Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Message from Sandy McIntyre, Chief Investment Officer, Sentry Select

John McCallum's attitude is symptomatic of the lack of interest in helping our population's savings play on a level playing field with large capital pools:

Is there a political analyst/politician out there who has the slightest interest in the impact on corporate capital structure on tax revenues? If so please call. The recent decision to allow "competition" in wireless has based on the limited information available to the public wildly uneven tax revenue implications for the GoC. Funding Orscam's Canadian venture with high yield debt (>18%) REMOVES PROFIT BEFORE TAX. The Canadian competition do not have this advantage. They can only pay dividends after tax. What you have is a foreign controlled private INCOME TRUST competing with domestic taxable public corporations. The result: domestic (retail + pension fund) public markets investors get screwed by a tax arbitrage no one in Ottawa seems to or cares to attempt to understand.

Brent may be a pain in the *** but he is frequently very right. I hate to say this, but this is Brent's (and my) area of expertise. We know how the Canadian public is getting screwed by tax structure. By the way, trusts were not the problem; they were the solution.

Enquiring minds are invited to pursue this invitation. Brent, my bet is no-one will respond. John McCallum's attitude is symptomatic of the lack of interest in helping our population's savings play on a level playing field with large capital pools.

James A. McIntyre
Senior Vice-President & Chief Investment Officer
Sentry Select
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld


Kephalos said...

If you're the President of the US and you lie to Congress about the definition of oral sex, you get an impeachment trial. If you're the Finance Minister of Canada or the Alberta Government and you lie about corporate income tax leakage, you get backslapping and bodily part shaking for the good 'job' you're doing.

It makes a difference whether the national presss can tell hard fact from hardcore fiction.

Anyhow McIntyre is 100% correct. The Harper Tory Government is selling off Canada to foreign companies. The foreigners use leveraged buyouts to remove Canadian income from Canada tax-free; thereby weakening the corporate tax base.

Harper is a cancer growing on the Prime Minister's office.

Dr Mike said...

Sandy said "trusts were not the problem; they were the solution."

This is from a guy who is in the know when it comes to tax structures , revenue streams , & from a guy who knows of the corporate dalliance that required the removal of the trust structure.

People of all stripes & parties should be appalled at the lack of accountability that was afforded to us by the blacked-out pages.

By allowing this to continue without question is a serious blow to the democracy that all of us hold dear.

Allowing the continued concentration of power in the mainly unelected PMO (had it`s beginning with Trudeau) is robbing us of any say in what goes on in our own country.

We cannot let the few dictate to the many.

Allowing these guys to get away with this just allows them to do it again.

No party can hold itself above the people & this is exactly what we have at present.

It sucks to be us & it is just going to get worse if we allow it to continue.

Dr Mike Popovich

Anonymous said...

Thank you Mr. McIntyre for issuing this.
Now I know why I decided to keep my Sentry instead of dumping it when forced to convert to a mutual fund. Sentry has been very decent to it's investors over the years. Or at least to my household. Years ago that co. allowed us to enter the markets and helped educate us on a few things. Of course Sentry also made us a bit of money. Thanks.
It's thanks to Sentry's activism on issues like this, and of course their efforts on Trust Units, that influenced our decision to keep our Sentry. In recent years we have become a very "anti mutual fund" household, as we have been burned big time on those. We were very pissed the conversion had to be done.
If Sentry had not been seen with postings on this forum and publicly supporting CAITI, we would have dumped it.
Other Trust Unit co's should be following Sentry's example when it comes to telling the truth on Trust Units or any other market issue and generally protecting clients. Nice to see that hasn't changed, since the conversion to a mutual fund. As unit holders, we expect more letters like this to be made available to the public and greater support for CAITI in 2010. Mr. McIntyre, demonstrate your expertise in very public forums. Your other staff too. Brent & Dr. Mike can't do everything on this issue.

Brent thank you for being such a "pain in the ass" by telling the truth on issues and offering detailed analysis on stuff so we can decide for ourselves. After this latest round with the telecommunication b.s., this country needs more whistle blowers. We sincerely appreciate the service provided.

We also equally appreciate the comments of others on this forum.

under age 40, mouthy, pain in the ass Sentry Unit holder(s) & telecommunication holders

Anonymous said...

Here is what I believe is simple but effective way to move your argument
forward. Politicians are often seen as a shallow group, motivated by an
uncomplicated advantage over their adversaries. (That's why they would
sooner throw mud than encourage the public to do simple math when choosing
a direction.) Create a political platform that will benefit the party and
you will attracting political support from the only real alternative to
Harper's Reformers, the Liberals! It will not be easy but if you can wrap
the direction to benefit the largest cross-section of Canadians the
liberals will awaken! Your proposal has already captured saving for
retirement, low cost equity creation for business expansion all resulting
in Canadian Growth and Prosperity. Everyone wins....everyone is interested
and simple sells!!


CAITI said...


Excellent suggestion!

However, we already did that with McCallum prior to the last election to NO AVAIL.

Yves Fortin, a very respected and former senior member of the Department of Finance, now retired, prepared an entire policy platform on the topic of retirement savings and Canadians having adequate income for retirement for the Liberals to adopt, in more than sufficient time for the 2008 election (could Yves have been more prescient?)

All of the measures were of an inducement nature, and not a subsidy nature. Improving the efficiency of things like RRSPs etc. Many of his suggestions were revenue positive as well as being socially positive/responsible. Income trusts were just a small part of the overall package (again highly revenue positive in nature).

Yves went so far as to fully cost the package of reforms that he was suggesting, which would have allowed the Liberals to appeal themselves to a vast segment of Canadians, including the 40% of people who actually show up and vote, i.e. those over the age of 60, as well as their children, many of whom are suffering the burden of supporting their parents in retirement in some form or other.

What became of that inordinate effort by Yves Fortin in the hands of John McCallum....squat. I know because I was instrumental in getting the study into John's hands in the first place.

So why pursue a good idea like you suggest, knowing it to be a complete waste of time...and one's faith in the "system"?

These politicians like McCallum are incapable of listening to the people who they profess to represent, unless of course you are some CEO of a life insurance company or some such thing. They get very good representation. Disproportionate representation by factors exceeding 1,000 fold.


Anonymous said...

All I can say is that McCallum is useless.