Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 158, Number 51: Regulations Amending the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (Administrative Penalties and Consequences)

December 21, 2024

Statutory authority
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act

Sponsoring department
Department of Citizenship and Immigration

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the regulations.)

Issues

Individuals seeking to immigrate to Canada or become Canadian citizens often rely on the advice and expertise of other people to help them navigate immigration and citizenship processes and applications. Individuals committing infractions such as providing advice and representation for remuneration without authorization or counselling fraud and misrepresentation on their clients’ applications has a negative effect on the integrity of Canada’s immigration and citizenship systems. The impacts on clients can be particularly egregious when the victims are vulnerable due to language and cultural barriers. Under the existing regulatory framework there are no tools for Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) to sanction individuals who commit these kinds of infractions.

Background

Only authorized immigration and citizenship practitioners are permitted to provide advice and representation for payment on immigration and citizenship-related matters. Authorized practitioners include members in good standing of one of the following groups: the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants (the College), a provincial or territorial law society, or the Chambre des notaires du Québec. These practitioners are authorized to provide services such as explaining immigration and citizenship options, advising as to the most appropriate programs, assisting in the completion of applications, and communicating with IRCC. Their specialized expertise allows them to help applicants navigate Canada’s immigration and citizenship processes and ensure applicants meet the requirements.

According to the College’s Annual Report, in 2023 there were 11 750 licensees of the College. All lawyers and Quebec notaries are authorized to provide immigration and citizenship advice and representation, though many practice in other unrelated areas. Authorized practitioners receive specialized training and are effectively regulated, meaning that they are held to a high standard of practice and there are options for complaints and potential recourse through their professional regulators should they not meet those standards.

In addition to licensed practitioners, there is an unknown number of unauthorized individuals both in and outside Canada who provide paid advice and representation, despite not being legally permitted to do so. Unauthorized individuals are a problem in the current immigration and citizenship system and solutions are needed to help deter their actions. For example, an average of 282 leads of suspected consultant offences are brought to the attention of the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) annually and of these, an average of 50 (17%) involve alleged unauthorized individuals. On average, a quarter of charges laid annually are against those who are not authorized to provide immigration and citizenship consultant services (this data represents the 2018–2022 calendar years inclusively).

Despite existing professional discipline measures and criminal penalties, clients continue to face issues like fraud in applications and documents. These may have dire consequences for applicants, including refusal of citizenship or immigration applications, financial hardship and losing legal immigration status in Canada.

In June 2017, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration (CIMM) published a report entitled Starting Again: Improving Government Oversight of Immigration Consultants. CIMM studied the framework governing immigration and citizenship consultants and found it inadequate. The Committee made 21 recommendations focusing on three areas of concern: (1) weakness in governance; (2) insufficient resources for investigations and enforcement; and (3) lack of public awareness and the need to better service serve clients.

In response to these persistent issues and the CIMM recommendations, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) and the Citizenship Act were amended in 2019 to allow the establishment of an administrative penalties and consequences (APC) regime by regulation. This initiative aims to address the observed gaps by enabling IRCC to directly respond to and sanction those who commit violations while providing paid immigration and citizenship advice. The proposed amendments to the Immigration Refugees and Protection Regulations (IRPR) and the Citizenship Regulations (CR) are crucial steps towards enhancing the integrity of the immigration system and more effectively safeguarding the interests of those seeking to navigate it.

Objective

The proposed regulatory amendments would

The expected outcomes of the proposed amendments are to

Description

The proposed regulatory amendments below would be made to both the IRPR and the CR.

Violations

The proposed regulations would prohibit a person from providing or offering to provide representation for payment unless they are authorized to do so under the CA or IRPA.

The proposed regulations would prohibit a person who represents or advises someone for payment from misrepresenting or withholding information, advising them to misrepresent or withhold information, or communicating misleading information.

The proposed amendments would designate unauthorized practice and misrepresentation as violations.

Inspections

The proposed regulatory amendments would provide IRCC officers the authority to require, in writing, that a person or entity provide any relevant documents to verify compliance in circumstances where the officer has reasonable grounds to believe they have committed a violation. If the individual fails to submit relevant documents, the failure would be justified if the individual made reasonable efforts to comply.

Notice of preliminary findings

Under the proposed regulations, an IRCC officer who has reasonable grounds to believe that a person committed a violation would have the authority to issue a notice of preliminary finding (NOPF).

Under the proposed regulations, the notice would be required to include

Notice of violation

The proposed amendments would give an IRCC officer the authority to issue a Notice of Violation (NOV). Following the issuance of an NOPF and after having reviewed any information submitted in response, an officer would have the authority to issue an NOV if they determine, on a balance of probabilities, that a person committed a violation.

The NOV would be required to include

The proposed amendments would also provide that no administrative monetary penalty could be imposed on a person if any acts or omissions occurred prior to the date of issuance of their most recent NOV.

Administrative monetary penalties and amounts

The proposed regulatory amendments would introduce a formula and baseline penalty amounts to be used when calculating the administrative monetary penalty for unauthorized practice and misrepresentation:

Administrative monetary penalty = (A + B + C) × D
Where:
A
is the baseline penalty amount, which would be determined depending on the type of violation:
  • Representation or advice without authorization: $5,000
  • Misrepresentation: $15,000
B
is the amount added when a misrepresentation violation had an additional impact by inducing an error in the administration of the relevant Act by causing an application to be approved when it otherwise would not have been.
  • Additional impact amount: $15,000
C
is the financial advantage gained as a result of the violation:
  • If an individual gained a financial advantage as a result of committing a violation (e.g. any money that they were paid by a client to provide unauthorized advice or to assist with misrepresentation), this amount is included in the penalty amount.
D
considers the individual’s previous history with the regime. Specifically:
  • if the person has not previously been issued a notice of violation, the penalty amount would be multiplied by 0.5 (halved)
  • if the person has on one previous occasion been issued a notice of violation, the penalty amount would stay the same (multiplied by 1)
  • if the person has been issued a notice of violation on two or more previous occasions, the penalty amount would be multiplied by 1.5
Failure to comply with an inspection

The proposed regulations would establish the penalty for an individual who does not comply with a request for submission of relevant documents by an officer to verify compliance at $10,000, multiplied by the factor in element D of the formula for other violations. A failure to comply on more than one occasion in the course of an inspection would result in one administrative monetary penalty.

Maximum amount per notice of violation

The proposed regulatory amendments would specify that if a NOPF or a NOV includes multiple violations. The penalties are cumulative and the total amount for all violations could not be more than $1,500,000.

Payment

The proposed regulations would require that an administrative monetary penalty be paid within 30 days after receipt of the notice of violation, unless the person has entered into an agreement with the Minister with respect to payment within 30 days.

Review

The proposed regulations would allow a person who received an NOV to make a written request, within 30 days of receipt of the notice, for a review of the facts of the violation or of the amount of the penalty, or both, instead of paying the administrative monetary penalty. As per IRPA and the CA, the review would be conducted by a reviewer appointed by the Governor in Council for that purpose.

The proposed regulations would require that the reviewer determine whether the person was liable for the violation and the amount of the penalty, based on the information that was available to the officer who issued the notice; the proposed regulations would not allow the reviewer to consider new evidence.

Based on the findings of their review, the proposed regulations would require the reviewer to cancel, confirm, or amend the notice of violation, and to state in writing the reasons for their decision.

The proposed regulations would require that the person pay the penalty set out in the Notice of Decision within 30 days unless they enter into an agreement with the Minister.

Consequences

The proposed amendments would require that the Minister publish information concerning persons found liable for a violation on IRCC’s website, including

Regulatory development

Consultation

IRCC consulted with the CBSA and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) on the proposed regulatory amendments and they did not express any concerns. Their mandates would be impacted as they investigate and prosecute those who commit immigration and citizenship fraud under IRPA and the CA as well. Primary responsibility for IRPA criminal investigations belongs to the CBSA, and CA investigations to the RCMP.

The Federation of Canadian Law Societies was consulted in August 2024 regarding the high-level concepts of the proposed APC regime and did not register any concerns. The College was consulted in August 2024 on the high-level concepts and is supportive of the proposed regime.

Modern treaty obligations and Indigenous engagement and consultation

The assessment did not identify any modern treaty implications or obligations for the IRPA or CA for consultants. There is no anticipated impact on Indigenous peoples for the proposed regulatory amendments.

Instrument choice

Regulation is the only instrument that was considered because it is the only viable instrument to establish the APC regime for non-compliant and fraudulent individuals who provide immigration and citizenship services.

Regulatory analysis

Benefits and costs

An important first step in developing a cost-benefit methodology is establishing a baseline scenario against which options may be measured. For this analysis, the baseline scenario is one where an APC would not be implemented, contributing to the existing gap in regulatory tools as IRCC cannot impose penalties and consequences on individuals who provide advice and representation for remuneration without authorization or counsel fraud and misrepresentation on their clients’ applications. The baseline scenario is then compared with the regulatory scenario, in which IRCC would introduce an APC regime, addressing the existing lack of tools for IRCC to sanction misrepresentation and unauthorized representation. The regime would allow for the issuance of penalties and consequences and provide the power to inspect individuals who are suspected of misrepresenting, counselling misrepresentation, or advising clients without authorization in the context of immigration and citizenship.

The estimated costs and benefits of the regulatory amendments are monetized for 10 periods of 12 months (2025 to 2034) and are expressed in 2023 dollars. The proposed regulatory amendments would come into force on the day they are registered. For further details regarding the methodology, a detailed cost-benefit analysis report is available upon request at the following email address: IRCC.APC-SCA.IRCC@cic.gc.ca. As the impacts pertain to penalties and consequences issued to those that contravene the law, no consultations were conducted on the cost-benefit analysis (CBA) for the proposed regulatory amendments.

The proposed regulatory amendments would result in a net cost of $5,969,356 present value (PV) however, additional qualitative impacts are expected to offset these costs. Costs to the Government of Canada are estimated at $13,766,908 PV over 10 periods. Benefits to the Government of Canada in the form of penalty payments are estimated at $7,797,552 PV over 10 periods.

Costs

Introducing the proposed APC regime would result in incremental costs to the Government of Canada. These costs would be incurred by IRCC. Although the RCMP and CBSA are involved in the criminal investigations as related to enforcement of the CA and IRPA respectively, the proposed regulatory amendments are not expected to impose any costs on them as they are not involved in the proposed IRCC’s APC regime itself.

The total costs to IRCC are estimated at $13,766,908 PV over 10 years. These include $1,795,758 PV in transition costs from developing IT functionality to issue penalties; training staff, draft initial operating procedures, program delivery instructions and document templates; and prepare communications material related to the regime and regulatory amendments. Ongoing costs to IRCC are estimated at $11,971,150 PV and include costs for investigating possible violations, issuing and reviewing penalties, managing communications, reviewing requests from alleged violators, setting up penalty accounts, sending statements to violators, following-up to obtain missed payments, engaging in additional collection activities when needed, developing regime reports, and providing legal advice where needed.

Impacts on those who provide immigration and citizenship services

The implementation of the APC regime would impose monetary penalties on individuals who are found to have committed a violation, and in some cases, costs related to the request of a review of their penalty amount and/or a review of the facts of the violation. It is estimated that penalty amounts per NOV would range from $5,000 to $1.5 million, as listed in the Description section. Determining a precise number of NOVs that would be issued each period can be challenging, especially given the absence of historical data, and the proposal being the introduction of a new IRCC regime. For the purpose of this analysis, simplifying assumptions were made to estimate the costs and benefits of the regulatory amendments. As such, it is assumed that the regulatory amendments would result in approximately 20 NOVs being issued per period, except in period 1, when approximately 10 NOVs are assumed to be issued. This estimate is based on an analysis of historical trends and data from past IRCC investigations where IRCC would anticipate meeting the evidentiary burden and ensuring procedural fairness, ultimately leading to the issuance of a NOV.

Although the proposed regulatory amendments would impose monetary penalties on violators, penalty costs do not have standing for the purpose of cost-benefit analysis. Penalties are a result of activities contrary to prevailing laws and regulations in Canada and are thus not included in the monetized costs. Similarly, some individuals may choose to make a request for a review of the violation or penalty if they feel there is an error in their case. While preparing this request would require time and effort, these impacts are not included as monetized costs as they also pertain to possible non-compliance of prevailing laws and regulations. However, they are acknowledged qualitatively.

IRPA and the CA extend outside Canada’s borders (most applications received by IRCC are from clients outside Canada, and applicants may be working with individuals providing immigration and citizenship services outside Canada, but those individuals are still subject to these two Acts), allowing IRCC to issue monetary penalties and consequences to individuals outside Canada. The proposed APC regime also includes the publication of the offender’s name and business information, and this could potentially have a significant impact on offenders (whether inside or outside Canada).

Benefits

Administrative penalties offer an effective and direct way to motivate compliance without involving expensive and time-consuming court proceedings. As an increasingly useful regulatory tool, administrative penalties widen the range of enforcement options available, allowing the flexibility to modify a response to specific compliance issues. As discussed in the Impacts on those who provide immigration and citizenship services section, for the purpose of this analysis, it is assumed that approximately 20 NOVs would be issued per period, except in period 1, when approximately 10 NOVs are assumed to be issued. For each NOV, it is estimated that there would be 5.5 citizenship or immigration applications where a violation has been committed. Per NOV, the average total penalty is estimated at approximately $70,000.

Although IRCC would allocate resources and efforts to collection activities, such as follow-ups to collect payments, and on some occasions refer payments to collection agencies, it may be challenging to collect monetary penalties issued to individuals outside of Canada. As a result, it is anticipated that a portion of penalties may not be collected. Estimates presented in this analysis take possible non-payments into account. The total penalty payments collected are estimated at $7,797,552 PV over 10 periods. Amounts recovered through the payment of administrative penalties are directed to the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Government of Canada.

Implementation of a regime that imposes penalties and consequences for misrepresentation and unauthorized representation would provide IRCC with additional tools to enforce compliance, other than referring all cases for criminal prosecution (which requires significant resources and higher evidentiary thresholds). Moreover, the proposed regime would also include publication of the offender’s name and business information in IRCC’s website. The introduction of this APC regime is expected to reinforce compliance and motivate behavioural change by those who provide immigration and citizenship services. The regulatory amendments are also expected to increase public awareness of non-compliant or unethical individuals, as their names would be published on IRCC’s website.

Cost benefit statement
Monetized benefits
Impacted stakeholder Description of benefit Period 1 Period 5 Period 10 Total (present value) Annualized value
Government of Canada Monetary penalty payments collected $421,325 $1,179,710 $1,179,710 $7,797,552 $1,110,196
All stakeholders Total benefits $421,325 $1,179,710 $1,179,710 $7,797,552 $1,110,196
Monetized costs
Impacted stakeholder Description of cost Period 1 Period 5 Period 10 Total (present value) Annualized value
Government of Canada Transition costs $1,795,758 $0 $0 $1,795,758 $255,676
Ongoing costs $1,366,061 $1,573,060 $1,573,060 $11,971,150 $1,704,422
All stakeholders Total costs $3,161,820 $1,573,060 $1,834,102 $13,766,908 $1,960,098
Summary of monetized benefits and costs
Impact Period 1 Period 5 Period 10 Total (present value) Annualized value
Total benefits $421,325 $1,179,710 $1,179,710 $7,797,552 $1,110,196
Total costs $3,161,820 $1,573,060 $1,573,060 $13,766,908 $1,960,098
Net cost $2,740,495 $393,350 $393,350 $5,969,356 $849,902
Qualitative impacts
Positive impacts
Negative impacts

Small business lens

Analysis under the small business lens concluded that the proposed regulation would not impose administrative or compliance burden on Canadian small businesses.

The great majority (99%)footnote 1 of licensed practitioners are estimated to be small businesses, so it is expected that most of the penalties issued as a result of the regulatory amendments would impact small businesses. However, those impacts would be related to the issuance of penalties and consequences as a result of activities contrary to prevailing laws and regulations in Canada. Penalties are not considered to be administrative or compliance burden as defined in the Policy on Limiting Regulatory Burden on Business.

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule does not apply as there is no incremental change in administrative burden on business and no regulatory titles are repealed or introduced.

The proposed regulations would allow individuals to request a review of their NOV. This task is expected to result in minor costs to those who provide immigration and citizenship services. However, those impacts would be related to the issuance of penalties and consequences as a result of activities contrary to prevailing laws and regulations in Canada. Those impacts are not considered to be administrative burden as defined in the Red Tape Reduction Act and the Policy on Limiting Regulatory Burden on Business.

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

To assess whether there are opportunities for cooperation or alignment, IRCC identified jurisdictions that regulate the provision of immigration and citizenship advice and representation to identify possibilities for alignment. It was determined that regulatory cooperation or alignment with international or domestic partners is not feasible and would not achieve the desired policy objectives since the target individuals are providing advice for the purposes of immigrating to or obtaining citizenship in Canada, based on federal laws.

Effects on the environment

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment (SEEA), a preliminary scan concluded that a SEEA is not required.

Gender-based analysis plus

The gender-based analysis plus (GBA+) assessment considered the effects on IRCC clients who rely on immigration practitioners and unauthorized individuals providing immigration and citizenship services. The APC regime is expected to have a positive effect on IRCC clients, including the hundreds of thousands of IRCC clients from all over the world who apply to its immigration or citizenship programs each year. These measures will help to ensure that applicants have access to quality immigration and citizenship advice and expertise, and that those who are providing services operate in a professional manner. The APC regime would have a particularly positive impact on clients who are vulnerable due to language or cultural barriers and who rely extensively on those who provide immigration and citizenship services for navigating the application process.

Furthermore, it was determined that these Regulations are not expected to negatively impact any group of persons disproportionately on the basis of identity factors such as gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality, religion, and age. During consultations with stakeholders, no concerns were raised about disproportionate negative impacts to specific groups.

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

Implementation

The proposed Regulations would come into force on the day they are registered.

Before the amendments come into force, IRCC would prepare IT updates to include the APC functionality into GCMS. IRCC would develop Notice of Preliminary Findings, NOVs, and Notice of Decision letter templates. New training and guidance materials would also be developed so that officers are informed, have the support needed to become familiar with the regime, have the skills and information to conduct inspections and collection processes and can issue penalties and consequences for determinations of non-compliance. IRCC is also developing a formal process to collect payments and to conduct reviews of the APCs.

Compliance and enforcement

Inspections would involve those who provide immigration and citizenship services being inspected based on a reason to suspect non-compliance on client immigration and citizenship applications, such as a complaint or an anonymous tip.

Individuals who are found to have violated one or more of the prohibitions on applications may be subject to consequences, which include administrative monetary penalties, up to a maximum of $1.5 million. Factors such as previous non-compliance and the impact of the violation would be taken into consideration when issuing administrative monetary penalties. Individuals found to be non-compliant would have their names and other information about the non-compliance posted on a publicly available Government of Canada website.

The APC regime is an additional tool designed to complement existing measures that apply to the same regulated parties. Existing tools include professional discipline by regulators such as the College and provincial law societies, as well as criminal enforcement agencies such as the CBSA and the RCMP. These measures work together to ensure compliance, deter violations, and promote ethical conduct across the sector.

The APC regime would have mechanisms in place to ensure procedural fairness for those who provide immigration and citizenship services. If non-compliance was identified during an inspection, individuals would be given a formal opportunity to provide additional information to demonstrate compliance or to justify instances of non-compliance.

Once a notice of violation is issued and final decision rendered, the individual would have an opportunity to request a review of that decision from a reviewer. Once the IRCC review process was completed, the individual would be bound by the decision, but would be able to apply for leave to the Federal Court to commence an application for judicial review of the decision.

Contact

Tina Matos
Director General
Admissibility Branch
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada
Email: IRCC.APC-SCA.IRCC@cic.gc.ca

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is given that the Governor in Council proposes to make the annexed Regulations Amending the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (Administrative Penalties and Consequences) under subsections 5(1) and 91.1(1)footnote a and (2)footnote b of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act footnote c.

Interested persons may make representations concerning the proposed Regulations within 45 days after the date of publication of this notice. They are strongly encouraged to use the online commenting feature that is available on the Canada Gazette website but if they use email, mail or any other means, the representations should cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be sent to Tina Matos, Director General, Admissibility Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration, 180 Kent Street, 8th Floor, Ottawa, Ontario K1P 0B6 (email: IRCC.APC-SCA.IRCC@cic.gc.ca).

Ottawa, December 13, 2024

Wendy Nixon
Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

Regulations Amending the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (Administrative Penalties and Consequences)

Amendment

1 The Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations footnote 2 are amended by adding the following after section 315.43:

PART 19.2

System of Administrative Penalties and Consequences — Representation and Advice

Interpretation

Definition of reviewer

315.44 In this Part, reviewer means a person appointed by order under subsection 91.1(3) of the Act.

Purpose

Purpose

315.45 The purpose of the administrative penalties and consequences provided for in this Part is to encourage compliance with the provisions of the Act and these Regulations and not to punish.

Violations

Designated provisions

315.46 The contravention — including a contravention committed outside of Canada — of any of the following provisions in connection with the submission of an expression of interest under subsection 10.1(3) of the Act or a proceeding or application under the Act, is designated as a violation:

Prohibitions

Unauthorized practice

315.47 A person must not knowingly, directly or indirectly, represent or advise a person for consideration — or offer to do so — in connection with the submission of an expression of interest under subsection 10.1(3) of the Act or a proceeding or application under the Act unless they are a person or entity referred to in any of subsections 91(2) to (4) of the Act.

Misrepresentation

315.48 A person who, directly or indirectly, represents or advises a person for consideration — or offers to do so — in connection with the submission of an expression of interest under subsection 10.1(3) of the Act or a proceeding or application under the Act must not knowingly

Inspection

Inspection

315.49 (1) If an officer has reasonable grounds to suspect that a person has committed a violation, the officer may conduct any inspection that they consider to be necessary in order to verify that the person is in compliance with sections 315.47 and 315.48, including the inspection of any entity for which that person conducts business relating to the provision of immigration and citizenship representation and advice..

Inspection of documents

(2) When conducting an inspection under subsection (1), an officer may, in writing, require the person or entity to provide any relevant document.

Requirement to provide documents

(3) The person or entity that is required by an officer to provide documents must provide them within the period and in the manner specified in writing by the officer.

Justification

(4) A failure to comply with subsection (3) is justified if the person or entity made all reasonable efforts to comply or if the failure results from anything done or omitted to be done by the person or entity in good faith.

Notice of Preliminary Finding

Notice — issuance by officer

315.5 (1) An officer who, on the basis of information obtained by any officer in the exercise of the powers set out in section 315.49 and of any other relevant information, believes, on reasonable grounds, that a person has committed a violation may issue to them a notice of preliminary finding.

Notice — contents

(2) The notice of preliminary finding must list all violations identified in the course of the inspection conducted under subsection 315.49(1) and must indicate

Submissions

315.51 (1) A person to whom a notice of preliminary finding is issued may, within 30 days after the date of receipt of the notice,

Deemed receipt

(2) Despite subsection 9.3(2), a notice of preliminary finding is deemed to have been received 30 days after the day on which it is sent.

Extension of filing period

(3) An officer may extend the 30-day period referred to in subsection (1) if there is a reasonable justification for the extension.

Notice of Violation

Notice of violation — issuance

315.52 (1) An officer who, on the basis of information obtained by any officer in the exercise of the powers set out in section 315.49 and of any other relevant information, determines, on a balance of probabilities, that a person has committed a violation may issue a notice of violation to them.

Notice of violation — contents

(2) The notice of violation must list all violations for which a determination has been made under subsection (1), and must indicate

Deemed receipt

(3) Despite subsection 9.3(2), a notice of violation is deemed to have been received 30 days after the day on which it is sent.

No administrative monetary penalty

315.53 No administrative monetary penalty may be imposed on a person with respect to any acts or omissions that occurred before the date of issuance of their most recent notice of violation.

Administrative Monetary Penalty Amount

Calculation of penalty amount

315.54 (1) The amount of the administrative monetary penalty for a violation in respect of any of section 315.47 and paragraphs 315.48(a), (b) and (c) is determined by the formula

(A + B + C) × D

where

Baseline penalty amount

(2) The baseline penalty amount is the following:

Impact of violation

(3) If an error in the administration of the Act results from a violation in respect of paragraph 315.48(a) or (b), the amount related to the impact of the violation is $15,000.

Financial advantage

(4) If the person who is believed to have committed the violation derives a financial advantage from the violation, the financial advantage amount is equal to the total of any amounts that they received in connection with the violation.

Prior violations

(5) The multiplier for any prior violations is

Calculation of administrative monetary penalty — inspection

315.55 (1) The amount of the administrative monetary penalty for a violation in respect of subsection 315.49(3) is $10,000 multiplied by the multiplier for prior violations as determined under subsection 315.54(5).

Clarification

(2) A failure to comply with subsection 315.49(3) on more than one occasion in the course of an inspection conducted under subsection 315.49(1) gives rise to one administrative monetary penalty only.

Maximum amount

315.56 If a notice of preliminary finding or a notice of violation lists more than one violation, the administrative monetary penalty amounts are cumulative, but the total must not exceed $1.5 million.

Payment

Payment

315.57 Subject to section 315.58, an administrative monetary penalty that is assessed under this Part must be paid within 30 days after the date of receipt of the notice, unless the person enters into an agreement with the Minister with respect to payment within those 30 days.

Review

Request for review

315.58 A person to whom a notice of violation is issued may, instead of paying the administrative monetary penalty indicated in the notice, make a written request, within 30 days after the date of receipt of the notice, for a review of the facts that constitute the violation or of the amount of the penalty, or of both.

Review

315.59 (1) A reviewer must determine, on a balance of probabilities, whether the person who requests the review is liable for the violation and, if so, whether the amount of the administrative monetary penalty has been determined in accordance with this Part.

No new evidence

(2) The reviewer must make their decision based on the information that was available to the officer who issued the notice of violation, and no new evidence is admissible.

Determined not liable — impact

(3) If the reviewer determines that the person is not liable for the violation, the reviewer must cancel the administrative monetary penalty.

Determined liable — impact

(4) If the reviewer determines that the person is liable for the violation, the reviewer must verify that the amount of the administrative monetary penalty was determined in accordance with this Part and

Decision on completion of review

(5) On completion of the review, the reviewer must confirm, amend or cancel the notice of violation by issuing to the person a notice of decision.

Notice of decision — contents

(6) The notice of decision must list all violations for which a determination under this section has been made and must indicate

Deemed receipt

(7) Despite subsection 9.3(2), the notice of decision is deemed to have been received 30 days after the day on which it is sent.

Obligation to pay

(8) The person must pay the administrative monetary penalty that is set out in the notice of decision within 30 days after the date of receipt of the notice unless they enter into an agreement with the Minister respecting the penalty within those 30 days.

Consequences

Publication

315.6 (1) Subject to subsection (2), the Minister must publish the following information on the Department’s website with respect to each person who has been found liable for a violation referred to in section 315.46:

Time period

(2) The Minister must not publish the information before the end of the period set out in section 315.58.

Coming into Force

2 These Regulations come into force on the day on which they are registered.

Terms of use and Privacy notice

Terms of use

It is your responsibility to ensure that the comments you provide do not:

  • contain personal information
  • contain protected or classified information of the Government of Canada
  • express or incite discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, sexual orientation or against any other group protected under the Canadian Human Rights Act or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
  • contain hateful, defamatory, or obscene language
  • contain threatening, violent, intimidating or harassing language
  • contain language contrary to any federal, provincial or territorial laws of Canada
  • constitute impersonation, advertising or spam
  • encourage or incite any criminal activity
  • contain external links
  • contain a language other than English or French
  • otherwise violate this notice

The federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change retains the right to review and remove personal information, hate speech, or other information deemed inappropriate for public posting as listed above.

Confidential Business Information should only be posted in the specific Confidential Business Information text box. In general, Confidential Business Information includes information that (i) is not publicly available, (ii) is treated in a confidential manner by the person to whose business the information relates, and (iii) has actual or potential economic value to the person or their competitors because it is not publicly available and whose disclosure would result in financial loss to the person or a material gain to their competitors. Comments that you provide in the Confidential Business Information section that satisfy this description will not be made publicly available. The federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change retains the right to post the comment publicly if it is not deemed to be Confidential Business Information.

Your comments will be posted on the Canada Gazette website for public review. However, you have the right to submit your comments anonymously. If you choose to remain anonymous, your comments will be made public and attributed to an anonymous individual. No other information about you will be made publicly available.

Comments will remain posted on the Canada Gazette website for at least 10 years.

Please note that communication by email is not secure, if the attachment you wish to send contains sensitive information, please contact the departmental email to discuss ways in which you can transmit sensitive information.

Privacy notice

The information you provide is collected under the authority of the Financial Administration Act, the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act, the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation Act,and applicable regulators’ enabling statutes for the purpose of collecting comments related to the proposed regulatory changes. Your comments and documents are collected for the purpose of increasing transparency in the regulatory process and making Government more accessible to Canadians.

Personal information submitted is collected, used, disclosed, retained, and protected from unauthorized persons and/or agencies pursuant to the provisions of the Privacy Act and the Privacy Regulations. Individual names that are submitted will not be posted online but will be kept for contact if needed. The names of organizations that submit comments will be posted online.

Submitted information, including personal information, will be accessible to Public Services and Procurement Canada, who is responsible for the Canada Gazette webpage, and the federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change.

You have the right of access to and correction of your personal information. To seek access or correction of your personal information, contact the Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) Office of the federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change.

You have the right to file a complaint to the Privacy Commission of Canada regarding any federal institution’s handling of your personal information.

The personal information provided is included in Personal Information Bank PSU 938 Outreach Activities. Individuals requesting access to their personal information under the Privacy Act should submit their request to the appropriate regulator with sufficient information for that federal institution to retrieve their personal information. For individuals who choose to submit comments anonymously, requests for their information may not be reasonably retrievable by the government institution.