Monitor Telegram

Bringing about a higher level of transparency and accountability in provincial and federal governments to help protect taxpayers from abuse

Bringing about a higher level of transparency and accountability in provincial and federal governments to help protect taxpayers from abuse.

  • About the Monitor Telegram
    • Your Little Ol’ Canadian Goose Is Being Cooked
    • What Are These Guys Doing With Your Money?
    • Yes, Your Tax Dollars Are Being Blown Away!
    • My Old Age Pension Is How Much?
  • Tax Dollars Wasted
  • Government
  • Healthcare Waste
  • Nutty Stuff
  • International Waste
  • Contact Us

Life Loans — Enabling Seniors to Live Better Lives

April 5, 2018

Executive Summary 

Making loans to life insurance policyholders or the selling of life insurance policies by third parties, known as life settlements, are considered to be trafficking in life insurance policies and are prohibited in most Canadian provinces, including Ontario, through provisions in their respective insurance legislation. This spring, however, a Private Member’s bill entitled Insurance Amendment Act (Life Loans) (Bill 20) was introduced by Trillium Party MPP Jack McLaren to the Ontario legislature. Bill 20 will enable third parties to make loans to life insurance policyholders and to charities to which life insurance policies have been donated. The challenge will be to have Bill 20 approved before the Ontario election on June 7, given that Bill 20 will be competing with government legislation. Most would agree that Bill 20 will help Ontario seniors by enabling them to convert their life insurance policies into cash at a time when they are faced with rising expenditures and low-interest rates.

————-

For almost eighty years, making loans to life insurance policyholders or the selling of life insurance policies by third parties, known as life settlements, has been considered to be trafficking in life insurance policies and is prohibited in most Canadian provinces through provisions in their respective insurance legislation. In Ontario, Section 115 of the Insurance Act prohibits “any person other than a life insurer or its duly authorized agent…from trafficking or trading in life insurance policies.” Because of Section 115, which was introduced in 1933, life insurance policyholders can only “sell” their life policies back to their own life insurer for its cash surrender value or borrow against this cash surrender value from a bank.

This spring, however, a Private Member’s bill entitled Insurance Amendment Act (Life Loans) (Bill 20) was introduced by Trillium Party MPP Jack McLaren to the Ontario legislature. Bill 20 will enable third parties to make loans to life insurance policyholders and to charities to which life insurance policies have been donated. Bill 20 will reverse the prohibition on making loans to life insurance policyholders but not the selling of life insurance policies by third parties in the current Ontario Insurance Act.

It is important to note that there are major differences between life settlements and life loans. Life settlements enable life insurance policyholders to sell the death benefits of their life insurance policies at less than face value to a third party; the buyer-investor keeps up premium payments and is entitled to the full death benefit when the policyholder dies. The policyholder receives cash upfront, and the investor’s return is based on the amount paid for the policy and the time that passes before collecting the death benefit. If the life insured is terminally ill, the life settlement is referred to as a viatical settlement. Loans to life insurance policyholders have several advantages compared to the sale of life insurance policies. In Canada, the proceeds of a life or viatical settlement are taxable whereas the loan proceeds to policyholders are not. With a life settlement, there are no death benefits left for beneficiaries whereas there is with a loan. A life settlement may adversely impact the policyholder’s entitlement to welfare benefits by increasing the policy holder’s income.

Bill 20, which was introduced on March 22 to the Ontario legislative, has several safeguards for life insurance policyholders including a 10 day cooling off period and the regulation of third parties who make or arrange these loans by the Financial Services Commission of Ontario. There is also a requirement for these third parties to advise their clients to seek legal and financial advice before making any decisions. This bill also gives insurance companies the right of first refusal with respect to a life insurance policyholder who wants to take out a loan and use their life insurance policy as collateral.

This initiative will help many people in Ontario, given the province’s aging demographic, greater longevity and low-interest rates. Although this bill is not restricted to seniors, this initiative is expected to benefit mostly seniors and charities owning donated life policies from seniors. Ontario’s senior population is more than 2 million, represents almost 16% of the population and is expected to rise to over 20% in a decade.

Allowing the trading in life insurance policies by third parties has been considered by the Ontario government in the past. A feasibility study sponsored by the AIDS Bureau in the Ontario Ministry of Health in 1997 recommended that people with a life-threatening illness should be able to benefit from their life insurance policies during their lives and receive fair and ethical treatment. The study stated that the Ministry of Health “should urge the Ontario Insurance Commission to mandate insurance companies to comply with the Recommended Practices, and permit, and establish regulations for viatical settlements in Ontario”. In 2001, based on the consultations during Ontario’s Red Tape Review Commission, Ontario passed legislation that would have allowed the sale of life settlements. The Financial Services Commission of Ontario, which regulates insurance companies in Ontario, issued draft viatical settlement regulations and asked for comments. This legislation, however, was repealed in 2011 after deaths from AIDS fell due to the introduction of more effective medications.

In October 2017, a Private Member’s bill entitled Insurance Amendment Act (Life Settlements) (Bill 162) was introduced by Mike Colle, Liberal MPP for Eglinton Lawrence, in the Ontario legislature to legalize life settlements and allow seniors the right to sell their existing life policies (after they had been in force for 3 years) to a third party investor (subject to a ten-day cooling-off period). Bill 162 passed Second Reading in October 2017 and was referred to the Committee of the Whole House. The Ontario Legislature recessed on December 14. In the first few months of 2018, it was made clear that Bill 162 would not move forward because of opposition from the insurance industry. Since being introduced on March 22, Bill 20 has received First Reading in the Ontario Legislature. The next step for Bill 20 is to receive Second Reading and to be referred to Committee. At this stage, these steps are viewed as attainable. The challenge will be for Bill 20 to pass the Committee stage and receive Third Reading, which historically has required more time for most bills. The passage of Bill 20 is also made more difficult by the fact that it is a Private Member’s bill not a government bill and, therefore, is not viewed as a priority by the governing party. Bill 20’s ultimate approval will be a race against time as the provincial election is June 7 and legislation that is not approved before that date will die on the order paper.

Four provinces currently allow third parties to buy life insurance policies and to make loans to life insurance policyholders – Saskatchewan, Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. Many countries across the globe have allowed the sale of life settlements for some time – the U.S., Germany, Japan and the U.K. In fact, American life settlement companies are able to advertise in Canada. For example, U.S.-based Coventry Financial Group has numerous ads on Canadian television channels offering to buy life insurance policies from Canadians.

Bill 20 recommends that third parties that make loans to life insurance policyholders be regulated by an existing Ontario financial services regulator — the Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO) as FSCO already regulates the insurance companies (all issues except solvency which is regulated by the federal Office of the Superintendent of Financial Services (OSFI)). When asked about such a role, FSCO has indicated that their mandate is determined by the Ontario Ministry of Finance. To this point in time, the Ontario Minister of Finance has taken a neutral position on Bill 20. The Ontario Minister of Seniors has expressed concerns about safeguards for seniors which appear to be adequately covered given Bill 20’s proposed 10 day cooling off period, the regulation of third parties who make or arrange these loans by the Financial Services Commission of Ontario and the requirement for these third parties to advise their clients to seek legal and financial advice before making any decisions.

Ultimately, the approval of Bill 20 will be a race against time, as all the parties in the Ontario legislature move into election mode. What must be kept in mind by all Ontario MPPs, however, is that Bill 20 will greatly assist Ontario seniors in dealing with financial challenges at a time when the costs of housing, hydro and other basic necessities of life are continuing to rise.

Beverly Brooks, MA, MBA, is President of Brooks Communications. Her company develops and implements investor, media, stakeholder and government relations strategies for private sector companies and associations. Brooks Communications has provided strategic advice to a variety of sectors including financial services, healthcare, energy, mining, information technology and real estate. Beverly has worked for two international communications agencies, a national association and a proxy advisory firm. She also worked as a Senior Economist and as the Director of Consultations for the federal Department of Finance. Beverly is an Advisor to the National Crowdfunding and Fintech  Association of Canada.  

Filed Under: Contributor

Legislation aimed at the root causes of Medicare and Medicaid fraud in the US

January 18, 2018

Recently the Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General issued a report A-17-17-52000-  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES MET MANY REQUIREMENTS OF THE IMPROPER PAYMENTS INFORMATION ACT OF 2002 BUT DID NOT FULLY COMPLY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016.

In the report, OIG recommends that HHS focus on the root causes of the improper payment rate percentage and evaluate critical and feasible action steps to decrease the improper payment rate percentage below 10%.  Advanced statistical systems, marketed under the name of “predictive modeling” don’t address any root causes.  Their value is picking up patterns of existing frauds.  Now, there is a bill in Congress which may go a long way to responding to this longstanding need.

HR 4554, the Medicare Common Access Card Act of 2017, directs CMS to initiate pilot programs to test smart cards for prevention, detection and deterrence of Medicare fraud.  In 2016, the GAO published GAO-16-216 HEALTH CARE FRAUD Information on Most Common Schemes and the Likely Effect of Smart Cards to report to Congress whether smart card technology can affect the root causes of frauds.  The answer is yes.

Criminal activity of all kinds thrives in the dark.  Because healthcare claims are basically paid without any verification that the services were ever rendered.  Payers do not know where they were rendered if the patient was at the office on the day the claim says they were- even that the provider of services was in the country on that day.  Media stories often document the “25-hour day” where legitimate provider billings would require that long a working day based on the procedures billed in the claims paid.  This root cause is a fundamental enabler of fraud in Medicare, Medicaid and private insurance fraud.  Capturing vital data at the point of care with multiple points of authentication, such as included in HR4554, would provide CMS and other payers the ability to shed light on the times, locations and actions that truly occur in provider offices, home care, and transportation claims, and reduce the ease with which many frauds are committed.

The GAO report estimated that smart cards can attack 22% of fraud.  We at Castlestone don’t completely agree their methodology, which included civil settlements against pharmaceutical companies in the universe of frauds measured.  Even so, using the way we implemented a smart card anti-fraud solution, the costs are about 1% of the 22% fraud number computed by the GAO.  Fraud in Medicare and Medicaid alone is estimated to be $120-$150 Million per year.

This is not the first time that the Medicare Common Access Card has been submitted to Congress.  Representative Peter Roskam of Illinois has diligently tried to get this passed in at least 3 previous sessions of Congress, and in the US Senate, the FAST Act and PRIME Act, led by former Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, could not get enough votes in Congress.

Given that Medicare and Medicaid now cost over $1 Trillion per year (yes, with a “T”), which is $400 billion more than it was 10 years ago when we started developing our smart card solution to Medicare and Medicaid fraud, it begs the question why this hasn’t been done years ago.

Along with technologies like those proposed in HR4554, policies that encourage increased spending and Federal reimbursement, and discourage fraud prevention and reduction must be reversed.  This combination will ensure that taxpayers are getting the healthcare they pay for.

Jeff Leston, CEO Castlestone LLC.

Castlestone is a US company created to use the infrastructure of the payment (credit/debit) networks to deliver verified,  real-time information about time, location and details of healthcare encounters without having to invest in large networks.  Castlestone’s primary customer base are health plans looking to prevent, detect and deter fraud and abuse.

There are some lessons for Canada in this so the Monitor Telegram is republishing this article. 

Filed Under: Contributor

Reverse Mortgages and Life Settlements in Ontario in 2017

January 4, 2018

(This article has been written by Daniel Kahan ASA, with permission to publish)

In October 2017 a Private Members Bill No. 162 was introduced to LEGALIZE Life Settlements in Ontario and allow seniors the right to SELL their existing life policies (after they had been in force for 3 years) to a Third Party Investor (subject to a 10 day cooling-off period). This Bill passed its Second Reading and was referred to the Committee of the Whole House. As of December 14, when the Legislature went into Recess, the earliest this can happen is after February 20 and before the start of the June Election Campaign in April.

Nobody has ever questioned the right of Ontario seniors to downsize and sell their homes to whomever gives them the best price OR to stay in their homes and if they are ASSET RICH and INCOME POOR to take out a Reverse Mortgage (subject to Independent Legal Advice). However when it comes to disposing of their permanent life policies, because of the 1933 Section 115 of the Ontario Insurance, they can only “sell” their life policy back to their own life insurer for its Cash Surrender Value OR borrow against this CSV from a Bank (if they don’t want to get taxed by taking out a Policy Loan).

So Bill 162 is a 21st Century initiative sponsored and promoted by www.lisac.ca a new Canadian Life Settlement Industry Association to MODERNIZE the Ontario Insurance Act and give Ontario Seniors the same FREEDOMS they now enjoy when it comes to Same Sex Marriages or buying wine in (some of) their local supermarkets.

However sec. 115 of Ontario Insurance Act also prohibits the offering of “reverse mortgage” Life Loans and there is nothing in this new Bill 162 to LEGALIZE this type of Loan secured by a Collateral Assignment of the life policy, where the Loan to Value is based on the current age and health of the policyholder and his estimated future Life Expectancy.

I have therefore contacted and met with Jack MacLaren, the lone MPP of the new Ontario Trillium Party and he has agreed to sponsor an Amendment to include Life Loans in Bill 162 if and when the Committee of the Whole House meets after February 20.

Based on the 2001 CAIFA (now Advocis) Stakeholder Submission to the DRAFT FSCO Viatical Settlements Regulations produced after the passage of Schedule G of the Red Tape Reduction Act in Dec. 2000 and a 2004 CARP 50Plus Magazine article reprinted last week by the Monitor Telegram, the “Canadian” Loan approach is PREFERABLE to the “US” Settlement approach from a Consumer perspective.

When it comes to Living Benefits and Viatical Settlements (which are specifically EXCLUDED from Bill 162) I think it would be worth reprinting the Executive Summary from the 1997 Ontario Ministry of Health Feasibility Study as nothing has changed since then (excect that AIDS is no longer a Terminal Illness) and if in July 2018 marijuana will only be sold by the LCBO, then why not have OHIP operate a NON-PROFIT Viatical Settlement Company to help reduce its expenses or improve its services??

[pdf-embedder url=”https://https://monitortelegram.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/ontario-MoH-1997-feasibility_study-Exec-Summary.pdf” title=”ontario MoH 1997 feasibility_study Exec Summary”]

Filed Under: Contributor Tagged With: Life Settlements in Ontario, Living Benefits and Viatical Settlements, reverse mortgages

Use your life insurance for cash now?

December 13, 2017

BY JUNE YEE – REPUBLISHED WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR RETIRED PERSONS (CARP)

[This article was provided to the Monitor Telegram by Daniel Kahan]

The costs of caregiving bear out the fact that growing old can carry real financial burdens. Recent innovations in the financial services industry underline concerns about paying these costs. Critical illness insurance and long-term care insurance as well as a more recent innovation, the so-called “nursing care” annuity, are touted as ways to lessen the financial stress of aging.

But these products aren’t available to everyone. “What happens to people who are going to a nursing home today? It’s not going to help them to buy a long-term care policy. Somebody who’s got cancer or needs a bypass – they can’t buy a critical illness policy,” says Daniel Kahan, an actuary in Toronto and a staunch supporter of viatical settlements.

Accessing life insurance equity
Viatical [editor: .  viatical – describing the purchase of an insurance policy from a holder who is terminally ill} arrangements represent an income alternative that’s rooted in insurance but dramatically different from our traditional perception of life insurance. In a viatical settlement (the term viatical is rooted in the Latin viaticum, referring to supplies or money for a journey), the policyholder sells the death benefits of the life insurance policy at less than face value to a third party; the buyer-investor keeps up premium payments and is entitled to the full death benefit when the policyholder dies. The policyholder gets cash upfront, and the investor’s return is based on the amount paid for the policy and the time that passes before collecting the death benefit.

“Somebody who is 80 years old and has been paying their premiums for 20 years needs to go into a nursing home. Eventually, when they die, their estate gets the money, but they need the money now.” says Kahan. “Why not allow a mechanism where they can convert that equity into cash with an income stream?”

Kahan had hoped changes to the Ontario Insurance Act in December 2000 as part of that province’s Red Tape Reduction Act would allow viatical business. But nervous politicians nixed the new rules at the last minute, saying that viaticals wouldn’t be allowed until proper regulations were in place. In July 2001, the Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO) issued draft regulations, asking for comments.

Opponents of viatical settlements cite widespread fraud in the United States, where viatical settlements are a booming business, as a reason for caution – or not at all (see “Fraud Cuts Both Ways,” [editor’s note: not available online]). Proponents of viaticals, however, say fears are unfounded and that it’s unfair to refuse policyholders, some needy, the right to sell their policies.

Currently, third-party trade in insurance policies continues to be prohibited in all provinces and territories except Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and Quebec. In the provinces where they are legal, lack of regulation means a lack of protection.

The key issue in the draft regulations is how to control the abuses that have characterized the U.S. viatical industry to date. Among the key questions are: who should be allowed to conduct business in viatical settlements; should viatical settlements be limited to only the terminally ill; how long a life expectancy should be stipulated as a condition of viaticating a policy (draft rules call for a two-year limit); and, not least, just who will regulate the industry.

Interested parties are watching Ontario these days. The bulk of life insurance policies in Canada reside in this province, and regulations governing viaticals are on the drawing board.

Seniors a prime market
Where viatical settlement business is legal, seniors are a growth area. The so-called “senior settlements” business, which has little to do with being terminally ill but everything to do with being old, has sprung up as a niche within the viatical industry. It’s a sound business concept, according to Victor Lansdown, who operates Life Source and Associates Inc., a Montreal company that buys life insurance policies. “It [the insurance policy] is a time-valued instrument. The healthy seniors, all they have against them is their age.” In other words, the older you are, the shorter your life expectancy, and the more you can expect to get when you sell your policy. “Seldom are we able to assist a person with a life expectancy of 12 years, for example. The majority would be 10 years [or less].”

Why the Canadian insurance industry is wary

For its part, the Canadian insurance industry largely opposes viatical settlements, claiming that living benefits, otherwise known as accelerated benefits, in which policyholders with life expectancy of less than two years may obtain an advance of death benefits, already fill the need. Living benefits originated as a compassionate response to the AIDS epidemic of the early ’80s, which saw many terminally ill patients facing staggering drug costs with no way to pay.

There are potential problems with this, however. Although living benefits are offered by most insurers, they are essentially a voluntary guideline, rather than part of any insurance contract. Also, living benefits are usually limited to 12 to 24 months prior to expected death.

“We’re not so much opposed to consumers getting their money. We had major concerns with the fraud associated with the viatical product,” says Andrew Casey, vice-president, legislative, of the Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association (CLHIA). “It was an industry that was rife with fraud and deception.”

Indeed, viatical transactions recently ranked sixth in BusinessWeek’s list of the most prevalent investment frauds in the U.S. Meanwhile, the Canadian Securities Administrators describes viatical settlements as “very risky investments and often fraudulent.” Casey also insists our superior health-care system means a weaker case for viatical settlements in Canada than in the U.S.

Tax implications
There are other technical issues. Casey notes concerns about the tax implications of viaticating a policy. “If your policy is paid out by the company, there’s a tax-free aspect. But once you viaticate it, you’ve sold that policy and that’s taxable.” This income could also affect pension benefits (for example, boosting a pensioner’s income past the threshold for clawback of Old Age Security).

One solution put forward by CAIFA, the Canadian Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors, in its response to FSCO’s consultation draft for viatical settlements in Ontario, is to set up the viatical settlement as a loan. “Among [the benefits to the viator, or person selling the policy] is the ability to avoid tax liability and to pay to a beneficiary any part of the death benefit that remains after repayment of the loan and interest.”

Kahan’s vision goes further – to a not-for-profit organization run by the provincial government to facilitate viatical settlements for the needy. A settlement would take the form of loans made against the security of collateral assignment of the policy. He points out the Ontario Ministry of Health has examined and pretty well established the feasibility of establishing a non-profit viatical organization in Ontario.

Unfortunately, this study seems to have been largely ignored in the current discussions. Says Kahan, “If the government were really interested, they could do it themselves.”

Fraud cuts both ways
The U.S. experience with viatical settlements shows regulators grappling with fraud; not only are insurance applicants participating in the crooked schemes, they’re being helped or encouraged by insurance agents and brokers eager for more policies to be available to investors, according to http://www.crimes-of-persuasion.com. The website, which serves as a fraud watchdog of sorts for consumers, lists two of the more common viatical investment schemes as:

  • Clean-sheeting, in which a life insurance applicant fails to disclose a pre-existing medical condition in response to a question on a life insurance application. Because medical exams can be forgone, this ensures the policy will be issued and can then be sold.
    • Wet-ink policies, in which the insured sells their policy or multiple policies from different insurance companies, sometimes within weeks, while there’s little chance of finding out they’re terminally ill.

© August 2004 50Plus Magazine

Filed Under: Contributor

Canada Promotes Piracy Using All Means To Undermine The “New Information Economy”

October 9, 2017

Originally published on August 31, 2017 by Paul Einarsson. Permission given to publish in the Monitor Telegram by author.

I read a recent article written by Jason Unrau in Blacklocks Reporter a great publication in Canada. Canada’s weak laws, criminal centric legal system, and then there is this article that speaks to the almost total non-enforcement of Copyright laws.

Professor Amir Attaran at the University of Ottawa law faculty had a few quotes:

Canada’s enforcement of Copyright and Trademark laws are “poorer than a banana Republic” and “these figures are not a surprise at all…Canada is a great place to be a white collar criminal- in fact, one of the best in the world, as you can see from these statistics.” “These are more than intellectual property crimes- it is closer to homicide” referring to counterfeit pharmaceuticals “Health Canada is doing an appalling job.”

My personal experience confirms this “banana republic” status in Canada. The government itself has grabbed billions in seismic data (acoustic images of the layers of earth similar to sonogram and ultrasound technology). Not only did they do so in a tricky way, slowly and incrementally over time, without notice, or warning…when we tried to find out what they were doing via Access to Information requests they concealed information, blocked us, pushed us to the courts to force disclosure, and tied us up for years keeping us in the dark.

The whole thing was unauthorized and simply a decision made at the bureaucratic level to “promote Canada” by stealing our information and giving it to the needy oil companies (apparently who need welfare and cant pay for this data), while trampling property rights and intellectual property rights, ignoring international treaties dealing with Copyright, and creating more of a lawless piracy haven atmosphere in Canada. Now its no wonder why people are now exposing the “deep state” pulling all the strings in the dark. But if you have the eyes to see it and look for it you can find it.

The unscrupulous defendants have claimed our firm knew the “rules of the game”. This is so dishonest and fraudulent it is beyond comprehension. The facts are the legislation was not at all clear, the permits we signed had nothing in them and certainly there was no; all captial, bold and underlined words saying: ” YOUR DATA WILL BE CONFISCATED AND GIVEN TO YOUR CLIENTS AND CUSTOMERS IN RETURN FOR THE ACCESS PERMIT YOU HAVE TO GET ALTHOUGH WE ARE CHARGING YOU HUGE FEES FOR THE PERMITS” Our counsel argued “It is like saying because you need a permit to build your house that the city can take possession of that house after 10 years just because they say so, and after the fact” It is obscene …but in Canada the obscene happens all the time. What is so misleading about this is that these same defendants know that the laws they rely on were created before seismic data existed so there is no way anyone can say it was contemplated. In the beginning there was no submission and no disclosure of seismic data. Then there was limited submission, then disclosure of oil company seismic (“exclusive data”) only and the government lied and assured us our “non-exclusive” data would not be disclosed. Then the submission of data grew into more products and into digital data on tape expanding from paper. Then the disclosure expanded slowly to the disclosing of paper, then copies, then digital processed data and then the plans if not policy to disclose field data. The dishonesty of the government gets creative when they used data to create maps and disclosed those derivative works. They do this because they claim it is a new product knowing full well this is illegal under Copyright laws.

These liars take it even further and state that the current policy has always existed and functioned as it is today. This is done to mislead the court or direct the court whatever it is to discredit us and mislead judges, who are already inclined to do all they can to “protect the crown”. This lie is accepted because it is repeated over and over with conviction and a straight face ” GSI knew the rules of the game” and now they are just not happy. This is the corrupt and deceitful story line.

Then even worse the government induced our clients to breach the keystone or hallmark of any intellectual property license, including ours, which is to not disclose the licensed material. Not only do they disclose it without seeking the owners permission, they sell it and usually get more money from the government than they paid us the owner to have a licensed copy. Why would the government induce our clients to breach our license agreements (common in many industries and one wonders who is next)? What an outrage and how lawless can you get with a Marxist government totally ignorant, malicious, and devious at the same time.

Back to the bureaucrats…their brilliant marxist meddling idea was to take our company’s intellectual property and give it to our clients, potential clients, and our foreign competitors (interfering in our license arrangements with those clients and destroying our relationships). This is what we pay taxes to the government for, so they can do this?

What is worse is because of the government’s idiotic schemes, private piracy firms sprung up overnight to get in on the gravy train of billions of dollars of free intellectual property, scanning and reselling it. They were fully supported by the government and incredibly government agencies paid these firms to scan and copy data from other government agencies to support and fund their piracy activities. I called the competition of bureau of Canada they were hostile and combative calling all of this more competition and they were fine with it. The RCMP is so busy stealing from Canadians they have no interest in actually investigating this billion dollar government and white collar crime ring. How infuriating those that I am paying to protect me and my property are so hopeless and abusive.

The professor above indicated Canada was one of the top countries to perpetrate white collar crime and get away with it…I would add a country where the government can steal property, take bribes, abuse its power, and get away with it.

In addition to government I have a theory about so many of the abusive and corrupt large corporations and how they get that way. The oppression of the government with all its corruption, picking winners and losers, the oppressive regulations, the lack of enforcement of criminal activity, the courts supporting criminals over victims, ….the only way these corporations can survive in this environment is to play dirty, to abuse power, abuse the courts, abuse the law, find shortcuts, find loopholes, push for oppressive and competition limiting rules and regulations. But they have to do so because the government creates this environment and perpetuates it.

The anti-Americanism, pervasive socialism and Marxism pounded into children in schools and universities in Canada allow the twisted notion of the “greater good” to justify anything if the end goal is to their liking. But this sickness actually destroys society, destroys the individual, destroys freedom, destroys the will to work hard, punishes honesty, promotes corruption, because it tramples all over individual rights, it rewards corruption, it rewards government picking winners and losers on a whim and beating those who disagree into submission. Quite simply this way of thinking and the system in Canada undermines any principle of Justice, Law, or Order, no one is free and no one is safe.

After decades fighting this tyranny and crony communism in 2017 we are now faced with applying to the Supreme Court of Canada to appeal the “implied license”, and pursuing expropriation claims against the government, and the injustice continues even in the process itself.

Filed Under: Contributor Tagged With: copyright law, intellectual property, trademark law

Search This Site

Sign Up to receive our bi-weekly email newsletter!

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Publisher’s Views by Robert D. Smith

“Canada’s Taxpayer-Funded Medical Liability Protection Agency” – a Six-Part Series

April 17, 2018

The Monitor Telegram has been sent and been given permission to publish a … [Read More...]

Duplessis Orphans – Victims of Abuse in Quebec Suing Catholic Church and Quebec Government

February 8, 2018

Late last month, a motion to receive approval for a multi-million dollar … [Read More...]

Victim’s Descendent Finally Gets Meagre $100,000 from Canada for Montreal CIA Torture Experiments

November 30, 2017

One of the darkest chapters of Canadian history surely has to be the … [Read More...]

More Articles from Robert D. Smith

Contributors to the Monitor Telegram

Life Loans — Enabling Seniors to Live Better Lives

April 5, 2018 By editor

Executive Summary  Making loans to life insurance policyholders or the … [Read More...]

Legislation aimed at the root causes of Medicare and Medicaid fraud in the US

January 18, 2018 By Jeff, Leston

Recently the Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General issued a … [Read More...]

Reverse Mortgages and Life Settlements in Ontario in 2017

January 4, 2018 By Daniel Kahan

(This article has been written by Daniel Kahan ASA, with permission to … [Read More...]

More Contributor Articles

Copyright © 2025 · All Rights Reserved · Monitor Telegram · Read Our Privacy Policy