h) of the CDSA respectively to extend certain existing regulatory powers regarding licences and permits so that they apply to authorizations as well.
Clause 464 establishes certain definitions pertaining to the transitional clauses. Of particular note, “regulatory scheme” is defined as regulations made under the CDSA regarding authorizations for activities that would have formerly been allowed via a ministerial exemption under section 56.1(1). This definition seems to signal an intention to replace the section 56.1 ministerial exemption provisions with a regulatory authorization scheme for SCSs.
Under clauses 465(1) and 465(2), a valid ministerial exemption granted under section 56.1(1) becomes a regulatory authorization with the same validity period on the day the exemption scheme is repealed. Clause 465(3) clarifies that the terms and conditions of the authorization are the same as the exemption, unless they conflict with the regulatory scheme, in which case the regulations prevail. Similarly, under clause 466, an unprocessed application for a section 56.1(1) exemption becomes an application for a regulatory authorization once the exemption provisions are repealed.
Clause 467 is a catch‑all clause that allows the Governor in Council to make any other regulations deemed necessary for transitional purposes.
Finally, clause 468 specifies that clauses 461(4), 462 and 463 – the clauses that repeal the current ministerial exemption provisions for SCSs – come into force on a day to be determined by the Governor in Council. This allows the Governor in Council to wait until the new regulatory scheme is in place before repealing the current ministerial exemption provisions.
* This Legislative Summary was prepared by the following authors:
(986 KB, 89 pages), Preliminary (unedited) version, Library of Parliament, 21 December 2023, Part 2.1.9. [ Return to text ] (553 KB, 71 pages), SOR/95‑329, Part V.1; and Canada Student Loans Regulations (338 KB, 40 pages), SOR/93‑392, ss. 17–19. [ Return to text ] (5.1 MB, 430 pages), Budget 2024, p. 113. [ Return to text ] (553 KB, 71 pages), SOR/95‑329. [ Return to text ] (5.1 MB, 430 pages), Budget 2024, p. 117. [ Return to text ] (2.9 MB, 141 pages), 21 November 2023, p. 61. [ Return to text ] (2.9 MB, 141 pages), 21 November 2023, p. 40. [ Return to text ] (5.1 MB, 430 pages), Budget 2024, pp. 16 and 286. [ Return to text ] (21.0 MB, 728 pages), 2019. [ Return to text ] (2.7 MB, 270 pages), Budget 2023, p. 131. [ Return to text ] (1.0 MB, 209 pages), 2022 ABCA 165. [ Return to text ] (5.1 MB, 430 pages), Budget 2024. [ Return to text ] (2.7 MB, 270 pages), Budget 2023; and Department of Finance Canada, Fall Economic Statement 2023: Building a strong economy that works for everyone (2.9 MB, 141 pages). [ Return to text ] (5.1 MB, 430 pages), Budget 2024, p. 246. [ Return to text ] (5.1 MB, 430 pages), Budget 2024, p. 148. [ Return to text ] (335 KB, 15 pages), 2017; and Entente Canada‑Québec pour la détention de personnes en vertu de la Loi sur l’immigration et la protection des réfugiés entre Sa Majesté la Reine du Chef du Canada et le Gouvernement du Québec, 2017. For examples of official notices of termination of detention agreements, see: Marco Mendicino, Minister of Public Safety of Canada, Letter to minister of Public Safety Canada from Alberta minister of Public Safety and Emergency Services about CBSA agreement (276 KB, 2 pages), 2023; and Government of Saskatchewan, Corrections, Policing and Public Safety, Province Ends Detainee Agreement with CBSA, News release, 14 April 2023. [ Return to text ]© Library of Parliament