http://www.aacb.com/Bringing Cross-Border Opportunities to You. Business Without Borders.en-usafan@aacb.com?2005 A & A Contract Customs Brokers Ltd.Thu, 2 Sep 2010 12:18:03 PDThttp://www.aacb.com/images/PoweredByAA.gifhttp://www.aacb.com15546Wed, 1 Sep 2010 00:00:00 -0800http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4709http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4709
As of August 9, 2010, the NHPD will no longer accept a product licence application (PLA) referring to ingredients that are not listed in the Natural Health Products Ingredient Database (NHPID) or are listed but the use and/or source of the ingredient is different from that listed in the NHPID.

Applicants must ensure that both the medicinal and non-medicinal ingredients (NMI) in the product are, in the case of a medicinal ingredient, a NHP substance which meets the definition of an NHP in accordance with Schedules 1 and 2 of the Natural Health Products Regulations (NHP Regulations) and in the case of an NMI, are recognized by the NHPD as an NMI and the use and/or source is acceptable for the NMI before the PLA is submitted. A failure to do so will result in the PLA being rejected.

The NHPID lists some ingredients with quantity limits or associated restrictions which must be complied with. In addition the NHPID may also designate certain ingredients as unacceptable for use in NHPs. The listing of an ingredient in the NHPID is not a reflection of safety or efficacy, but rather that the ingredient is one that is acceptable for use in an NHP, in the case of a medicinal ingredient, by meeting the definition contained in the NHP Regulations, and for an NMI, that the ingredient meets the NHPD's definition of an NMI including the purpose and source. If the ingredient to be used is not listed as acceptable in the NHPID, or the applicant's use or source is not one listed on the NHPID, the applicant must send a classification request to the NHPD using a NHPID Issue Form.

In the case of a medicinal ingredient, the NHPID Issue Form must be accompanied by evidence that demonstrates that the medicinal ingredient meets the substance definition of an NHP contained in the NHP Regulations. In the case of an NMI, the NHPID Issue form must be accompanied by evidence that demonstrates that the ingredient meets the definition of an NMI with an acceptable non-medicinal purpose and/or source.

For information on the NHPID Issue Form or the requirements for listing an ingredient on the NHPID, refer to the Appendix: "Classification of Medicinal Ingredients", Classification of Non-medicinal Ingredients" August 9, 2010, by way of a request to pla.info.dlmm@hc-sc.gc.ca until such time as it is listed on the NHPD website.

Source: I E Canada Website ]]>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 00:00:00 -0800http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4708http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4708
Canadian Trade Minister Peter Van Loan said the goverment has started exploratory trade discussions with South America?s Mercosur bloc, which consists of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay.

?While it?s in an early stage yet, we are pleased with the first steps,? Van Loan said on a conference call with reporters.

Source: I E Canada Website]]>Mon, 30 Aug 2010 00:00:00 -0800http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4707http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4707
The Honourable Peter Van Loan, Minister of International Trade, announced yesterday that Canada and Costa Rica have agreed to work toward modernizing the existing bilateral free trade agreement. Minister Van Loan made the announcement following his meeting with the Costa Rican Foreign Trade Minister, Anabel Gonzalez.

?Our government?s aggressive free trade agenda is creating opportunities for Canadian businesses and workers and is securing future prosperity for Canadians and our trading partners in the hemisphere,? said Minister Van Loan. ?Costa Rica is our largest trading partner in the region, and updating our free trade agreement is the logical next step in our growing commercial relationship.?

Canada and Costa Rica have enjoyed excellent bilateral relations, enhanced by the entry into force of the Canada-Costa Rica Free Trade Agreement in 2002, a first-generation agreement that focuses mainly on trade in goods and excludes substantive provisions in areas such as cross-border trade in services, government procurement, financial services and investment.

An updated free trade agreement could lower tariffs on goods and remove trade barriers in a broad range of sectors, creating new opportunities for the Canadian construction, manufacturing and agricultural industries. It could also expand market access for cross-border trade in services, financial services, electronic commerce, telecommunications and investment, as well as secure access to the government procurement market.

Two-way trade between Canada and Costa Rica totalled $441.8 million in 2009. In the same year, Canadian exports consisted mainly of preserved foods, machinery, and paper and paperboard.

Source: I E Canada Website]]>Fri, 27 Aug 2010 00:00:00 -0800http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4706http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4706
The proposals released today include draft legislation to:

Provide for the sharing of the Canada Child Tax Benefit and the Universal Child Care Benefit in cases of shared custody.

Allow Registered Retirement Savings Plan proceeds to be transferred to a Registered Disability Savings Plan on a tax-deferred basis.

Implement disbursement quota reform for registered charities.

Better target the tax incentives in place for employee stock options. Expand the availability of accelerated capital cost allowance for clean energy generation.

Adjust the capital cost allowance rate for television set-top boxes to better reflect the useful life of these assets.

Clarify the definition of a principal-business corporation for the purposes of the rules relating to Canadian Renewable and Conservation Expenses.

Introduce amendments consequential to the introduction in 2011 of new International Financial Reporting Standards by the Accounting Standards Board.

Provide legislative authority for the Canada Revenue Agency to issue online notices where the taxpayer so requests.

Implement a new reporting regime for aggressive tax planning, taking into account comments received during post-budget consultations.

Replace the previous proposals relating to foreign investment entities with several limited enhancements to the current Income Tax Act and better target and simplify previous proposals relating to non-resident trusts, taking into account comments received during post-budget consultations.

Counter schemes designed to shelter tax otherwise payable by artificially increasing foreign tax credits.

Ensure that income trust conversions into corporations are subject to the same loss utilization rules that currently apply to similar transactions involving only corporations.

Limit tax arbitrage opportunities by extending the application of the Specified Leasing Property rules to property that is the subject of a lease to a government or other tax-exempt entity, or to a non-resident.

The draft legislative proposals also include other previously announced measures identified in Budget 2010, as modified to take into account consultations and deliberations since their release, as well as an income tax amendment relating to the enactment of the Fairness for the Self-Employed Act:

The Paperwork Burden Reduction Initiative for small excise taxpayers, announced by the Minister of National Revenue on March 31, 2009.

Measures relating to the income taxation of shareholders of foreign affiliates, previously released in draft form on December 18, 2009.

Rules to facilitate the implementation of Employee Life and Health Trusts, released in draft form on February 26, 2010.

The introduction of a personal income tax credit in respect of Employment Insurance premiums paid by self-employed individuals.

References to ?Announcement Date? are to be read as references to today?s date. Explanatory notes to the legislative proposals will be posted on the Department of Finance website shortly.

Interested parties are invited to provide comments on the draft legislative proposals by September 27, 2010. Please send your comments to:

Tax Policy Branch Department of Finance 140 O?Connor Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G5

Source: Department of Finance]]>Thu, 26 Aug 2010 00:00:00 -0800http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4705http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4705
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/cps-spc/legislation/consultation/2010ampr-rsap/consult-eng.php

Source: I E Canada Website ]]>Wed, 25 Aug 2010 00:00:00 -0800http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4704http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4704
Victory for Foreign Affairs over Chemtura may scare Dow off

The lawyers at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade are not bragging about it ? at least not to date ? but they've just won an impressive victory in an $80 million-plus NAFTA lawsuit. Earlier this month, a panel of three arbitrators dismissed claims filed by the U.S. chemical company Chemtura under Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Chemtura had sought to hold Canada liable for financial losses related to the government's phase-out of lindane, a hazardous agricultural chemical. However, the company failed to persuade arbitrators that government regulators acted without regard for scientific evidence or due process. In addition to kicking Chemtura's claim to the curb, arbitrators also ordered the company to reimburse Canada for $3 million in legal costs and expenses.

While the feds will still be out of pocket for time devoted to defending the NAFTA lawsuit, the outcome is about as good as a government could hope for.

In fact, the victory could signal a set-back for another NAFTA claim which has been looming in the shadows. In early 2009, a subsidiary of the Dow Chemical Company set in motion a similar NAFTA Chapter 11 claim. As was first revealed in these pages, Dow wants Canadian taxpayers to compensate them for losses arising out of provincial bans on cosmetic lawn pesticides.

After filing its papers in 2009, Dow ostentatiously sat on its hands ? perhaps to see how arbitrators chose to resolve the earlier-launched Chemtura case. However, with arbitrators refusing to compensate Chemtura for the loss of its lindane business, Dow may now think twice before attempting to recoup its own pesticide sales losses.

One can never be sure in the topsy-turvy world of international arbitration, where arbitrators often disagree with each other ? and are under no obligation to follow the lead of earlier arbitration tribunals. Yet the big picture suggests that some of the more excessive claims filed under the controversial NAFTA Chapter 11 mechanism are being beaten back. This is certainly a good thing.

The NAFTA and other international investment treaties grease the wheels of international commerce by providing protection in cases where governments expropriate or nationalize foreign-owned businesses, or subject them to other forms of egregious treatment.

However, few bargained for such treaties to be used in an effort to immunize foreign businesses from the financial impact of legitimate public health, safety or environmental regulation. Readers may recall that alarms about NAFTA Chapter 11 were raised more than a decade ago when the Canadian government caved in to another U.S. chemical producer, Ethyl Corp., and agreed to roll back its plans to crack down on the gasoline additive MMT.

But in the years since, both Canada and the United States have stiffened their resolve and decided that they will not be pushed around on the legal playing field. Over the last decade, the two governments have taken a few lumps, but they have been broadly successful in beating back efforts by claimants seeking to force taxpayers to bear the cost of strengthened government regulation.

Mind you, it's not all clear sailing for Canada.

The government may struggle to defend some of the dozen or more active NAFTA Chapter 11 cases pending at the moment. Indeed, where authorities have acted capriciously or in a discriminatory fashion against foreign investors, the government will still find itself on the wrong side of the NAFTA's strictures.

For instance, it would have been tough for the feds to duck liability for the outright expropriation by the province of Newfoundland of timber and water rights owned by Abitibi-Bowater. The government might have argued that Abitibi was entitled to less than full compensation for its assets due to the environmental mess allegedly created by the financially-stricken company's closure of several pulp and paper operations.

No surprise then that as Embassy was on the verge of going to press, the government announced that it was settling the Abitibi claim for US$130 million, rather than permitting it to be arbitrated. As DFAIT lawyers know all too well: the rules of the global economy dictate that governments must pay when they seize foreign-owned property from its owners.

Nevertheless, the recent ruling in the Chemtura case may give pause to those considering copycat lawsuits. Slowly, but surely, international arbitrators are offering reassurances that NAFTA governments need not take out their chequebooks every time they introduce a new health or environmental regulation.

Luke Eric Peterson is the editor of InvestmentArbitrationReporter.com, an electronic news service dedicated to foreign investment and political risk disputes.

Luke Eric Peterson is the editor of InvestmentArbitrationReporter.com, an electronic news service dedicated to foreign investment and political risk disputes

I E Canada Website ]]>Tue, 24 Aug 2010 00:00:00 -0800http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4703http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4703
Retail sales edged up 0.1% in current dollars to $35.9 billion in June despite lower prices at gasoline stations and new-car dealers. Statistics Canada reports retail sales in volume terms were up 0.9% with price changes factored in. Retail sales rose in five of 11 subsectors in June but were down overall in six provinces.

The largest increase in dollar terms was a 2.1% rise at motor vehicle and parts dealers. New-car dealers reported gains of two per cent, reflecting higher sales of new motor vehicles, while sales at used car dealers were up 4.5% and automotive parts, accessories and tire stores rose 1.8%. Sales rose 5.1% at electronics and appliance stores. Furniture and home furnishing stores sales increased 2.3%. Sales at building material and garden equipment and supplies dealers increased 0.5%.

The largest decline was at gasoline stations, which fell 2.7%. General merchandisers were down 1.7%. Sales at clothing and clothing accessories stores fell 1.1%.

Retail sales declined in all of the Atlantic provinces except Nova Scotia, where sales rose 3.1%. Sales increased 0.3% in Ontario and dropped 0.2% in Quebec.

Summary statistics and links to the data files are on the Statistics Canada website at http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/100824/dq100824a-eng.htm.

Sourec: I E Canada Website]]>Mon, 23 Aug 2010 00:00:00 -0800http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4699http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4699
The CFIA said twenty-four (24) countries received a notice of non-compliance for this period. A total of 1657 shipments with wood packaging material (WPM) were inspected during that period (data includes shipments inspected at the ports of Halifax, Montreal, Vancouver, Prince Rupert). Data collected by the CBSA during that period has been analyzed by the CFIA to determine that compliance is about 93.4% with regards to presence of a IPPC mark or a Phytosanitary Certificate and with no live pests or signs of living pests.

Approximately 2.2% (37/1657) of shipments were infested. Most of these infested shipments were from China. The remaining non-compliant shipments had no mark and no Phytosanitary Certificate and no live pests or signs of living pests. No fraudulent phytosanitary certificates were intercepted during this period. Pest identification has been included in the notices sent to exporting countries.

CIFFA would like to remind Members that Canada strictly regulates the entry of wood packaging from all countries of the world. The entry requirements for wood packaging from all areas except the continental United States are specified in policy D-98-08. You should also be aware that non-compliant wood packaging may be refused entry into Canada. Members can help prevent the introduction and spread within Canada of pests by staying vigilant and ensure that the overseas agents used are reputable. For more visit: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/for/cwpc/wdpkge.shtml

Source: I E Canada Website ]]>Mon, 23 Aug 2010 00:00:00 -0800http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4701http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4701

• Pacific Highway, Surrey, BC - 5:00am to 12:00am.
• Huntingdon, BC - Closed
• Aldergrove, BC - Closed
• Vancouver Airport, BC - Closed
• Emerson, MB - Closed
• Mississauga, ON - Closed
• Ottawa, ON - Closed
• Lacolle, PQ ? Closed

The following are the hours of operation for Labor Day, September 6, 2010, a statutory holiday in the United States:

• Blaine, WA - 8:00am to 6:00pm

]]>Thu, 19 Aug 2010 00:00:00 -0800http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4698http://www.aacb.com/news/press.asp?id=4698
Recent international trade statistics corroborate what is obvious in other economic indicators: growth is slowing worldwide. For the trade stats, it?s a new phenomenon, but other, forward-looking data suggest that weakness will linger through the second half of this year. Governments, worried enough about local demand, are busy implementing trade promotion policies. Are they likely to succeed?

The rebound from the drubbing trade took in late 2008 makes it look like a great solution to domestic woes. Worldwide, export growth vaulted from deep negatives back into a solid, double-digit pace, recovering a good chunk of lost ground over the past three quarters. It?s the very recent data that rings a more ominous tone. Exports had become an engine of U.S. growth, but in June they shrunk back by 1.3%. At the same time, exports fell 2.5% in Canada and 0.6% in Japan, while they were flat in Singapore, the Asian trade hub. Numbers aren?t down universally, but there are questions about the sustainability of the recent spurts in the UK and Germany, and of ongoing Chinese growth.

What makes the impending slowing more dangerous is the extent to which the rebound in trade has influenced overall GDP growth. During the good quarters, U.S. trade activity was up 14%, while GDP growth averaged 3.4%. German GDP growth was modest at 2%, but trade expanded on average by 12%. Japan, which in recent years has been particularly trade-dependent, saw 22% trade growth while GDP averaged just 3.3%. Canada has likewise seen an eye-catching increase in exports and imports, averaging 15% while GDP tracked at 4%. In these locations, the trade balance wasn?t necessarily contributing to the bottom line, but both rapid export and import activity creates local jobs.

Trade?s dynamism has ignited hopes in an otherwise disheartening environment, and policymakers have jumped into action. The U.S. has set a goal of doubling exports in five years. The new UK government seems intent on increasing foreign trade promotion. Japan?s new prime minister has quickly jumped on the bandwagon, pledging to flog the products of his country?s top companies. And Germany is expected to continue its long-held view of exports as a key source of economic strength.

Exchange rate volatility is to some extent frustrating these endeavours. Nascent protectionism, whether overt or more subtle, also poses a threat. But the policies are up against an even larger foe. For a beleaguered economy, looking elsewhere as a source of demand seems like intelligent policy. But when weakness is ubiquitous, it?s hard to know who has the capacity to buy. Global fiscal stimulus has helped to re-energize trade flows, but there?s a sinking feeling that the impact is fast wearing off, and the sources of replacement demand are highly uncertain.

It stands to reason that ultimately, there has to be demand for final goods for the system to work, but at the moment, everyone is looking elsewhere for greener grass. Without obvious sources of renewed demand growth, new policies, while good longer-term strategies, threaten a widespread increase of neo-mercantilism as nations duke it out for an increased share of a slow-growing pie.

The bottom line? Encouraging global trade expansion is great policy. Trade will continue to be the most dynamic segment of GDP for a long time to come, but it is no substitute for healthy, global domestic demand. Once the latter truly recovers, outward-looking policies are more likely to succeed.

Source: I E Canada Website ]]>