The website of the people who offer to reduce up to 100% of your taxes, Money Mechanics , was recently critiqued by Canadian Capitalist. One thing I feel compelled to add is that the website does not appear to provide abusiness address for the financial advisors behind the website. Instead, there are several invitations to call in and arrange a meeting at a convenient location, such as a coffee shop etc.,in the Toronto area.
When I interviewed one of the participants for my post on their tax-reduction scheme, I asked him to provide a business address. There were answers to the other questions but not this one. It might have been an oversight, but it raised a red flag in my mind.
I went ahead and published the interview, anyway. Ididnt critique the tax scheme because I had not researched it indepth. I chose instead to pass on comments from tax specialists that they had never heard of the scheme or recommended contacting Canada Revenue Agency. I also quoted one of the participants himselfsaying that CRA has previously challenged strategies even though they were in full compliance with the Income Tax Act, some with success. In short,as it seemed to me, investors would be rolling the dice.
After the post appeared, a reader emailed me a link to a MFDA disciplinary case involving a lifetime ban on a person with the same name as one of the participants. Canadian Capitalist has asked the participants if one of them is the person named in the case. As far as I can see, there has not yet been a denial.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Blogs & Comment
Tax schemes and financial tune-ups
By Larry MacDonald
The website of the people who offer to reduce up to 100% of your taxes, Money Mechanics , was recently critiqued by Canadian Capitalist. One thing I feel compelled to add is that the website does not appear to provide abusiness address for the financial advisors behind the website. Instead, there are several invitations to call in and arrange a meeting at a convenient location, such as a coffee shop etc.,in the Toronto area.
When I interviewed one of the participants for my post on their tax-reduction scheme, I asked him to provide a business address. There were answers to the other questions but not this one. It might have been an oversight, but it raised a red flag in my mind.
I went ahead and published the interview, anyway. Ididnt critique the tax scheme because I had not researched it indepth. I chose instead to pass on comments from tax specialists that they had never heard of the scheme or recommended contacting Canada Revenue Agency. I also quoted one of the participants himselfsaying that CRA has previously challenged strategies even though they were in full compliance with the Income Tax Act, some with success. In short,as it seemed to me, investors would be rolling the dice.
After the post appeared, a reader emailed me a link to a MFDA disciplinary case involving a lifetime ban on a person with the same name as one of the participants. Canadian Capitalist has asked the participants if one of them is the person named in the case. As far as I can see, there has not yet been a denial.
_____________________________________________________________________________________