To summarize:

• Our CPP fund now has a $257 billion surplus;

• Standard pension protocol demands a surplus distribution at 25%. The CPP’s surplus is arguably as high as 450%;

• A no-risk $170 billion surplus distribution could increase all business profits by 20% this year and 5% in ongoing years;

• It would also give 17 million Canadians $10,000 each, on average;

• Actuaries are all denying the surplus, probably concerned that the CPP’s investment success could eliminate the need for other pension funds;

• The concerned financial industry has much to lose if the CPP’s surplus becomes known;

• Probably funded by the financial industry to remain mute, the Canadian media has published nothing on the CPP’s surplus and potential,;

• Experts on democracy claim bribery is rampant in Canadian politics;

• Only the financial industry has the resources and motivation to engineer this cover-up;

• Canada’s big five banks oversee 70% of the financial industry’s assets;

• Your President of The Chamber will not act until he hears from his members.

Please see below for:

• More details,

• Why businesses are being deprived of a 20% profit increase,

• A list of suggestions on how businesses can combat this cover-up.

If you are the President of a local Chamber of Commerce, I urge you to forward this email to all your members. It could have a significant impact on your community. The townspeople of Bracebridge, Ontario, for example, with a population of 17,000, would receive roughly $100 million if a $170 billion CPP surplus were distributed.

Businesses have the right to know about a possible 20% increase in profit. Then they can decide for themselves how to proceed, possibly using the suggestions below.

My website, www.fixthecpp.ca, has much more detail regarding this disgraceful $257 billion cover-up.

Sincerely,

Ross Macnaughton

Professor emeritus

Ryerson University, aka Toronto Metropolitan University

How CPP reform could increase almost all business profits by 20%

The following analysis shows how a typical Canadian company could increase their profit by an astounding 20%, with reasonable CPP reform.

This recommended $170 billion CPP surplus distribution is equivalent to 10.7% of Canada’s GDP outside of Quebec. (Instead of the CPP, Quebec has the QPP). After income taxes have been paid, roughly 8% of GDP, $126 billion, might reach Canadians. Some would be invested but some would be spent twice or more, thanks to the multiplier effect. Presume $100 billion more will be spent, because of this surplus distribution. This is 6% of Canada’s GDP outside Quebec.

Consider a typical company with $100 million in sales, 70% directly spent on labour and materials, 20% on fixed costs, thereby netting a 10% profit. The following table shows the impact of a 6% increase in sales.

How a $170 billion CPP surplus distribution would increase a typical Canadian business’ profit by 18%

For some companies, the impact would be larger than an 18% profit increase. With the service industry, the profit from a surplus distribution is almost 100%. For example, a physiotherapist who charges $100 per hour would keep almost all $100 if her preceding fees had already paid for her fixed costs like rent and other overheads. Golf courses are another example.

CPP reform can bring still more profits to Canadian businesses.

• Now employers must contribute almost 6% of gross pay (to a maximum pay of $65,000) to the CPP. A contribution reduction to 5% is easily justifiable. 

•  Many companies have their own pension plan where they contribute as much as 10% of gross pay for each employee. If the CPP let all Canadians automatically invest their first $2,000 in contributions directly with CPP Investments, these private pension plans would gradually become unnecessary. For example, almost all 25-year-olds would be $1.5 million wealthier at age 65.  

• Employees would be less likely to demand a large wage increase. This is because they would enjoy a $10,000 CPP surplus payment, a reduced CPP contribution amount and a reduced private pension plan contribution amount.  

• COVID increased our mounting federal debt by 50%. Tax increases will soon be necessary to offset this debt. A $170 billion surplus distribution would result in a $50 billion deficit reduction. And a substantial deficit reduction could be ongoing annually. This means tax increases will not be as necessary with a $170 billion CPP surplus distribution.

In conclusion, revised CPP legislation could likely lead to an estimated 20% increase in profit in year one. Moreover, because CPP Investments will likely add roughly $40 billion to the mushrooming surplus every year, CPP reform could easily result in an estimated 5% increase in profits for most Canadian businesses every year.

Why is Canada not doing this?

Probably, three powerful industries are spearheading this cover-up. They have both the motivation and the resources to succeed. The evidence below, buttressed by links to reliable sources, explains how and why.

The actuarial industry

Ten top actuaries who I have contacted have all denied the irrefutable $257 billion CPP surplus with vacuous arguments. Only one top actuary, with a conscience, told the truth. He stated that our Chief Actuary

“has done what pension actuaries frequently do - invent measures that are easily manipulated so that actuaries can control the narrative, and hide things at will…I must remain anonymous because I am not allowed to criticize my fellow actuaries”.

My six years of research confirm this disgraceful assessment of our Chief Actuary. We Canadians pay him handsomely to be the watchdog of 10% of most Canadians’ lifetime earnings. He has clearly abandoned us.

Why would top actuaries agree to deny the CPP’s surplus? With CPP Investments’ likely ongoing investment success, actuaries know that 25-year-olds could have a $100,000 CPP pension, in 2022 dollars. What business would need an expensive company pension plan, and an accompanying expensive actuary, if the CPP alone could provide such a large pension?

Actuaries oversee a closed, complex science that forces others to trust their advice without question. Only the financial aspect of the CPP fund deserves scrutiny. All other actuarial aspects of our CPP fund are trivial and accurately analyzed by our Chief Actuary. However, he has admitted to 500% in errors in predicting investment return.

We members of the CPP are further disadvantaged. Even though the CPP holds 10% of most Canadians’ gross earnings, it has no Board of Governors. Our Chief Actuary has full control and cannot be challenged on his suspect reporting. Yet pension experts claim a Board of Governors, mostly contributors and pensioners like you and me, is mandatory for pension fund success. Such a CPP Board of Governors would have declared a multibillion-dollar surplus distribution years ago.

For example, like the CPP, the respected Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan (HOOPP) has had investment success resulting in a large surplus. In 2018, their Board of Governors declared a pension increase of $4,900 per year per pensioner. For comparison, the CPP increases pensions by roughly $250 per year.

Not even Canada’s Auditor General has jurisdiction over the CPP. Absolutely no one is checking our Chief Actuary’s analysis.

Imagine you are in a hockey game where the other team has handsomely bribed the referee. He constantly disallows almost every goal your team scores and unjustifiably puts your players in the penalty box. As he denies an irrefutable $257 billion CPP surplus, how is our Chief Actuary any different from this referee?

Politicians, busy with other issues, conveniently claim they must trust our Chief Actuary regarding the complexities of actuarial science.

The financial industry

Statistics Canada reports the financial industry earned 47% of all Canadian corporate business profits in 2020 but only contributed 7.5% to Canada’s GDP. The industry oversees $10 trillion in assets. Canada’s five big banks oversee 70% of those assets. The industry’s website, TFI.ca, alludes to a suspicious “partnership” with all levels of government.

A considerable source of profit for the financial industry is investment fees. If, as Finance Minister Flaherty investigated in 2011, the CPP allowed voluntary contributions, the financial industry knows that billions of Canadians’ investment dollars would be transferred from the investment industry to CPP Investments.

Investors would earn much more profit with CPP Investments. For example, a typical $10,000 investment, using a reasonable 5% return on a 60/40 portfolio, would earn $63,000 in profit in ten years. Using CPP Investments’ likely return of 11%, the investor would earn a profit of $184,000 in ten years, almost three times as much. In 40 years, with CPP Investments, the profit from a $10,000 investment would be more than $700,000, over ten times the profit that the investment industry would likely give him.

CPP Investments has several advantages over any other investor. They have over 2,000 employees worldwide who have found several profitable investments like 407-ETR. An ongoing 11% return is very likely.

The financial industry is concerned. That is why, in 2016, when conflicted Finance Minister Morneau legislated lacklustre changes to the CPP, the financial industry’s representative, Janet Ecker, stated

“The worry was the CPP would undermine a lot of successful, legitimate retirement savings products in the investment industry”.

Who should be undermined - the financial industry, with 47% of all Canadian corporate business profits, or one million challenged businesses and millions of struggling Canadians?

There is a compromise solution that would appease the financial industry. Almost all working Canadians will earn the $20,000 in income needed to contribute $1,000 per year, matched by their employer, to the CPP. If this first $2,000 of every CPP contributors’ contribution were invested directly with CPP Investments, it would be a win/win/win/win/win.

• Almost all 25-year-olds would likely have $1.5 million more in their personal CPP fund at age 65. This means they would have, at least, a CPP pension of $75,000 per year, in 2022 dollars.  For a Canadian earning $20,000 per year, this is over 17 times their currently promised CPP pension.

• Half of young Canadians, unable to afford a home, are deeply concerned about retirement. With a likely $75,000 CPP pension, this anxiety would substantially disappear. Income inequality, poverty anxiety and mounting mental health problems would decline.

• No longer would Canada have the problem of one third of its seniors existing near the poverty line in their final years.

• Skyrocketing social assistance costs for seniors could be considerably reduced.

• Meanwhile, not one penny of investment dollars would be transferred from the investment industry to CPP Investments.

The financial industry needs to advocate for this reasonable compromise now, before politicians face unbearable pressure to legislate voluntary contributions to CPP Investments, which could cost the financial industry billions of dollars.    

The Canadian media  

What articles would be more read and sell more newspapers than

The CPP could increase business profits by 20% this year and 5% ongoing.

The CPP should pay 17 million Canadians $10,000 each, on average. Here is why.

How almost all 25-year-olds could be $1.5 million richer by age 65...without spending a nickel.

Such stories would be read voraciously. And they would load considerable pressure on politicians to act.

A Google search will find no articles alluding to the CPP’s surplus in the entire Canadian media. Only a respected international publication, The Economist, has ever published anything on the CPP’s “gigantic” fund. In January 2019, The Economist stated

“Canada’s vast pension fund is gaining even more financial clout. The fund’s portfolio size has more than tripled over the past decade and is going to become only more gigantic.”

Since this article was published, the fund has increased by another $192 billion to $550 billion.

Most Canadians, like your author six years ago, naturally presume the media publishes everything that is newsworthy because it will lead to more readership and hence more profit. In Canada, this is not the case. The following quotes from respected media authorities explain why.

Chrystia Freeland, at one time a world-class journalist, regarding the media, thinks,

“The super-rich have bankrolled a network of conservative think tanks, elite journals and mass media outlets to dominate the debate over economic policy.”

John Millar, award-winning Chairperson of the Ryerson School of Journalism and ex-Managing Editor of The Star, stated

“In order to make a profit, the whole public service aspect of journalism has sort of taken a back seat…the overall quality of journalism has been lost.”

Marc Edge, Canadian journalist, academic and author, stated

“Newspapers have saved their Biggest Lie, however, to line their own pockets. Yet they claim to be a trusted medium. Not only is the government playing along with the lies, it’s doubling down on them. This is crony capitalism at its worst.”

A Globe and Mail reporter, who must remain anonymous or possibly lose his job, stated

“It is challenging working within the confines of mainstream media, and I tried to push as hard as I could to cover stories that are important to 99% of Canadians (and not the wealthy 1%) but parochial, short-term thinking and market-driven journalism often thwarted my attempts.”

Is it possible that the unprofitable Canadian media, owned by a wealthy few, have secretly made a pact to never cover the CPP’s $257 billion surplus? Is it possible they received money from the financial industry to collectively remain silent? The evidence suggests so.

For perspective, using the traditional ten to one ratio, a $257 billion CPP surplus in Canada is like a $2.57 trillion surplus in the US. There were thousands of stories in the US regarding the pros and cons of Mr. Biden’s infrastructure $1.5 trillion expenditure. Moreover, in the US, for example, right-wing FOX News and left-wing CNN, who dislike each other intensely, would never agree to veto coverage on certain topics so they both could make more money. In Canada, it appears such a pervasive veto agreement on CPP surplus coverage is in place.

Consider the alleged WE charity scandal. Mr. Trudeau’s family received benefits from the charity totaling much less then $500,000 for justifiable speaking engagements that experts claim increased donations by much more than $500,000. The book, WHAT WE LOST, on page one, states there were 125,000 references to this alleged scandal in the Canadian media. Conversely, there have been zero stories on the CPP’s, as The Economist calls it, “gigantic” surplus and potential to solve many of Canada’s problems. The CPP’s irrefutable $257 billion surplus is 514,000 times the size of the WE scandal’s $500,000. 

The Canadian media predominantly gives us depressing, distressing information – COVID, Ukraine, residential schools, WE campaign, Hockey Canada, Ottawa truckers, mass shootings, mental health, and much more. What could be more positive and uplifting for struggling Canadians and Canada than a story that could lead to a 20% increase in almost all business profits and a $10,000 payment to each of 17 million Canadians?

As a taxpayer, this policy of, as Ms. Freeland states, “dominating the debate over economic policy”, and only cherry-picking those stories that will lead to more profit is infuriating. We taxpayers naively fund the “unprofitable” media with hundreds of millions of dollars per year so that Canadians will receive a “true” picture of the news.

Consider the impact of this CPP surplus coverage failure. In addition to depriving all businesses of a 20% profit increase, this lack of coverage is responsible for directly depriving 17 million Canadians of a deserved $10,000 each, arguably resulting in a $170 billion scandal. The most expensive Canadian scandal to date in Canada relates to the Charbonneau Commission, which revealed a $15 billion cover-up. This CPP cover-up is over ten times that amount.

In Canada, we do not have freedom of press. Several journalists have submitted this story to their mainstream media owners for publication. All have been rejected. Our Canadian media often trumpets “No fake news here.” A much more accurate trumpet would be “We selectively only publish news that will net us more profit, largely funded by dark money.”

Fortunately, Canada does have freedom of speech. If I were in China or Russia, I would spend my last years in jail for writing and distributing this. Our freedom of speech, coupled with the media’s failure, explains why I have emailed these details to every Chamber of Commerce chapter in Canada. The entire Canadian media won’t cover the CPP’s surplus, but businesses deserve to know. Hopefully, each chamber chapter will forward this email to the businesses that they represent.

For more evidence of a cover-up, please visit www.fixthecpp.ca/the-bare-facts.

Authorities agree - our system is rigged to favour the super-rich at the expense of the poor

There is further comprehensive evidence that a cover-up is likely. Several prominent Canadians believe our capitalist system is rigged to favour the super-rich.

Chrystia Freeland, Minister of Finance, states in her book, PLUTOCRATS

“In an age of super-wealth, we need to be constantly alert to efforts by the elite to get rich by using their political muscle to increase their share of the pre-existing pie, rather than by adding value to the economy and thus increasing the size of the pie overall.”

Mark Carney, ex-Governor of the Bank of Canada, in his book VALUE(S), alludes to

“twisted economics, an accompanying amoral culture, and degraded institutions whose lack of accountability and integrity accelerate the system’s dysfunction”. 

Even though our Chief Actuary oversees 10% of most Canadians’ lifetime earnings, he enjoys virtually zero accountability.

Bob Rae, in his book, What’s Happened to POLITICS? states

“If the political process, and the media fog that surrounds it, are not able to generate the decisions that are now needed more than ever, it will fall to an active citizenry, colleges and universities, nongovernmental organizations, and others to frame the debate and make change happen.”

David Meslin, Canada’s authority on democracy, states in his book, TEARDOWN, on page 124,

“To put it more bluntly, our political system has evolved into a sophisticated enabler of mass institutionalized bribery.”

Democracywatch.ca, our watchdog on Canadian democracy states

“…so why do we allow wealthy private interests to buy politicians off with huge donations, including secret donations, and why do we allow interest groups to spend secret, unlimited amounts of money before and during many election campaigns...Canada’s biggest corporations spend $25 billion annually on their lobbying and promotion efforts”.

When I presented these CPP details to my principled MP, Jane Philpott, her final words to me were “Disgraceful lobbyists.”

Canadians probably wonder what these authorities are alluding to. Any products or services we buy have the price somewhat controlled by consumers and the law of supply and demand. We understand, for example, that Walmart might buy a product for $7 and resell it to us for $10, with $2 for expenses and $1 for profit.

Then there is the financial industry that earns 47% of all profits earned by Canadian corporate business but only contributes 7.5% to our GDP. By a process of elimination, it is probable that these authorities are alluding to the lucrative financial industry, overseeing $10 trillion in assets. They must have huge, hidden profit margins. The entire industry, led by the big banks, needs much more scrutiny.

The financial industry is mainly composed of banks and insurance companies. Unlike most businesses, they both enjoy virtually guaranteed profits. If bank profits are down, banks agree to raise mortgage rates. The insurance industry is similar. If insurance claims increase, they simply raise premiums. Almost all other Canadian businesses have no such built-in profit stabilizer.

Pierre Poilievre – Canada’s saviour?

Pierre Poilievre, Conservative Party leader, has also alluded to a rigged economic system. He recently stated,

“we have a Canada in which a privileged elite — ‘the media, special interest groups, corporate giants, government authorities’ — fiddle with the economy to profit themselves.”

After being presented with the above details, Mr. Poilievre responded as follows:

Mr. Poilievre is known for outlandish policies, some of which he has been forced to abandon. For example, encouraging Bitcoin, supporting truckers in Ottawa, and firing the head of the Bank of Canada are all suspect policies he has somewhat discarded or will likely discard.

However, his policy to “fire the gatekeepers” is meritorious. Our deceptive Chief Actuary, who oversees the CPP, is the “gatekeeper” of 10% of most Canadians’ lifetime earnings. He deserves to be fired because has stated “The CPP is not in surplus.” when it holds $257 billion more than he specified is needed to fund all pensions for the next 75 years. He is a “gatekeeper” who has deserted 17 million Canadians and almost all businesses, probably to protect his at-risk actuarial industry.

The president of the CBC is another “gatekeeper” who deserves to be fired. With private sector media refusing to cover the CPP’s surplus and potential, “our” CBC, funded $1 billion per year by taxpayers, has also refused to publish anything on the CPP’s $257 billion surplus.

Is it possible that Mr. Poilievre’s newest policies will include:

• Ignoring any bribes put forth by the financial industry;

• Firing our Chief Actuary;

• Establishing a CPP Board of Governors, primarily comprised of contributors and pensioners like you and me;

• Legislating a $170 billion CPP surplus distribution, thereby bringing the massive benefits to Canadians and Canada as described above; 

• Defunding/cancelling the CBC unless they fill Canada’s media void created by private sector media.

Choosing these policies will substantially upgrade Mr. Poilievre’s image from Canada’s version of Donald Trump to a reasonable politician who can do much more for Canadians and Canada than the Liberals. By promising to legislate these logical policies, he could easily become our next Prime Minister.

Mr. Poilievre is likely aware of the CPP’s surplus. On his first day in office, he pushed for no increase in CPP contribution amounts, which would save contributors roughly 5%, as much as $600 each. More proposals based on the CPP’s gigantic surplus on behalf of Canadians may be forthcoming, especially if there is encouragement from Canadian voters.

(It should be noted that Mr. Poilievre recently was in the media complaining about a marginal effective tax rate (METR) of 80% for single mothers who work. If, for example, they work for a $15 minimum wage, they will only increase their bank balance by $3 for each hour they work. Unlike most Conservatives, it appears he wants to see low-income Canadians receive financial justice.

In 2019, I harassed CARP to advocate regarding a clawback rate as high as 76% for low-income working seniors. CARP appealed to Mr. Morneau who, in his 2019 budget, reduced the clawback rate, thereby giving low-income seniors $440 million more per year. It appears Mr. Poilievre intends to also rectify clawback injustice, this time with respect to working Canadians under 65 years of age. Is CPP justice next on his agenda?) 

How could the financial, actuarial, and media industries collude so successfully?

How could three industries possibly agree, without documentation, to collude in this CPP cover-up? The C.D. Howe Institute is a think tank that will not reveal who funds them. They recently published a disgraceful paper that falsely claims our CPP pensions may be in jeopardy. Their associate, top pension expert Malcolm Hamilton, spent 40 hours trying to suppress my efforts by convincing me there is no CPP surplus, using vacuous arguments. He failed miserably.

The C.D. Howe Institute website boasts 90 meetings a year that are “off-the-record”, probably resulting in underhanded, handshake agreements with no documentation. Did representatives from the actuarial industry, the finance industry and the media industry meet at the C.D. Howe Institute, “off-the-record”, to agree on an unwritten strategy that keeps the news of the CPP’s surplus suppressed?

The business case for bribery

In the 1960’s, the top tax rate was over 90% in both Canada and the US. Then the super-rich were persuasive enough to get it reduced it to roughly 53% in Canada and 37% in the US today. Probably the wealthy spent a small fraction of their wealth to bribe politicians to reduce the tax rate.

With one expert on democracy claiming our political system has “evolved into a sophisticated enabler of mass institutionalized bribery”, who is doing the bribing and why?

In 2020, for example, the total legal fundraising by the three mainstream political parties was $42 million. Conversely, for the financial industry, $100 million is a mere 0.08% of their annual profits. (Recall democracywatch.ca states “Canada’s biggest corporations spend $25 billion annually on their lobbying and promotion efforts”.) What industry would not spend 0.08% of their profits to preserve a lucrative profit stream, if their actions could not be traced?

Political parties need financial help. This is because, in 2015, the pay-per-vote subsidy was eliminated. It gave the three mainstream federal parties $266 million between 2004 and 2015.

Campaigning for an election is expensive. All roughly 1,000 candidates in 338 ridings have local expenses. And each party leader and his entourage needs to expensively travel across the country. And the cost for all three parties to bombard millions of Canadian voters with hundreds of expensive advertisements must be substantial. Finally, social media is a recent necessary and additional election expense. With two elections in the last three years, and no pay-per-vote subsidy, political parties need financial help. Has the financial industry provided that help, with the condition that the CPP’s surplus can never be mentioned?

In the US, it is no secret that individual politicians increase their net worth by much more than their salary. Is this possibly also happening in Canada?

Words of encouragement from Canada’s best mayor

Naheed Nenshi was Calgary’s award-winning mayor from 2010 to 2021. In a resignation article in the Globe and Mail, he stated:

“Most of all, we need all of us – everyday people, with our everyday hands and our everyday voices – to lead. We are at a pivotal time. Certainly, we need politicians – municipal, provincial and federal – to step up. But we as citizens need to also meet the moment. We must. The future demands it of us.

Mr. Nenshi knows that leaving politicians and administrators like our Chief Actuary alone to safeguard Canadians’ wellbeing is dangerous. Chrystia Freeland, Mark Carney, Bob Rae and other respected politicians have similarly pleaded for more citizen participation in politics.

Hopefully, the CPP is an area where you and I can contribute to the wellbeing of Canadian businesses, Canadians and Canada.

What actions can you take?

Individuals like me can accomplish little in combating this “Goliath” cover-up. “Goliath” will never admit to it and it is probably impossible to uncover details or proof. However, Canadian businesses, with a combined, concerted effort, do have the ability to force CPP reform. Combating this sophisticated cover-up needs to be bold, not timid, with considerable consequences if you are ignored.

Following are some suggestions that will help bring pension justice to Canada. There is no risk. These are reasonable questions addressed to people and organizations who you pay, directly or indirectly, to serve you.

Your paid advocate – The Canadian Chamber of Commerce (the Chamber)

Your president, Perrin Beatty’s response to these details was surprising. Instead of stating to me,

“I will investigate further and then act on behalf of my members.”,

he responded,

“CPP reform is not a topic about which we hear frequently from our members”.

If a professor of Finance needs six years to uncover these details, how can he expect an individual company, struggling to make a profit, to uncover them?

You have a right to expect the Chamber to advocate on behalf of your business, especially if such advocacy might lead to a 20% profit increase. The Chamber website admirably states:

“As the unified voice of Canadian business, we represent our members’ interests on policies, regulations and decisions that are critical to creating a favourable environment for business success and the future of Canada.”

What is more “critical” than a 20% increase in profit and the other benefits to Canadians and Canada as described above?

Mr. Beatty is in a challenging conflict of interest situation. All the big banks are members of the Chamber and probably pay much higher fees than any other business. He probably needs a substantial complaint from hundreds of his non-financial members before he will step up and combat the financial industry on your behalf.

If Mr. Beatty’s advocacy efforts are only driven by comments from his members, I urge members and individual businesses to forward this email to him at pbeatty@chamber.ca, prefacing it with words like:

“Below is convincing evidence that my company is being deprived of a possible 20% profit increase by three powerful industries. Please investigate and explain why you are not advocating strongly for CPP reform. If you cannot explain, I may terminate my membership.”

Your elected representative

Is it possible Canada is less democratic than the partisan US? It appears all three parties, including the left-wing NDP, may have been bribed to remain silent on the CPP. (Is it possible the recent Liberal/NDP coalition that will give us Pharmacare and Dental Care was bartered only if the NDP remained silent regarding the CPP’s $257 billion surplus?)

I have emailed all 330 MPs and 100 Senators with these details and presented them in person to my three MPs. There has been no response. I am but one vote and can be easily ignored. However, if many businesses and individual Canadians act, the pressure for CPP reform will be impossible to ignore.

If enough politicians are bombarded with complaints about this CPP policy that is depriving Canada of such huge benefits, the pressure on Ottawa and big banks may force them to change course. I encourage you to forward this email to your MP, prefaced with,

“The evidence below is convincing that my business is being deprived of a 20% increase in profit. Please explain why your party is not proposing a CPP surplus distribution. If you cannot, I will vote for anyone but you, the incumbent, in the next election. And I will consider cancelling all donations to your party. Finally, I may encourage my employees to vote similarly because they are being deprived of a deserved $10,000 each and much more.”

Individual MPs have little say in government policy, but they can pressure their leader to make changes, or he will lose precious seats in the House of Commons. This possible loss of a seat in the House of Commons may get the attention of your MP’s party leader.

Even the small business lobby can be very effective. Economics Professor Miles Corak feels that, related to raising funds to combat COVID,

“the small-business lobby was very effective in informing individual MPs and putting pressure on cabinet and government to respond.”

You can find your MP’s email address at www.ourcommons.ca/Members/.

The big banks – by a process of elimination, driving the bus

Other than the financial industry, there is no other industry or organization in Canada that has 10% of the resources and the motivation to accomplish such an all-encompassing cover-up. Because the big banks oversee $7 trillion of the financial industry’s $10 trillion in assets and they boast a “partnership” with all levels of government, they probably control the narrative. This means they also have the power and influence to end this cover-up.

The optics do not look good for the banks. Even if they are innocent of this $257 billion cover-up, the evidence is strong that they have abandoned their millions of customers. In 2016, following lacklustre changes to the CPP, the banks’ representative, Janet Ecker,

“called for a ‘more targeted approach’ to an expanded CPP, aimed at groups living below the poverty level and modest-income Canadians”.

If Ms. Ecker and the banks truly want a “more targeted approach”, there is one that would be a win/win for banks and all working Canadians.  By Investing every Canadian’s first $2,000 in CPP contributions directly with CPP Investments, the numbers show that almost every Canadian 25-year-old, for example, would be $1.5 million richer by age 65. And 45-year-olds would be $100,000 richer by age 65. The banks are hypocrites if they don’t endorse such a policy.

All five big banks now enjoy a high image among Canadians. Bank branches and bank advertisements exude courtesy, friendliness, concern, savings, and trustworthiness. When struggling Canadians learn banks may be depriving them and our country of the benefits described above, they risk tarnishing their pristine image. It may plummet from a benevolent, compassionate, charitable, corporate citizen to a sleazy, bribing, self-interested bully that has probably deprived Canada of huge benefits so they can selfishly increase their profits and reward bank presidents with $15 million incomes. Credit unions and smaller banks are eagerly waiting in the wings, ready to exploit any suggestion that the big banks are untrustworthy.

Will banks’ share prices decline? With ESG concepts emerging as important, this message could soon be going to would-be investors in banks:

“If you are a Socially responsible investor, don’t invest in banks. The evidence is strong that they may have engineered a cover-up that is depriving millions of citizens, one million businesses and our Canadian economy of hundreds of billions of deserved dollars. And they hypocritically refuse to rectify it. Convincing evidence is at www.fixthecpp.ca.”

Ironically, CPP reform would likely lead to more profits for banks. Firstly, much of a $170 billion surplus distribution would need considerable banking services.

Secondly, by endorsing the concept of investing every Canadian’s first $2,000 in CPP contributions directly with CPP Investments, the threat of voluntary contributions would disappear. Billions of dollars of lucrative investment fees would remain with the banks.

I encourage you to forward this email to each of the big five banks, prefaced with the following:

“After reading below, please forward this email to your bank’s corporate strategy department because it has billion-dollar implications regarding your bank’s profit.

The evidence below is convincing that Canadian big banks are depriving my business of a 20% increase in profit. Please explain why you are not endorsing CPP changes. If you cannot explain, I will consider switching to a smaller bank or credit union.”

Here are some email addresses of appropriate contacts at the big banks and other relevant organizations.

Bank of Montreal (BMO) complaint.appeal@bmo.com

Bank of Nova Scotia ccao@scotiabank.com,

mail.president@scotiabank.com

CIBC sustainability@cibc.com

National Bank www.nbc.ca/forms/contact/contact-us.html

and refer them to

www.fixthecpp.ca/business-losing-big-profits

Royal Bank (RBC) excoqu@rbc.com

Toronto Dominion Bank (TD) customer.care@td.com

Ombudsman for Banking (OBSI) ombudsman@obsi.ca

Canadian Bankers’ Association inform@cba.ca

You will not be alone. This email has been distributed to every local Chamber of Commerce and Board of Trade in Canada. Hopefully, each local Chamber has forwarded it to its members as they each deserve to know about how they can enjoy a deserved 20% increase in profit. Then they can decide how to proceed.

Should your employees also be informed?

Business executives may want to share these details with their employees. They also have much to gain from CPP reform, including a $10,000 surplus payment, a reduction in CPP contributions and a much more profitable company to work for.

Power in numbers

Changes will only happen if many thousands of Canadians notify these groups that they are very aware of being duped and, without answers, will punish the probable perpetrators. With The Chamber in danger of losing members, with MPs in danger of losing votes, with big banks in danger of losing customers, the authors of this cover-up may soon feel too much pressure and abandon ship.

You may have other ideas on how to combat this huge cover-up. I encourage you to exercise them. If you think other businesses could use your ideas, please send them to Mr. Beatty. Hopefully, he will distribute them to other chapters.

Class action lawsuit

Section 7 of our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states:

“Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.”

Based on standard pension protocol, pension funds distribute a surplus when it is 25% above the fund’s target value. The CPP surplus is as much as 450% above target. “Fundamental justice” and our “right to security” thus demands a surplus distribution. It would be difficult for any judge to disagree?

A class action lawyer, interested in notoriety and a substantial payment, could take our government to court on our behalf. If you know of any lawyers who might be interested, please forward this email to them.

Final remarks

Please recall that the CPP gave us no choice. They forced us to contribute as much as 10% of our lifetime earnings. Then they used our money to create a $257 billion surplus. And now they refuse to follow standard pension protocol and distribute it.

Buttressed by my generous professor’s pension, half funded by taxpayers, I feel an obligation to Canadians to aggressively reveal this disgraceful CPP cover-up. Now, at age 74, it is time to truly retire. Over to you. Best wishes and good luck.

Sincerely,

Ross Macnaughton

rossmacnaughton48@gmail.com

Professor emeritus

Ryerson University, aka Toronto Metropolitan University 

P.S. If you have any comments, questions, or suggestions, I welcome them.