This page has been archived.
Archived Content
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
2007-08
Departmental Performance Report
Canada Revenue Agency
Supplementary Information (Tables)
Table of Contents
Table 4 Sources of Respendable and Non-Respendable Non-Tax Revenue
By virtue of its mandate, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) is responsible for collecting tax revenue; these are described earlier in the Audited Financial Statements – Administered Activities. The CRA is also responsible for collecting
non-tax revenue, similar to other government departments and agencies; these are detailed below, divided between respendable and non-respendable.
Table 4.1 Respendable Non-Tax Revenue
|
|
(in thousands of dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxpayer and Business Assistance
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment of Returns and Payment Processing
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts Receivable and Returns Compliance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Respendable Revenue pursuant to Section 60 of the CRA Act (cash receipts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refund of Previous Year’s Expenditures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advance Pricing Agreement
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Services of a Regulatory Nature
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Services of a Non-Regulatory Nature
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales of Goods and Information Products
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Respendable Revenue pursuant to Section 60 of the CRA Act (cash receipts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from the Disposal of Surplus Crown Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Revenues credited to Vote 1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Respendable Non-Tax Revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Footnote 1] CRA charges taxpayers (based on a regulated user fee) for providing tax rulings in advance of a transaction taking place (to provide tax certainty).
[Footnote 2] Comprised mainly of a basic fee charged to the provinces for recoveries provided under the tax collection agreements (
TCA). Also involves work over and above the
TCA (e.g. refund
set-off, additional audit coverage, benefit programs).
[Footnote 3] Comprised mainly of information technology services provided to the Canada Border Services Agency (
CBSA) ($133M).
[Footnote 4] Comprised mainly of amounts recovered on behalf of Public Works and Government Services Canada (
PWGSC) and Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (
TBS)
(e.g. Employee Benefit Plans –
EBP).
[Footnote 5] The large variance between the 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 Actuals for Revenues Credited to the Vote (
RCV) is related to the addition of Accommodation Services and Justice to our
RCV base starting in 2007-2008.
[Footnote 6] The
CPP-EI budget is based on a unit cost approach. The difference between Authorities and Actuals is related to forecasted volumes that did not materialize.
Table 4.2 Non-Respendable Non-Tax Revenue[Footnote 1]
|
|
(in thousands of dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxpayer and Business Assistance
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment of Returns and Payment Processing
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts Receivable and Returns Compliance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Details of Non-Respendable Non-Tax Revenue
|
|
|
|
|
Refunds of previous years’ expenditures
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments to prior year’s payables
|
|
|
|
|
Sales of goods and services
|
|
|
|
|
|
Public building and property rental
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lease and use of public property
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recovery of employee benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Non-Respendable Non-Tax Revenue
|
|
|
|
|
1 This table reflects the approach taken in the Agency’s Audited Financial Statements where a clear distinction is made between Agency activities and administered activities. Interest and penalties collected for personal, corporate and other taxes, which are part of the Agency’s administered activities rather than Agency’s
activities, are excluded.
Table 5 User Fees/External Fees
Table 5.1 a) User Fees Act (UFA) – Advance Income Tax Ruling Fee
|
Advance Income Tax Ruling Fees
|
|
|
|
Financial Administration Act – 19(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The key service standard target is to issue advance income tax rulings to taxpayers within an average of 60 calendar days of receipt of all essential information. The Income Tax Rulings Directorate’s Quality Management System requires a telephone acknowledgement of receipt of the request within 24 business hours. Within
14 days, a review of the file for completeness is conducted and an acknowledgement letter, complete with a contact name and request for any missing information (if required) is sent to the client. The client is again contacted by telephone when the file is assigned for processing. Where a delay is unavoidable, clients are contacted and delays are discussed with
them.
|
|
Actual 2007-2008 results: 101 days
|
|
|
Estimated Full Cost ($000)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The performance standard was not met primarily due to staffing issues. The performance result is expected to improve and gradually get closer to the performance standard in the next few years through the additional hiring and training of staff.
|
According to prevailing legal opinion, where the corresponding fee introduction or most recent modification occurred prior to March 31, 2004 the:
- Performance standard, if provided, may not have received Parliamentary review;
- Performance standard, if provided, may not respect all establishment requirements under the User Fees Act (UFA) (e.g. international comparison; independent complaint address); and
- Performance result, if provided, is not legally subject to UFA section 5.1 regarding fee reductions for failed performance.
Table 5.1 b) Policy on Service Standards for External Fees – Advance Income Tax Ruling Fee
|
Advance Income Tax Ruling Fees
|
|
The key service standard target is to issue advance income tax rulings to taxpayers within an average of 60 calendar days of receipt of all essential information. The Income Tax Rulings Directorate’s ( ITRD) Quality Management System requires a telephone
acknowledgement of receipt of the request within 24 business hours. Within 14 days, a review of the file for completeness is conducted and an acknowledgement letter, including a contact name and request for any missing information (if required) is sent to the client. The client is again contacted by telephone when the file is assigned for processing. Where a delay
is unavoidable, clients are contacted and delays are discussed with them.
|
|
Actual 2007-2008 results: 101 days
|
|
Client satisfaction questionnaires were sent out to all advance income tax ruling clients for a 2-year period from October 2002 through October 2004. At that time, responding clients from this group indicated a satisfaction rate in excess of 95%. More recently, client feedback is largely received informally during
ITRD’s attendance at major tax conferences. Generally, there is a very high degree of satisfaction with the quality of advance income tax rulings albeit the clients would like to receive them faster.
|
|
B. Other Information: N/A
|
As established pursuant to the Policy on Service Standards for External Fees:
- Service standards may not have received Parliamentary review;
- Service standards may not respect all performance standard establishment requirements under the User Fees Act (UFA) (e.g. international comparison; independent complaint address); and
- Performance results are not legally subject to UFA section 5.1 regarding fee reduction for failed performance.
Table 5.2 a) User Fees Act (UFA) – Taxation Statistical Analysis and Data Processing Fee
|
Taxation Statistical Analysis and Data Processing Fee
|
|
|
|
Financial Administration Act 19(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provide statistical data to taxpayers within an average of 30 calendar days of receipt of all essential information.
|
|
Average provision time for requested data was 28.85 days
|
|
|
Estimated Full Cost ($000)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Other Information: N/A
|
According to prevailing legal opinion, where the corresponding fee introduction or most recent modification occurred prior to March 31, 2004 the:
- Performance standard, if provided, may not have received Parliamentary review;
- Performance standard, if provided, may not respect all establishment requirements under the User Fees Act (UFA) (e.g. international comparison; independent complaint address); and
- Performance result, if provided, is not legally subject to UFA section 5.1 regarding fee reductions for failed performance.
Table 5.2 b) Policy on Service Standards for External Fees – Taxation Statistical Analysis and Data Processing Fee
|
Taxation Statistical Analysis and Data Processing Fee
|
|
Provide statistical data to taxpayers within an average of 30 calendar days of receipt of all essential information.
|
|
Average provision time for requested data was 28.85 days during the 2007-2008 fiscal.
|
|
Client satisfaction surveys were sent to all external clients. The responses received indicated a satisfaction rate in excess of 94%.
|
B. Other Information: N/A
|
As established pursuant to the Policy on Service Standards for External Fees:
- Service standards may not have received Parliamentary review;
- Service standards may not respect all performance standard establishment requirements under the User Fees Act (UFA) (e.g. international comparison; independent complaint address); and
- Performance results are not legally subject to UFA section 5.1 regarding fee reduction for failed performance.
Table 5.3 a) User Fees Act (UFA) – Access to Information Processing Fee
|
Fees charged for the processing of access requests filed under the Access to Information Act
|
|
Other Products and Services (O)
|
|
Access to Information and Privacy Act
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Processing time of 30 calendar days for the Access to Information Act, with no time limit for the extension period.
|
CRA’s internal processing standard is 90% of completed request should be completed within legislative deadline.
|
|
92% of the requests made under the Access to Information Act were processed within the legislative timeframe.
|
|
|
Estimated Full Cost ($000)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is the Canada Revenue Agency’s practice to waive Reproduction fees where the total owing per amount is less than $25.
|
According to prevailing legal opinion, where the corresponding fee introduction or most recent modification occurred prior to March 31, 2004 the:
- Performance standard, if provided, may not have received Parliamentary review;
- Performance standard, if provided, may not respect all establishment requirements under the User Fees Act (UFA) (e.g. international comparison; independent complaint address); and
- Performance result, if provided, is not legally subject to UFA section 5.1 regarding fee reductions for failed performance.
Table 5.3 b) Policy on Service Standards for External Fees – Access to Information Processing Fee
|
Access to Information Processing Fees
|
|
Processing time of 30 calendar days for the Access to Information Act, with no time limit for the extension period.
|
CRA’s internal processing standard is 90% of completed request should be completed within legislative deadline.
|
|
92% of the requests made under the Access to Information Act were processed within the legislative timeframe.
|
|
The service standard is established by the Access to Information Act and the Access to Information Regulations. Consultations with stakeholders were undertaken for amendments done in 1986 and 1992.
|
|
It is the Canada Revenue Agency’s practice to waive Reproduction fees where the total owing per amount is less than $25.
|
As established pursuant to the Policy on Service Standards for External Fees:
- Service standards may not have received Parliamentary review;
- Service standards may not respect all performance standard establishment requirements under the User Fees Act (UFA) (e.g. international comparison; independent complaint address); and
- Performance results are not legally subject to UFA section 5.1 regarding fee reduction for failed performance.
Table 6 Details on Project Spending
|
|
(in thousands of dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prior Years’ Expenditures to March 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
Assessment and Benefit Services Branch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GOL – My Business Account
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individual Identification Renewal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxpayer Services and Debt Management Branch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Integrated Revenue Collections
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payroll Deductions Accounting and Collections Renewal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Tax Collections Integration
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compliance Program Branch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compliance Systems Redesign
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise Work Management
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxpayer Relief Registry Redesign project (formerly Fairness Management Information System)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Publishing Content Management Solution
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Information Technology Branch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business Intelligence/Decision Support
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security Modernization Program
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Data Centre Recoverability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate Administrative Systems Sustainability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Managed Distributed Environment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Network Services Enhancements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finance and Administration Branch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Information Strategy – Revenue Ledger Strategic Plan (formerly FIS Development Phase 2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enhanced Travel Management Solution
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Agency Classification Standard
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation Service Delivery Renewal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Footnote 1] Prior Years’ Expenditures to March 31, 2007 have been restated to more accurately reflect the total spending attributable to these initiatives.
[Footnote 2] Any discrepancies in the sum of Sub-total amounts can be attributed to rounding.
Table 7 Details on Transfer Payment Programs (TPPs)
Three Transfer Payment Programs with payments in excess of $5M were administered by the Agency in 2007-2008:
- Children’s Special Allowance Payments (CSA) (Statutory)
- Energy Cost Assistance Measures Expenses (Statutory)
- Transfers to Provinces under the Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006 (Statutory)
Table 7.1 Children’s Special Allowance Payments (CSA) (Statutory)
|
|
Total Expenditures: $1,529,508,000 to date including 2007-2008
|
Description of Transfer Payment Program:
Tax-free monthly payments made to agencies and foster parents who are licensed by provincial or federal governments to provide for the care and education of children under the age of 18 who physically reside in Canada and who are not in the care of their parents. CSA payments are equivalent to Canada Child Tax Benefit payments. CSA payments are governed by the Children’s Special Allowances Act which provides that this allowance be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
|
Objective(s), expected result(s) and outcomes:
The Canada Revenue Agency’s second strategic outcome states that “eligible families and individuals receive timely and correct benefit payments”. In this context, the specific objective of the CSA is to ensure that children in care receive their
rightful share of entitlements. According to the CSA Act, the CSA payments “shall be applied exclusively toward the care, maintenance, education, training or advancement of the child in respect of whom it is
paid.”
|
Achieved results or progress made:
Monthly payments were made to 293 agencies and foster parents on behalf of 56,255 children. Payments were issued on schedule, no delays were reported.
|
|
Actual Spending 2005-2006
|
Actual Spending 2006-2007
|
Planned Spending 2007-2008
|
Total Authorities 2007-2008
|
Actual Spending 2007-2008
|
Variance(s) Planned/Actual
|
|
(in thousands of dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Types of Transfer Payments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comment(s) on variance(s): N/A
|
Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s): N/A
|
[Footnote 1] Responsibility for
CSA Statutory Vote payment was transferred effective August 28, 1995 from Human Resources and Social Development Canada (P.C. Order 1995-342)
* A grant is an unconditional transfer payment where the government chooses to further policy or program delivery by issuing payments to individuals or organizations. Eligibility criteria and applications received in advance of payment provide sufficient assurance that the objectives of payment will be met, therefore specific conditional
agreements with the recipient are not required. The government must list a grant in the Estimates but may withhold the grant(s) if eligibility criteria are not met.
Table 7.2 Energy Cost Assistance Measures Expenses (Statutory)
Implementation Date: Fall 2005
|
End Date: December 31, 2008
|
Total Expenditures: $362,719,000 to date
|
Description of Transfer Payment Program:
The Energy Cost Benefit ( ECB) Program is a one-time payment issued to low-income families with children and to seniors. Families entitled to receive the National Child Benefit ( NCB) supplement will receive $250 and seniors entitled
to receive the Guaranteed Income Supplement ( GIS) will receive $125 or $250 for senior couples. It is estimated that 3.1 million payments will be effected under the ECB consisting of 1.5 million payments by the Canada Revenue Agency ( CRA) to families receiving
the NCB and 1.6 million payments by Human Resources and Social Development Canada to seniors receiving the GIS.
|
Objective(s), expected result(s) and outcomes:
The CRA’s second strategic outcome states that “eligible families and individuals receive timely and correct benefit payments”. In this context, the specific objective of the ECB is to ensure that eligible recipients receive their rightful share of
entitlements.
|
Achieved results or progress made:
ECB payments administered by the CRA were issued by cheque starting on January 12, 2006, or will be issued after the assessment of the prospective recipients 2004 tax returns, whichever is the latest.
|
|
Actual Spending 2005-2006
|
Actual Spending 2006-2007
|
Planned Spending 2007-2008
|
Total Authorities 2007-2008
|
Actual Spending 2007-2008
|
Variance(s) Planned/Actual
|
|
(in thousands of dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Types of Transfer Payments*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comment(s) on variance(s): N/A
|
Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s): N/A
|
* Other Transfer Payment is a transfer payment based on legislation or an arrangement that normally includes a formula or schedule as one element used to determine the expenditure amount. However, once a payment is made, the recipient may redistribute the funds among several categories of expenditure in the arrangement.
Table 7.3 Payments to Provinces under the Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006 (Statutory)
Implementation Date: October 12, 2006
|
End Date: October 12, 2013 with an option for an additional 2 years
|
Total Expenditures: $603,601,579 to date
|
Description of Transfer Payment Program:
The export charge, to be levied by Canada on exports of softwood lumber products to the United States, will be collected and administered by the Canada Revenue Agency ( CRA) with support from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade ( DFAIT) on behalf of the provinces. Under the Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006 (Act), the CRA is responsible for making disbursements to the provinces of a portion of the charge collected over the course of the application of
the Softwood Lumber Agreement, 2006. These payments will be reduced by several factors: refunds paid to the industry, costs for the administration and implementation of the Agreement and the Act as well as the costs incurred for certain litigation resulting from the Agreement or Act. The Act applies to the following regions: BC Interior, BC Coastal,
Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec. Exports from the remaining provinces and territories are excluded.
|
Objective(s), expected result(s) and outcomes:
Softwood lumber is a significant economic generator in all provinces. The Canada – US Softwood Lumber Agreement, supported by the majority of industry members and the major lumber producing provinces, provides for long-term and predictable market access
to the United States, which is of significant benefit to the Canadian industry. The CRA’s first strategic outcome is that “Taxpayers meet their obligations and Canada’s revenue base is protected”. In this context, one of the CRA’s goals in
administering the Act is to ensure that softwood lumber exporters in regions covered by the Act comply with their registration, filing, reporting, and remittance obligations. The CRA’s ability to maintain continued compliance with the Act will demonstrate to U.S.
authorities that Canada’s obligations are met and the Agreement will be maintained.
|
Achieved results or progress made:
The first payment covering revenues collected, minus costs for the period between the entry into force on October 12, 2006 and September 30, 2007, was made to the provinces on January 11, 2008. A second payment was made on March 31, 2008 covering the calendar quarter from October 1, 2007 to December 31, 2007. Payments will
continue on a quarterly basis until the termination of the Agreement, unless lumber market prices increase to the point where no export charge is applicable for that period.
|
|
Actual Spending 2005-2006
|
Actual Spending 2006-2007
|
Planned Spending 2007-2008
|
Total Authorities 2007-2008
|
Actual Spending 2007-2008
|
Variance(s) Planned/Actual
|
|
(in thousands of dollars)
|
Taxpayer and Business Assistance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Types of Transfer Payments*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comment(s) on variance(s): N/A
|
Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s): N/A
|
* Other Transfer Payment is a transfer payment based on legislation or an arrangement that normally includes a formula or schedule as one element used to determine the expenditure amount. However, once a payment is made, the recipient may redistribute the funds among several categories of expenditure in the arrangement.
Canada Revenue Agency Sustainable Development Strategy Performance, 2007-2008
The commitments in the Canada Revenue Agency's (CRA) Sustainable Development (SD) Strategy for 2007-2010 are implemented through specific activities. The following tables provides a brief summary of the progress made against those
activities that were scheduled for completion during the 2007-2008 fiscal year.[Footnote 1]
CRA SD Strategy Goal 1: Reduce the effects of our operations on land, air, and water.
Activities scheduled for completion in 2007-2008 that contributed to the Federal
SD Goal(s) and/or Green Government Operations (
GGO) Government-wide Target(s)
[Footnote 2] below are noted
explicitly in the “Department
's Expected Results” column.
-
Federal Goal 3: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
- GGO Target: Reduce by 15% from 2002-2003 levels, GHG emissions per vehicle kilometre from the departmental fleet by 2010.
- Federal Goal 6: Strengthen federal governance and decision-making to support SD/GGO Target: Set a minimum of three procurement targets over three years.
[Footnote 1] Spending and
FTE figures for sub-activities may not add up to this total due to rounding.
Department's Expected Results for 2007-2008
|
Supporting Performance Indicator(s)
|
Achieved SDS Departmental Results for 2007-2008
|
Activity 1.1.1.1: Develop a methodology for estimating Greenhouse Gas ( GHG) emissions from waste management programs at priority facilities.
|
|
The GHG methodology was developed. It was applied to the 2006-2007 solid waste audit of 29 priority facilities. The results showed that by reducing, recycling and reusing about 2,700 tonnes of solid waste, the 29 priority facilities avoided generating more than 2,000 tonnes
of CO2 equivalents per year.
We will assess the applicability of the GHG methodology to future solid waste audit results.
Status: In progress (77% complete)
|
Activity 1.1.2.1: Include SD clauses and environmental specifications in all new strategic sourcing contracts.
[Federal Goal 6/GGO Target: Set a minimum of three procurement targets over three years.]
|
Percentage of strategic sourcing contracts that include environmental specifications.
|
All (100% or 2 of 2) strategic sourcing contracts issued in 2007-2008 contained environmental specifications/criteria.
Percentage of green products purchased was 11.4% of total product spending, exceeding our target of 10% for 2007-2008.
|
Activity 1.1.2.2: Develop a management plan to expand the scope of green procurement to include IT hardware and software.
|
Expanded scope of Environmental Management Program for Green Procurement. (output)
|
We drafted a management plan to green the procurement of Information Technology ( IT) equipment. Implementation will begin in 2008-2009. We also expanded the scope of the Environmental Management Program for Green Procurement to include IT commodities.
Status: In progress (88% complete)
|
Activity 1.1.3.1: Expand the paper baseline to include the three major sources of the CRA's paper consumption: 1) multi-purpose office paper; 2) paper used in CRA printing systems (e.g., ELCS); and 3) paper
printed in external printing shops.
|
|
We expanded the paper baseline in 2007-2008 to include paper used in CRA printing systems and external printing shops.
The results for 2007-2008 show that CRA bought the equivalent of 1.2 billion sheets of paper used in envelopes, publications, and forms.
|
Activity 1.1.4.1: Establish an emissions ( GHG) baseline for business travel to include local and long-distance travel and videoconferencing.
[Federal Goal 3: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions.]
|
Baseline for business travel. (output)
|
We will establish the business travel baseline in 2008-2009 when analysis of the travel data is complete.
Status: In progress (35% complete)
|
Activity 1.1.5.1: All vehicles purchased/leased by the CRA are either hybrid or alternative fuel capable, where operationally feasible.
[Federal Goal 3/GGO Target: Reduce by 15% from 2002-2003 levels, GHG emissions per vehicle kilometre from the
departmental fleet by 2010.]
|
Number and percentage increase in hybrid and alternative fuel vehicles.
|
The number of hybrids and ATF vehicles owned/ leased by the CRA in 2007-2008 increased by 2 vehicles. The percentage of hybrids and ATF vehicles in CRA fleet increased by 1% (vis-à-vis 2006-2007) to 39%.
|
Activity 1.1.5.2: All gasoline purchased for CRA road vehicles will be ethanol blended, where available.
[Federal Goal 3/GGO Target: Reduce by 15% from 2002-2003 levels, GHG emissions per vehicle kilometre from the
departmental fleet by 2010.]
|
Percentage of gasoline purchased for CRA vehicles that is ethanol blended.
|
Total gasoline purchased by CRA in 2007-2008 was 135,436 litres. Total Ethanol blend was 25,107 litres. Percentage of gasoline that is Ethanol blended was 18.5% (up from 7.2% in 2006-2007).
|
Activity 1.1.5.3: Develop and distribute communications materials to CRA fleet drivers on ethanol blended fuels and retailers.
|
Number of CRA fleet drivers who received communications material on ethanol fuels.
|
We developed the EMP for energy. Implementation will take place in 2008-2009, and results will be available after the fiscal year end March 31, 2009
|
Activity 1.1.6.1: Develop an Environmental Management Program ( EMP) for Energy.
|
Percentage of targets completed in environmental management program for energy.
|
Results will be available after fiscal year end March 31, 2009.
|
Activity 1.2.1.1: Complete an assessment of IT hardware and software disposal practices across the CRA and use results to expand the scope of the environmental management program ( EMP) for hazardous materials.
|
Assessment document, and new IT hardware/ software disposal activities in the EMP for hazardous materials. (output)
|
Competing priorities did not allow a thorough assessment. Work will continue in 2008-2009.
Status: In progress (10% complete)
|
[Footnote 2] Spending and
FTE figures for sub-activities may not add up to this total due to rounding.
CRA SD Strategy Goal 2: Our programs demonstrate sustainable service delivery.
Activities scheduled for completion in 2007-2008 that contributed to the Federal
SD Goal(s) and/or Green Government Operations (
GGO) Government-wide Target(s) below are noted explicitly in the “Department
's Expected
Results” column.
- Federal Goal 4: Sustainable Communities – Communities enjoy a prosperous economy, a vibrant and equitable society, and a healthy environment for current and future generations.
Department's Expected Results for 2007-2008
|
Supporting Performance Indicator(s)
|
Achieved SDS Departmental Results for 2007-2008
|
Activity 2.1.1.1: Research and develop an historical timeline of CRA tax filing processes, focusing on the shift from paper filing to E-filing, and the associated paper burden.
|
Timeline report with paper usage (output).
|
The timeline report was developed. We completed the report that assessed paper savings resulting from the electronic services provided by the T1 tax program between 1990 and 2007. The finding showed that of the 402 million tax returns filed by taxpayers
within that period, a total of 107 million (27%) returns were processed electronically through EFILE and NETFILE. This resulted in savings of 4.3 billion sheets of paper from the reduction in the mail out of T1 returns and tax packages. This is equivalent to approximately 500,000 trees, and
avoided the creation of about 54,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions.
|
Activity 2.2.1.1: Integrate sustainability criteria into new key federal/provincial partnerships, where appropriate.
|
Percentage of partnership negotiations/discussions that included considerations of sustainability criteria; number of commitments completed in the action plan for integrating SD into partnerships.
|
To assist the application of the criteria, we prepared a guide for applying the SD Criteria that was posted on the SD Website. The link to the Website was also included in the guide documents.
Data on the use of the criteria will become available when the guide documents are finalized and are in use.
Status: In progress (40% complete)
|
Activity 2.2.1.2: Promote the Community Volunteer Income Tax Program ( CVITP) to ensure that eligible Canadians are aware of the assistance that can be obtained through the program; and provide program volunteers and community associations with the necessary
software/computers to assist individuals to file their tax returns electronically.
|
Number of volunteers trained and number of community associations carrying out the CVITP in partnership with CRA; number of software/computers donated to the CVITP.
|
In order to carry out the CVITP in 2007-2008, the CRA trained 15, 041 volunteers and partnered with 2,096 community associations. We also donated 10,520 tax software programs. No computers were donated to the
program during this period.
|
Activity 2.2.1.3: Contribute to economic development in Canada and abroad by holding a leadership position within organizations, such as the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development ( OECD); and sharing information with partners on
better tax administration, encouraging better economic practices, working with partners to develop internationally accepted tax rules, and managing and coordinating technical assistance projects in different countries.
[Federal Goal 4: Sustainable Communities – Communities enjoy a prosperous economy, a vibrant and equitable society, and a healthy environment for current and future generations.]
|
Membership and/or leadership position in international committees; shared information, best practices, and technical assistance with partners. (output)
|
The CRA continued to manage multilateral and bilateral relations with international organizations, and provide technical assistance on tax administration.
|
Activity 2.3.1.1: Integrate principles of sustainable development, such as innovation and efficiency, into the CRA's marketing and/or branding strategies, and advertising campaigns.
|
Type of SD concepts included in marketing and branding products.
|
The CRA developed a branding strategy to encourage and equip employees to deliver clear and consistent messaging to both internal and external audiences when conducting CRA business.
As an example of SD messaging in CRA brand, the Agency 's advertising radio campaign for the 2008 tax filing season advocated electronic tax filing as a way of lessening paper burden. The CRA also promoted the Agency 's commitment to SD in a new youth recruitment video.
Status: In progress (65% complete)
|
Activity 2.3.1.2: Explore the use of an ‘ SD watermark ' or SD statement on client and taxpayer correspondence and the CRA 's external Web site.
|
Result of recommendations report for the use of SD watermark and next steps.
|
Resulting from the consultations, the Minister's Office and the Commissioner 's Office formally adopted the practice of duplex printing all Executive Correspondence letters destined for external or internal distribution. And specifically, those correspondences that are managed by the Executive Correspondence and
Language Services ( ECLS) Division. We also updated the CRA writing, and related guidelines to reflect this change, as well as, promoted CRA's Reduction in Internal Paper
Consumption Directive.
|
CRA SD Strategy Goal 3: All employees apply sustainable development in their jobs.
Activities scheduled for completion in 2007-2008 that contributed to the Federal
SD Goal(s) and/or Green Government Operations (
GGO) Government-wide Target(s) below are noted explicitly in the “Department
's Expected
Results” column.
- Federal Goal 3: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Department's Expected Results for 2007-2008
|
Supporting Performance Indicator(s)
|
Achieved SDS Departmental Results for 2007-2008
|
Activity 3.1.1.1: Include meaningful and measurable SD expectations in the guidelines for preparing performance agreements for Executive Cadre and Management/gestion ( MG) management levels.
|
SD responsibilities in guideline document. (output)
|
For 2007-2008, a total of 89% of ECs included SD in their performance agreement. This compares to 68% in 2006-2007.
We updated and included SD clauses in the 2008-2009 guide for preparing EC performance agreements. We also drafted SD clauses for inclusion in the guide for preparing MG performance expectations. However, we were unable to finalize the MG clauses due to extended consultations with stakeholders. This will be completed in 2008-2009.
Status: In progress (95% complete)
|
Activity 3.1.1.2: Continue to develop and deliver job-specific SD training for MG managers.
|
Number of MG Learning Program sessions with SD content delivered and number of participants.
|
A total of 360 MGs attended 18 SD sessions under the MGLP for 2007-2008.
|
Activity 3.1.1.3: Explore opportunities to deliver SD messages and communications materials to ECs, and to integrate principles of SD into new management development learning
programs/resources. (e.g., EXDP).
|
Number of EC managers who received training or communications materials on SD.
|
Data on the number of EC managers who attended the sessions since the provision of SD information will be available in 2008-2009.
|
Activity 3.2.1.1: Innovate in the delivery of general SD awareness messages to employees through national campaigns, events, and local initiatives, such as Environment Week.
|
Results of and participation in national and local SD awareness campaigns and events.
|
The results from the 2007 SD employee awareness survey showed that participation rates for our three national events were: Earth Day – 36%, Environment Week – 45%, and Waste Reduction Week – 54%.
|
Activity 3.2.1.2: Implement the SD Innovation Fund ( SDIF) nationally to employees.
|
Number of Innovation Fund proposals received, accepted and results of funded projects.
|
For the first launch in 2007-2008, we received 35 submissions from which 5 projects were selected and awarded a total of $50,000. In the second launch of the SDIF, we received 32 proposals from employees. A total of $37,000 was awarded to five
projects for implementation in 2008-2009.
|
Activity 3.2.1.3: Strengthen employee commitment to SD in workplace by providing employees and their managers with the necessary tools and examples to include SD commitments in employee performance agreements.
|
Web page and guidance material on including SD in employee performance agreements. (output)
|
We developed tools to help SD Coordinators promote employee SD clauses, and to enable managers and employees draft SD clauses that are appropriate to their job function. At
the end of the period, stakeholder consultations were ongoing.
Status: In progress (40% complete)
|
Activity 3.2.1.4: Develop and launch a Recognition Toolkit for recognition coordinators to enable them to recognize employees in the branches and regions for their contributions to SD in the workplace, such as innovation in business practices leading to efficient internal
operations and service delivery.
|
Number of employees recognized for their contributions to SD in the workplace.
|
During the year we finalized the SD Recognition Toolkit that was drafted in 2006-2007. The purpose of the toolkit is to enable the SD Network to integrate SD recognition in
the formal recognition program of the CRA.
Through future reports from the Agency 's internal SD Network, we will be able to report ad hoc results on the number of employees recognized for SD contribution.
|
Activity 3.2.2.1: Establish a baseline for employee commuting, such as emissions ( GHG) and employee commuting behaviour /mode of travel.
[Federal Goal 3: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions.]
|
Baseline survey and report. (output)
|
The results from our survey showed that CRA employees made over 20 million commuting trips; traveled over 360 million kilometers when commuting to and from work; and produced over 64,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases ( GHGs) and
2,800 tonnes of air pollution while commuting. The results also showed that 47% of employees drove alone in their vehicles, 25% took public transit, 20% car pooled, 6% used active transportation (e.g. bike, walk, and inline skate) and 2% teleworked. We will use this information to implement effective sustainable commuting initiatives, and measure
changes over time.
|
CRA SD Strategy Goal 4: Use modern systems that support and maintain sustainable development.
Activities scheduled for completion in 2007-2008 that contributed to the Federal
SD Goal(s) and/or Green Government Operations (
GGO) Government-wide Target(s) below are noted explicitly in the “Department
's Expected
Results” column.
- Federal Goal 6: Strengthen federal governance and decision-making to support sustainable development.
Department's Expected Results for 2007-2008
|
Supporting Performance Indicator(s)
|
Achieved SDS Departmental Results for 2007-2008
|
Activity 4.1.1.1: Continue to plan, implement, and report performance of the CRA Environmental Management System ( EMS).
|
Timely SD and EMS reports that meet reporting timelines of the CRA and the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development ( CESD).
|
All EMS and reports were delivered on time to the national committee, and senior management. The CESD forwarded one environmental petition to the CRA. The Agency acknowledged the petition and provided a response within
the time frame prescribed by the Auditor General Act (1995).
|
Activity 4.1.1.2: Renew the three-year commitment from SD Champions (Assistant Commissioner-level) and the Terms of Reference for SD Steering Committee.
|
SD Steering Committee quarterly meetings (indicator); SD Champions and committee terms of reference. (output)
|
Three meetings of the committee were held during 2007-2008. The revised terms of reference was approved by the group.
|
Activity 4.1.1.3: Improve and formalize (where needed) the SD Network infrastructure in all branches and regions.
|
Type of improvements to the SD Network.
|
We developed an SD Committee toolkit that will be released to the SD Network in 2008-2009. A survey of SD Network was conducted to determine how to improve the delivery of the
SD program. Job levels for regional SD Coordinators were increased, while we formalized job descriptions for branch SD Coordinators.
Status: In progress (80% complete)
|
Activity 4.1.1.4: Improve SD performance reporting by aligning the data management and statistical analysis systems for the national, branch and regional SD action plans, and the environmental management programs of
the EMS.
|
Improved system for data management and statistical analysis of SD Strategy and EMS.
|
The systems documentation was finalized, and project is in the initial phase of development.
Status: In progress (55% complete)
|
Activity 4.2.1.1: Continue to integrate sustainability criteria into key programs and policies of the CRA.
[Federal Goal 6: Strengthen federal governance and decision-making to support sustainable development.]
|
Number and type programs, policies, and plans that were assessed using sustainability criteria.
|
We applied the SD Criteria to the E-resourcing project. The goal of the project is to leverage technology to reduce the average time required to hire employees at the Agency.
Status: In progress (80% complete)
|
Activity 4.2.1.2: Develop an SD Report Card by establishing economic, social and environmental indicators spanning all business lines.
[Federal Goal 6: Strengthen federal governance and decision-making to support sustainable development.]
|
Number and type of social/economic/environmental indicators developed.
|
To advance the preparation of an SD report card for the CRA, we completed a research paper on corporate social responsibility ( CSR) [Footnote 3] reporting in the private, public and quasi-public sectors. It included a scan of the CRA to compile a set of potential SD indicators for the Agency. Competing priorities slowed progress on this activity. However,
this report contains elements of CSR reporting that will be strengthened each year.
Status: In progress (30% complete)
|
[Footnote 3] CSR refers to the integration of environmental, social, and economic factors to traditional financial factors in the decision-making process.
Response to Parliamentary Committees and External Audits
Response to Parliamentary Committees
1. Government Responses (
GR) are requested by Parliamentary Committees under House of Commons Standing Order 109 or under Rules of the Senate 131(2). Such requests are included in the reports tabled by the respective Parliamentary Committee.
In fiscal year 2007-2008, the Minister of National Revenue tabled the following comprehensive
GR to a report from a Parliamentary Committee, on behalf of the Government:
Report 9 – Parliamentary Review of the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency Act: A Value Proposition or a Failed Experiment? (Adopted by the Standing Committee on Finance on December 12, 2006; Presented to the House on December 13, 2006)
Government Response: Ninth Report of the Standing Committee on Finance, “Parliamentary Review of the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency Act: A Value Proposition or a Failed Experiment” (Presented to the House on April 4, 2007)
(NB: As the committee
's report was tabled during fiscal year 2006-2007, this information was previously included in the
2006-2007 Canada Revenue Agency Annual Report to Parliament.)
2. It is important to note, however, that in fiscal year 2007-2008, the House of Commons
' Standing Committee on Public Accounts (referred to in Parliament as “
PACP”) undertook two separate initiatives related to the practice of seeking
“follow-up” information (referred to herein as ‘status reports
') further to
GRs previously tabled in Parliament:
- a study to follow-up on past PACP Recommendations; and
- the Committee's Sixth Report entitled “Departmental Answers to Questions About Government Responses (39th Parliament)” (tabled February 25th, 2008).
Within this framework, on an exceptional basis, the
PACP Chair twice contacted the
CRA via written correspondence in order to obtain current status reports to
GRs previously
tabled with
PACP. These status reports are not
GRs
per se, but as they stem from previous
GRs they have been included below.
(NB: The Government
's position toward these exceptional requests was later articulated in a
GR tabled by the President of the Treasury Board. Please see item 3. for further clarification.)
-
Letter dated August 20, 2007, from the Chair of the PACP to the Commissioner of the CRA, requesting a status report on the progress further to its GR to the
Committee's Seventh Report (“Canada Revenue Agency – Collection of Tax Debt”).
- Though the original request was terminated with the prorogation of the 39th Parliament, 1st Session, on September 14, 2007, on the resumption of Parliamentary business, the Committee renewed its interest/request on January 28, 2008.
- The CRA provided its status report on February 22, 2008.
-
Letter dated March 13, 2008, from the Chair of the PACP to the Minister of National Revenue, requesting a status report further to the GR concerning recommendations in the Twenty-third Report of the Standing Committee
on Public Accounts – Chapter 7 of the Auditor General's December 2001 Report (Canada Customs and Revenue Agency – International Tax Administration: Non-Residents Subject to Canadian Income Tax). In this letter by the Committee Chair to the CRA, reference is also made to the Auditor
General's February 2007 Status Report.
- The CRA provided the committee with the requested status report on May 30, 2008.
3. Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the President of the Treasury Board tabled the
GR to the Sixth Report (in July 2008), in which reference is made to the above-noted practice of the Committee Chair contacting Deputy Heads directly for status reports relating to
GR. The Government noted that:
“…Government Responses are tabled in Parliament by the responsible Minister or Ministers and represent the collective position taken by the Government as a whole and as such are approved by Cabinet through its collective decision-making process. While public servants are often able to assist the Committee
's
evaluation of a Government Response by providing relevant information of a technical or factual nature, the Government believes it would not be appropriate to ask these officials to address perceived inadequacies with the positions taken in the Response. Rather, such requests are properly addressed to Ministers. The Government very much appreciates the recent
correspondence from the Chair of the Committee indicating that future “follow-up” requests from the Committee will be directed to Ministers, and thanks the Committee for addressing its concerns on this point.”
4. In 2007-2008, various Parliamentary Committees did table reports wherein the
CRA is mentioned. These include:
The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology
Final Report on: The Enquiry on the Funding for the Treatment of Autism (March 29, 2007)
Recommendation G: “The Department of Finance and the Revenue Canada Agency study the implications of income splitting for
ASD [Autism Spectrum Disorders] families and issue a report to the Minister of Finance by June 2008.”
The Standing Committee on Public Accounts (
PACP)
Sixth Report (Departmental Answers to Questions About Government Responses) – Tabled February 25, 2008
Recommendations: This report reviewed the performance of certain government departments, including the
CRA, in fulfilling recommendations made by the Standing Committee on Public Accounts over the course of the 37
th and 38
th Parliaments. There are four recommendations
that relate to the
CRA. For full recommendations please see link below.
Government Response (presented July 16, 2008 by the
President of the Treasury Board)
Eleventh Report (The Public Accounts of Canada 2007) – Tabled March 5, 2008
Recommendation 2: “The Canada Revenue Agency modify its tax revenue estimation methodology by 30 September 2008. If this cannot be done by this date, the Canada Revenue Agency should explain to the Public Accounts Committee the reasons for the inability to meet this deadline and provide the Committee with a date by which this
modification will be done.”
Government Response (presented July 16, 2008 by the
President of the Treasury Board)
Response to the Auditor General
Canada Revenue Agency – Technical Training and Learning
Federal Loans and Grants for Post-Secondary Education—Human Resources and Social Development Canada and Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation
Internal Audits and Evaluations
Internal Audits
|
|
|
|
T2 Transaction Flow-Through
|
|
|
|
2006-2007 Fiscal Year End
|
|
|
|
T3 Transaction Flow-Through
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business Intelligence Decision Support
|
|
|
|
Non-Filer/Non-Registrant Program
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GST Credit Returns Prepayment Follow-up
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Follow-up of 2004-2005 Audits
|
|
|
|
|
Evaluations
|
|
|
|
|
Headquarters-Region Managers Exchange Program
|
|
|
|
Headquarters-Region Managers Exchange Program
|
|
Accounts Receivable and Returns Compliance
|
|
|
|
GST Delinquent Filing and Remitting
|
Accounts Receivable and Returns Compliance
|
|
|
GST Delinquent Filing and Remitting
|
Charities Partnership & Outreach Program
|
Taxpayer and Business Assistance
|
|
|
Charities Partnership & Outreach Program
|
|
Travel Policies
Comparison to the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat Special Travel Authorities
Travel Policy of the Canada Revenue Agency (Module 6)
Authority: Canada Revenue Agency Act (1999, c. 17) 30. (1)
Coverage: Applies to all employees and other persons travelling on Canada Revenue Agency (
CRA) business, including training. It does not apply to those persons whose travel is governed by other authorities.
Principal difference(s) in policy provisions: None
Principal financial implications of the difference(s): None
Comparison to the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat Travel Directive, Rates and Allowances
Travel Policy of the Canada Revenue Agency
|
Authority: Canada Revenue Agency Act ( 1999, c. 17 ) 30. (1)
|
Coverage: Applies to all employees and other persons travelling on Canada Revenue Agency ( CRA) business, including training. It does not apply to those persons whose travel is governed by other authorities.
|
Principal difference(s) in policy provisions:
|
|
|
|
Meal and incidental allowances
|
Incidental expense allowance is $17.30 per day
|
Incidental expense allowance is $17.50 per day
|
Reduced to 75% at day 31 when occupying corporate, apartment hotel, or private accommodation
|
Reduced to 75% as of day 61 and to 50% as of day 121 in travel status (if period known at the outset, reduced rate to be applied from day 1)
|
Reimbursement of actual cost of a meal (up to the applicable meal allowance) within the headquarters area
|
When reimbursement of meal expenses is clearly reasonable and justifiable as a direct result of an employee's duties
|
At the manager's discretion, in situations specified in the Policy, and in certain exceptional circumstances
|
Reimbursement of Interac fees on personal access cards
|
|
For withdrawals of cash as reasonably required on the trip
|
Principal financial implications of the difference(s): No implication
|