•Since most of the information is only
available to CRA, the onus should be on
CRA to maintain a list of ineligible individual”
(which may exist internally for the purpose of enforcing these provisions) and making it publicly available (unlikely because of privacy and other legal concerns)
•Onus is shifted to charities to comply
in a situation where it is impossible
to ensure 100% compliance because the
necessary information is not available
•This new cause for revocation is similar
to a strict liability offence – no due
diligence defence is available in the legislation
•Charities will be required to undertake
other forms of due diligence and
hope CRA will excuse any inadvertent non-compliance?
15