Income Tax Amendments Act, 2006
| Bill C-10 | |
|---|---|
| An Act To Amend The Income Tax Act, Including Amendments In Relation To Foreign Investment Entities And Non-resident Trusts, And To Provide For The Bijural Expressions Of The Provisions Of That Act. | |
| Citation | Bill C-10 |
| Enacted by | House of Commons of Canada |
| Enacted by | Senate of Canada |
| Legislative history | |
| Bill introduced in the House of Commons of Canada | Bill C-10 |
| Introduced by | MP Jim Flaherty |
| First reading | October 29, 2007[1] |
| Second reading | October 29, 2007[1] |
| Third reading | October 29, 2007[1] |
| Conference committee bill passed | October 29, 2007[1] |
| Bill introduced in the Senate of Canada | Bill C-10 |
| First reading | October 30, 2007 |
| Second reading | December 4, 2007 |
| Status: Repealed | |
The Tax Amendments Act, 2006 is a Bill in the Canadian Legislature numbered as Bill C-10 of the second session of the 39th Parliament of Canada and containing a controversial clause that David Cronenberg and Sarah Polley have argued represents censorship of Canadian films.[2] The long form title of the bill is "An Act to amend the Income Tax Act, including amendments in relation to foreign investment entities and non-resident trusts, and to provide for the bijural expression of the provisions of that Act". Among a 600-page list of minor changes to tax law, the bill contains a clause, Section 120(3)(b), that would give the government power to deny taxation benefits for films made in Canada if the government deems the content to be objectionable. Critics of the clause argue that it is equivalent to censorship because most Canadian films cannot afford to be produced without government assistance. The Bill was passed in the House of Commons October 29, 2007, but opposition parties later said that they did not notice the controversial part and several Senators have said that they intend to send the bill back to the House.
Iconic of the debate is a contemporary Canadian film titled Young People Fucking.[3] The film contains no pornographic material and has received favourable reviews and a relatively wide distribution for a Canadian film, but has been cited by some Conservative Parliamentarians as an example of a film which would not receive financial aid under Bill C-10.[2] Senators and MPs were invited to view an advance screening of the film.
The new conservative platform for the election of October 2008 planned for this bill to be repealed.[4]
References
- 1 2 3 4 "Bill C-310 at LegisInfo". Parliament of Canada.
- 1 2 Smith, Charlie (12 June 2008). "Bill C-10 is Canada's new culture war". Georgia Straight. Retrieved 13 March 2009.
- ↑ Lacey, Liam (14 June 2008). "Relax – the title is as outrageous as this movie gets". The Globe and Mail. Retrieved 13 March 2009.
perhaps leading to the infamous Bill C-10 to limit funding to morally objectionable material
- ↑ Canadian Press (7 October 2008). "Artists happy with Tory reversal on plan to scrap film, TV tax credits". CBC. Retrieved 13 March 2009.
Conservative Leader Stephen Harper's promise to reverse plans to scrap tax credits for productions deemed offensive to Canadian viewers came as a pleasant surprise Tuesday to those in the film and television business and a major blow to the religious right.