June 27: ‘Used’ cars – and other letters to the ROB editor

Share

Do taxpayers pay for used-car profits?

Re 'Used' cars boost sales at Chrysler (June 20): "You sell them to yourself and then you sell them on the used-car lot as a used car," says one dealer. "There's nothing illegal about it," says one auto-industry veteran.

Hmm. Are the cars sold as "used" at any of these companies shown to Canada Revenue Agency as depreciated in value and sold at a lower price? Do any of the dealers take a pretend loss on a double sale to offset profits? Do taxpayers pay for this?

These questions should be asked to help protect honest dealers and taxpayers.

Garry Preston, Oakville, Ont.

A multipronged national strategy

Re National strategy is noble, but it's not enough (June 23): Brenda Spotton Visano's op-ed reflects feedback I heard during national consultations held by the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada. However, I'd like to address the view that the strategy "does nothing to dismantle the real barriers to financial success."

The strategy addresses these barriers by establishing three goals to improve Canadians' financial know-how: day-to-day money and debt management, planning and saving, and preventing and protecting against financial abuse and fraud. It's a call to the public, private and non-profit sectors to work toward common goals. More than 50 initiatives in support of the goals are identified on the FCAC website.

Some of the professor's arguments touch on regulatory matters. Financial literacy and a good regulatory framework go hand in hand. Complementary to our work in education is the agency's regulatory function, which ensures that consumers' rights are respected by the financial sector. My role and that of the national strategy are distinct from, but fully supported and reinforced by, the FCAC's regulatory role.

Jane Rooney, financial literacy leader, Financial Consumer Agency of Canada

DPA certainly not 'soft on crime'

Re Deferred prosecution won't put a dent in corporate crime (June 3), and Canada needs new tools to fight corporate wrongdoing (May 29): There has been a lively debate on the ROB op-ed page about the efficacy of so-called deferred-prosecution agreements and whether Canada should put a DPA regime in its tool kit for responding to corporate wrongdoing.

Under a strictly operated DPA regime, enforcement authorities gain the benefit of internal investigations that are funded by industry and disclosed voluntarily, which saves government resources and brings to light misconduct that might otherwise never become public.

Under a DPA, criminal charges against a corporate offender are held in abeyance for a set period of time, during which management is expected to comply with probation-like terms; often including the appointment of a monitor, which is like an embedded auditor. The use of monitors requires real-time compliance and is not "soft on crime."

We feel our British cousins have struck the right balance. Britain has judicialized the approval process, requiring a court to determine whether a proposed DPA is in the interests of justice and whether its terms are fair, reasonable and proportionate.

Kenneth Jull, Baker & McKenzie partner, and adjunct professor, faculty of law, University of Toronto, and Christopher Burkett, Baker & McKenzie associate, London office

Letters to the editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. Submit letters to letters@globeandmail.com.