(Return tabled) Question No. 480 Hon. Shawn Murphy: With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency’s (CRA) investigation of cases of possible tax evasion in Liechtenstein: (a) for the 26 cases reassessed by the CRA as of June 10, 2010, what is the breakdown of the $5.2 million (i) in unpaid taxes, (ii) in interest, (iii) in fines, (iv) in penalties; (b) how much of the $5.2 million has been collected; (c) how many of the 26 cases are under appeal; (d) how many of the 26 cases remain open; (e) in how many of the 26 cases has the CRA collected the full amount of taxes, interest, fines and penalties owed; (f) for each case identified in (e) how much was collected (i) in taxes, (ii) in interest, (iii) in fines, (iv) in penalties; (g) how many o ...[+++]f the account holders in the 26 cases have made partial payment; (h) of the partial repayments made (i) what was the largest repayment, (ii) what was the smallest repayment, (iii) what was the average repayment; (i) how much does the CRA anticipate it has yet to collect (i) in taxes, (ii) in interest, (iii) in fines, (iv) in penalties; (j) of the amounts of money contained in the Liechtenstein accounts declared to or discovered by the CRA, what was (i) the largest amount, (ii) the smallest amount, (iii) the average amount; (k) on what date was the CRA first made aware of the names of Canadians with accounts in Liechtenstein; (l) on what date did CRA begin its investigation; (m) on what date did the first audit of an individual account holder begin; (n) of the 106 Canadians identified as having bank accounts in Liechtenstein, how many have (i) had their accounts audited, (ii) not had their accounts audited, (iii) had their accounts reassessed, (iv) not had their accounts reassessed, (v) been the subject of a compliance action, (vi) not been the subject of a compliance action; and (o) how many tax evasion charges have been laid?

However, such a residence permit often takes more than six months to obtain, in which case, instead of attributing this delay to their own officials, the Greek authorities attribute it to the persons concerned by prohibiting them from using their vehicles for more than six months or even by impounding vehicles on the grounds that no tax has been paid on them.

1. Without prejudice to any subsequent harmonisation, every assurance contract shall be subject exclusively to the indirect taxes and parafiscal charges on assurance premiums in the Member State of the commitment, and also, with regard to Spain, to the surcharges legally established in favour of the Spanish ‘Consorcio de Compensación de Seguros’ for the performance of its functions relating to the compensation of losses arising from extraordinary events occurring in that Member State.

However, in the cases giving rise to those judgments, there was a direct link, with respect to the taxpayer subject to the tax, between the deductibility of its operating expenses and its later taxation.

2. Permanent ACP staff members not referred to in paragraph 1 shall be exempted by their host country from any taxes on salaries, emoluments or allowances paid to them by the ACP States from the day on which such income becomes subject to tax levied for the benefit of the ACP States.

Relations between Member states not covered by bilateral agreement (as at 1 January 1991) Denmark* Greece Greece** Spain Greece* Ireland Greece* Luxembourg Greece Portugal Spain* Ireland Portugal* Luxembourg Portugal Netherlands Portugal Ireland * Treaty under negociation ** Treaty signed but not yet in force Tax relief systems: neutrality of treatment between foreign, source and domestic source dividends where a full or partial credit for corporation tax paid (e.g. under an imputation system see P. 2) is given to domestic source dividend income, the same relief is not granted to foreign-source income (e.g. a french resident may receive ...[+++]the benefit of "avoir fiscal" only on french source dividends, but not on foreign dividend income; subject to treaty provisions.