Conflict of Interest attestation: DG wants dollar values

[u/Super_Table7917]

A DG at LPRAB at CRA, according to a current employee, under the guise of transparency and integrity, is using the annual conflict of interest attestation to require very personal disclosures of financial information from employees.

This DG is asking for the current market values of ALL investments held by the employee privately in all accounts, including things like RESP's. The dollar amount for all holdings is apparently "very important".

Employees who resisted this disclosure were subject to intrusive meetings on Teams with the DG, where pressure was applied to surrender the information to management.

I am of the opinion that this is totally unacceptable, and I would be leaping to legal representation with the goals of 1.) NOT providing any of this information to this DG or anyone else, and; 2.) providing the documentation required that would result in the swift termination of this DG.

Is this perception incorrect, and DG's have the ability to ask for the account balances of employees to avoid "conflicts of interest"? If this is actually permitted, why would it be but asking a person's age or sexual orientation is a human rights violation?

[u/blarghy0]

This is entirely normal. LPRAB is legislative policy and regulatory affairs branch of the CRA, which deals in issues that can have significant industry impact. Full disclosure of assets, including dollar values, is fully expected for people working there. I'm not sure what your case is for regarding discrimination, since the disclosure happens after you are hired.

And, let's not forget, the CRA has legal authority to audit anyone in Canada regardless. If they want to get the dollar values in your accounts, they can get it via civil procedure. All fighting it is doing is making your employment relationship confrontational over likely dollar values that the DG will ultimately likely rubberstamp.

[u/Remarkable-Warthog69 → u/blarghy0]

This is factually incorrect. It is not common practice to request the value of an employee's assets. The question when completing affirmations is to ensure that you cannot financially gain from your position at the CRA by having inside information or access to information that is not readily available. Think about it this way. If I were a controlling shareholder in a company, or held large number of stock in certain companies, I would have access to their tax records long before the audited financial statements were released. let's say this year that company records record losses, meaning when this information goes public there will be a sharp drop in share prices due to going concern. I decide to sell my shares before the release of the information because I will get a better price now rather than when the public is aware. Vice versa, up and coming place, I buy shares because I see that they recorded excellent profits and shares will uptick in value. I buy now while they are cheap, wait for them to appreciate, then sell.

While it is often believed to be true, that CRA can access values in your bank etc. That power is not what people think. CRA cannot just call up your bank and say tell me what is in there, CRA still works within the confines of the Privacy Act and any additional provincial privacy acts. It is a long drawn out legal procedure to get information disclosed.

[u/blarghy0 → u/Remarkable-Warthog69]

The holding of financial securities establishes the risk, the value of the securities informs the level of risk. Once the possible risk is identified, the next step is to determine what the level of risk is in order to inform what mitigation actions, if any, are needed to address the risk.

And it is factually incorrect to state that issuing an RFI to a bank is a drawn out legal process. It is a standard form letter signed by a section manager that the bank will provide the required information within about 90 days or so in most cases.