Legal news and trends for Canadian in-house counsel and c-suite executives
Issue link: https://digital.canadianlawyermag.com/i/50892
EDITOR'S BOX By Kelly Harris INHOUSE Group Publisher: Karen Lorimer Editorial Director Gail J. Cohen Editor: Kelly Harris Staff Writer: Glenn Kauth Copy Editor: Neal Adams Creative Director: Einar Rice Art Director: Janet Popadiuk Account Co-ordinator: Mary Hatch Publications Mail Agreement #40766500 ISSN 0703-2129 Copyright © 2008 G.S.T. Registration #R121349799 Advertising Sales Representatives Legal Suppliers: Kimberlee Pascoe Tel: (905) 713-4342 E-mail: kpascoe@clbmedia.ca Law Firms: Karen Lorimer Tel: (905) 713-4339 E-mail: klorimer@clbmedia.ca Kathy Liotta Tel: (905) 713-4340 E-mail: kliotta@clbmedia.ca Rose Noonan Tel: (905) 726-5444 E-mail: rnoonan@clbmedia.ca Sales Co-ordinator: Sandy Shutt Tel: (905) 713-4337 E-mail: sshutt@clbmedia.ca Canadian Lawyer Magazine Inc. President: Stuart J. Morrison Canadian Lawyer InHouse is published 6 times a year by Canadian Lawyer Magazine Inc., 240 Edward St., Aurora, Ont. L4G 3S9 (905) 841-6480 Fax: (905) 727-0017. E-mail: canlawmag@clbmedia.ca. Web: www.canadianlawyermag.com/inhouse All rights reserved. Contents may not be reprinted without written permission. The opinions expressed in articles are not necessarily those of the publisher. Information presented is compiled from sources believed to be accurate, however, the publisher assumes no responsi- bility for errors or omissions. Canadian Lawyer InHouse disclaims any warranty as to the accuracy, completeness or currency of the contents of this publication and disclaims all liability in respect of the results of any action taken or not taken in reliance upon information in this publication. To subscribe Call 1-888-743-3551 x4355 or email kschulz-lacey@clbmedia.ca RETURN UNDELIVERABLE CANADIAN ADDRESS TO: CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT 240 EDWARD ST., AURORA, ON L4G 3S9 Indexed in the Canadian Periodical Index R The law of unintended consequences ecently the Canadian Federal Court of Appeal ordered eBay Canada to hand over anonymous customer records held in the United States. At the core of the decision was the desire of the Canadian Minister of National Revenue to see records of eBay's "PowerSellers," or large volume vendors, that may have unpaid taxes. The records are held in California and are anonymous. An earlier ruling forcing the minister to show cause before acquiring anonymous records was tossed out by the latest decision. Then there was a story of an American customer of Swiss bank UBS AG, peti- tioning a Swiss court to stop the bank from handing over his records to U.S. tax authorities, claimed handing over his records contravened Swiss banking laws. It seems in Switzerland in order for authorities to seize banking records they have to prove almost beyond a shadow of a doubt that tax fraud has occurred. Yes, to see the records you have to prove tax fraud, but to prove tax fraud you have to know the assets, but you can't really know what the assets are unless you can see the bank records, which you can't see unless you can prove tax fraud. It's like "Who's on First" for bankers. That takes it too far. A country needs to be able to use the courts to seek infor- mation on assets when they have reason to believe a person is evading their taxes. That's far from calling on the courts to force a company to hand over records of anonymous customers, held offshore mind you, that may or may not be avoiding their taxes, simply to troll for deviants. Aside from it being a fishing expedition, it is anti-business. When regimes in the world like Switzerland exist, going to ri- diculous lengths to protect customer records, how can Canada compete? If the same rule was applied — as several lawyers have said it could be — to Canadian-based UBS AG affiliates, or ABN AMRO or the Hong Kong Service Bank or Merrill Lynch, what would their response be? They'd more than likely shut down Canadian-based operations rather than hand over customer records. The irony is the tool the authorities are using to shore up tax leakage may lead to companies pulling out of Canada, thereby costing the government tax revenue. Making this law truly a law of unintended consequences. IH letter to the editor Thank you for publishing the profile on page 37 of the most recent edition. In reference to the public utilities board, I had not – at the time of the interview – ever attended a PUB hearing. I did attend the 2008 public hearings, but it was most definitely in a supporting role only. The MPI team was, in fact, led by the CEO, the CFO, and the general counsel, among others. While I am indeed the point man on access and privacy issues, I cannot take any credit for the MPI responses to staged accidents, fraudulent claims, and the Dauphin hail storm. That credit properly belongs to other MPI employees, both within and beyond the legal department.We have a very good team of employees here at MPI, and I do not want anyone to think that I, personally, do it all. Dean Scaletta Acting director of legal services and acting assistant general counsel Manitoba Public Insurance C ANADIAN Lawyer INHOUSE DECEMBER 2008 3