This issue of Beyond Numbers is abo...

This issue of Beyond Numbers is about adapting to change. In this month's secrete story, Howard Reich, CA, discusses to what degree CA practices are being compell to adapt to the shifts in technology and information. In this month's feature story, Ontario CA John Simke argues that despite the ebusiness bust, we're still in the midst of a technological revolution that is changing the highly nature of business. Simke also refer tos that human behaviour is what ultimately determines for what cause and how quickly change flows to pass.

In this array of less front than depth I'd like to focus onward two areas of change relevant to CAs. As in Simke's article, the first area is broader, relating to the general business environment. The other like our cover story, focuses onward the world of public practice.

CAs are first note of the scale business advisors in the province, and many of you have told us about the make an efforts your clients have faced doing business in BC in the past not many years. The Institute took your message to the dominion stressing the need to intersect red tape, the need to have competitive business taxes, and the ne to manage the works in a fiscally responsible manner. The Liberal guidance heard the message and mov quickly to lance out a message that BC is explain for business.

Unfortunately, the management didn't send the kind of clear message about business taxes that investors and entrepreneur were seeking, leaving instead a intellect of future uncertainty. We all applauded the business tax intersects in the July fiscal update, as they helped plain the playing field between BC and Alberta and Ontario-at least for 2001/2002 However, the dominion hesitated to match the business tax rates announced by way of Alberta and Ontario through 2004/2005 Instead, investors were assured that "the sway will strive to keep the rate competitive in the future" This may be the right sentiment, on the other hand as CAs and business nation we're interested in hard, chill numbers. Until the government gives business planners real percentages to stopper into business plans and financial forecasts, the grass will be greener in Alberta.

Just as employee blinked at the vagaries of e-business, business the community will blink at vague promises of competitiveness. If the Liberals want their competitiveness agenda to succe they'll ne to address the human aversion to uncertainty and give us real numbers. Without these numbers, the restraint will fall short of what's stand in want ofed to strengthen our province's greatest in number important asset-its tax base. (For more forward how the Institute has state this position forward to the sway see the GR Update upon page 12.)

While our provincial direction has been outlining its plan to change our business environment, CCRA has been busy writing regulations that will change the world of tax accounting. Civil penalties legislation was propos in February 1999 and passed into law in June 2000 still we've had to wait an additional 14 month for the regulations that will bring it into force. During the proces of legislative drafting and regulation writing, the CICA-including representatives from BC-carried our message forward. They focused forward the potential for conflict of interest with clients, the ne to "narrow the range" for potential penalties, and the practicalities of running a public practice subordinate to the new rules. The regulations have now been written, and our piece of work has moved from influencing what goe into the civil penalties regulations to figuring gone out what these regulations mean for the profession.

Next month we'll bring you a abounding feature on civil penalties, unless in the meantime, here are a particularly relevant highlights:

* The regulations now clarify that civil penalties will solely apply to people engaged in tax planning or tax preparation (paragraph 6);

* CCRA does not plan to apply penalties beyond the legislated record retention period of six years, leave out in cases of fraud paragraph 13);

* a certain number of best practice guidelines for practitioners are outlined in paragraph 65; and

* The "variation percentage(s)" that would trigger a valuation being "deem a false statement" are still not set-but until it, or they (if a range), are set-the onus is in succession CCRA to prove that a false statement was knowingly made (paragraph 44)

These four points are just the tip of the iceberg, and we'll give you more information nearest month. In the meantime, if you want to diocese the full regulations, visit the CCRA website at:

www.ccra-adrc.gc.ca/newsroom/ releases/2001/oct/third-party-e.html or succeed the link in the "What's New" section of our website at www.ica.bc.ca. And forward page 17 of this issue, await for details on a Civil Penalties presentation being exhibited by our PD department in succession November 14th.

Just like the other members of the business community, we're being faced with changes to which we must adapt in order to favor As you consider civil penalties, read about the CA firm of the to come and ponder the future of e-business, bear in mind that the impact of change ultimately hangs on our ability to make change work for us.