Prepared for the Canada Revenue Agency
Contract Award Date: 2017-11-10
Delivery Date: 2018-06-21
Contract Number: 46575-188941/001/CY
POR Number: POR 043-17
Produced by: Leger
Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français.
For more information on this report, please email media.relations@cra-arc.gc.ca
Political Neutrality Statement
I hereby certify as Senior Officer of Leger that the deliverables fully comply with the Government of Canada’s political neutrality requirements outlined in the Policy on Communications and Federal Identity and the Directive on the Management of Communications - Appendix C (Appendix C: Mandatory Procedures for Public Opinion Research).
Specifically, the deliverables do not include information on electoral voting intentions, political party preferences, standings with the electorate, or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leaders.
Signed:
Christian Bourque
Executive Vice-President and Associate
Leger
507 Place d’Armes, bureau 700
Montréal, Québec H2Y 2W8
cbourque@leger360.com
Table of contents
Leger is pleased to present this report on findings from a series of focus groups and on methodological details from quantitative surveys and a series of focus groups to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). The CRA mandated Leger to conduct its 2017 Annual Corporate Research (ACR). This annual research assesses several important indicators, such as overall performance and trust in and satisfaction with the CRA, among Canada’s general public, small and medium-sized enterprises, and tax intermediaries.
This report was prepared by Leger who was contracted by Public Services and Procurement Canada (contract number 46575-188941/001/CY, awarded November 10, 2017).
In 2005, the CRA launched an annual survey focusing on corporate-wide issues. Since then, the research has evolved and the survey has been conducted over many years (but not every year). Among the changes made to the research approach over time, a qualitative phase was added in 2011. Moreover, each year, modules can be added or removed from the survey, depending on the research objectives. For the first time, the 2017 edition includes a compliance module with questions on the underground Economy and offshore tax havens.
The ACR is of great value to the CRA for contextualizing other studies, the management of engagement and reputation, developing communication strategies, and identifying target audiences for communication tactics, etc.
This year’s research explored the following elements:
The results obtained through this research will provide the CRA with background and contextual information regarding perceptions of the public and businesses. With this information, the CRA may gauge factors, such as trust in and satisfaction with the CRA, contextualize other research information, and also provide information for reporting on engagement and reputation management. Understanding public perceptions and attitudes enables the CRA to identify target groups for specific action and communication. Findings from the 2017 ACR is intended to be used in the CRA’s strategic planning exercises and internal analysis of trends in public opinion. Findings may also be used in other corporate reporting and tracking initiatives including the Public Perception Index for the Department Reporting Framework, and the Commissioner’s Annual Reports to the Governments of the Provinces and Territories, etc.
The ACR comprises two main research components: 1) a qualitative phase consisting of focus groups and 2) a quantitative phase consisting of surveys. The target population for this entire research project comprised three main groups: 1) the general adult population of Canada, 2) small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) decision-makers, and 3) tax intermediaries (that is to say, people who work with small business clients on tax-related matters).
Leger conducted 16 focus groups in six different locations across Canada: Toronto, Brampton, Calgary, Halifax, Montréal, and Sherbrooke. All focus groups were carried out between January 22, 2018, and February 5, 2018. All groups were held in English except for the French groups held in the province of Quebec (Montréal and Sherbrooke).
In each of the four provinces selected for the research, two sessions were conducted with the general population, one session was conducted with SME decision-makers, and another was conducted with tax intermediaries.
The following table details the 16 focus groups that took place during the 2017 ACR:
Table 1: Details of the Focus Group Sessions
| City | Participants | Target | Time | Language | Date |
| Toronto, ON | 8 | SME decision-makers($225) | 5:30 p.m. | EN | January 22, 2018 |
| Toronto, ON | 10 | Tax intermediaries($250) | 7:30 p.m. | EN | January 22, 2018 |
| Brampton, ON | 8 | Low/Middle income($100) | 5:30 p.m. | EN | January 23, 2018 |
| Brampton, ON | 10 | High income($100) | 7:30 p.m. | EN | January 23, 2018 |
| Montréal, QC | 10 | SME decision-makers($225) | 5:30 p.m. | FR | January 24, 2018 |
| Montréal, QC | 9 | Tax intermediaries($250) | 7:30 p.m. | FR | January 24, 2018 |
| Halifax, NS | 10 | Low/Middle income($100) | 5:30 p.m. | EN | January 29, 2018 |
| Halifax, NS | 6 | High income($100) | 7:30 p.m. | EN | January 29, 2018 |
| Halifax, NS | 9 | SME decision-makers($225) | 5:30 p.m. | EN | January 30, 2018 |
| Halifax, NS | 7 | Tax intermediaries($250) | 7:30 p.m. | EN | January 30, 2018 |
| Calgary, AB | 8 | Low/Middle income($100) | 5:30 p.m. | EN | January 31, 2018 |
| Calgary, AB | 10 | High income($100) | 7:30 p.m. | EN | January 31, 2018 |
| Calgary, AB | 9 | SME decision-makers($225) | 5:30 p.m. | EN | February 1, 2018 |
| Calgary, AB | 10 | Tax intermediaries($250) | 7:30 p.m. | EN | February 1, 2018 |
| Sherbrooke, QC | 8 | Low/Middle income($100) | 5:30 p.m. | FR | February 5, 2018 |
| Sherbrooke, QC | 9 | High income($100) | 7:30 p.m. | FR | February 5, 2018 |
| Total | 141 |
The groups lasted approximately 120 minutes and were made up of 7 to 10 participants (out of 10 people recruited for each group). A total of 141 people participated in the focus group sessions.
Participants were recruited using a hybrid method consisting of random digit dialling (RDD) and an online panel of Canadians who agreed to be contacted for market research purposes. All Market Research and Intelligence Association (MRIA) and Government of Canada standards have been respected.
Participants from the general population received an honorarium of $100, while SME decision-makers received $225, and professional tax intermediaries received $250.
Statement of Limitation
Findings from this qualitative research (i.e. focus groups) should be considered directional only, and results should not be projected as representative of the entire Canadian population. Qualitative research is intended to provide deeper insight into the underlying reasons for opinions or lack thereof.
Survey of General Population of Canada
Leger conducted a telephone survey with 1,647 adult Canadians between January 16 and February 21, 2018. Telephone numbers serving as the base sample were generated, and a random sample was drawn using a regional stratified approach in order to reach minimum sample sizes in each region of Canada. A random telephone sample of this size yields a margin of error of ±2.4% with a confidence interval of 95% (19 times out of 20).
The regional distribution was as follows:
Table 2: Regional Quotas| Region | Quotas | Effective Sample |
| Atlantic Region (NB, NS, PEI, NFL) | 175 | 175 |
| Quebec | 375 | 375 |
| Ontario/Nunavut | 525 | 525 |
| Prairies (including AB)/NWT | 325 | 372 |
| BC/Yukon | 200 | 200 |
| Total | 1,600 | 1,647 |
The questionnaire used for surveying the general public had an average length of 18 minutes.
Survey of Corporate Respondents
In addition to the survey of the general population, Leger conducted an online survey of decision-makers in small and medium-sized enterprises and of tax intermediaries. The sample for this portion of the study was purchased by Leger. Data collection took place between January 17 and February 1, 2018. A total of 605 respondents took part in the survey: 302 SME decision-makers and 303 tax intermediaries.
More specifically, surveyed SME decision-makers included respondents with the following profile:
Tax intermediaries included respondents with the following profile:
The executive summary of this report outlines key findings of the ACR’s qualitative phase. The executive summary is followed by a detailed analysis of focus group findings. Additional details on the ACR methodology (qualitative and quantitative) are presented in Section 3 of this report. Recruitment questionnaires, the moderator’s guides, and survey questionnaires are included in the appendix. Data tables for the quantitative surveys are reported under separate cover.
People are mostly unfamiliar with the tax system and the Canada Revenue Agency.
In general, although the CRA is well known, focus group participants are not very familiar with the agency’s mission and role. Its role is often confused with the role of other federal departments. Respondents were not very familiar with Canada’s tax system. Some would like to see this topic in the compulsory school curriculum.
In general, people deal with the CRA once a year during the tax season, and for some, there is no contact at all. Generally, participants from the general public prefer to have a specialist prepare their yearly income tax return. This process is considered too complex and time consuming. Handing this task over to a specialist is a way to avoid mistakes and ensure that you get back as much as possible on your tax return. Only a few participants still prefer to produce their own tax return using software.
Many general population participants perceive the system as unfair.
Participants believe that the system does not work in their favour. They believe that the system allows large corporations and rich people to avoid paying their fair share without problems, while ordinary people and small business owners cannot benefit from the same largesse. They clearly see the system as unfair when comparing the big guys to the little guys. Many also feel that the Agency spends more time "bothering" small players rather than trying to catch the big players.
The Agency is mostly perceived negatively (despite perceived improvements) ...
At first glance, participants have a rather negative impression of the Agency. At best, their impression is neutral. While some participants mentioned that the Agency has improved in recent years by facilitating how to produce and submit tax returns and by improving its website, others perceive the Agency as a complex and rigid organization, which can be frustrating and lead to many inconsistencies.
... unlike its employees who are perceived positively.
Focus group participants make a clear distinction between the system, the Agency, and the employees who work there. Several participants said that the problem lies with the system (which is not fair or ethical) and not with the Agency’s employees. In fact, employees are rather positively perceived. The qualities frequently associated with CRA employees are professional and respectful.
Income Tax cheating is perceived as a serious offence.
The majority of general population participants believe that income tax cheating is a serious offence. However, they believe that Canadians are mostly honest and that they play by the rules. In their eyes, only a minority of Canadians engage in tax evasion. Moreover, they would consider it very risky to engage in income tax cheating. They believe that the CRA has many resources to identify fraudsters and to catch them.
Many of them think that if they knew someone who was engaged in tax fraud, they would advise this person to declare everything to the CRA. In fact, they are convinced that the Agency would eventually catch them, so they would strongly encourage anyone to be honest on their tax return. However, it is out of question for participants to turn into informers for the CRA. None of them would report a cheater to the Agency. They consider that it is not their job to do this and they would not want Canadians to develop a culture of denunciation. They do not like the idea of citizens turning against each other.
The underground Economy and tax havens are issues that are difficult to grasp for the general public.
The Underground Economy: How Big Is the Problem?
Participants are not familiar with the concept of the underground Economy. They talk about the black market or working under the table. However, they are not very familiar with the phenomenon. Most of them are not able to easily assess the extent of the problem in Canada. For some, it is widespread, while for others it is a phenomenon that is becoming less significant over time. They have a great deal of difficulty estimating the amounts the government loses yearly due to the underground Economy. Part of the problem is that, in their minds, the underground Economy represents only small amounts of money. They do not understand that small amounts add up over time. They also think that the underground Economy consists of ordinary people trying to "survive," not of rich people or big corporations.
Tax havens
Most focus group participants remembered having recently heard about tax havens in the media. A few mentioned the "Panama Papers" or the "Paradise Papers" during the discussion. However, none of them were able to elaborate on the subject. In fact, most participants knew absolutely nothing about tax havens. Participants are unaware of what the Agency is currently doing to counter this problem. They are not aware of the programs developed or the actions that have been taken against tax evasion using tax havens. For participants, tax havens are used by rich people or large corporations to hide large amounts of money from the CRA. It is not something accessible to the general public. It takes many resources, lawyers, and accountants to gain access to tax havens.
The issue of tax havens is more important than the underground Economy.
Spontaneously, many participants were more inclined to believe that tax havens are a bigger problem for Canada than the underground Economy. They believe the Agency should be spending more resources to recover money from tax havens.
Underground Economy Message Testing
Overall, seven (7) messages were tested in the general population groups. In general, participants tended to prefer messages that were rather positive and rejected those they believed were more accusatory in nature. Furthermore, messages providing advice that goes beyond tax issues were seen as positive (e.g. how a written contract with a contractor protects them in many ways). Participants indicated they would prefer a message with concrete examples that tells them how the money collected through taxes is being used.
Communications from the CRA
Participants of most groups felt that the CRA should inform and communicate to Canadians some general statistics outlining their successes in reducing or tackling the underground Economy and offshore tax haven issues. General statistics should focus on the size of the problem, how many people/companies were caught, what the consequences were, and how much tax money came back to the Government of Canada in the process. Participants felt this would be a positive move since, in their view, a certain level of fear of the CRA would be an effective deterrent to tax cheating.
Decision-makers in small and medium-sized enterprises and tax intermediaries do not seem to have a completely different opinion from general population participants. On the vast majority of topics, opinions expressed were similar, and it was possible to observe the same trends among the two target groups. Even though views were similar, some differences were observed. These main differences are detailed below.
Awareness and familiarity with the CRA is greater among SME decision-makers and tax intermediaries.
These participants have, not surprisingly, more in-depth knowledge of the CRA and have much more settled views about the agency. Unlike the general population, they are much more familiar with the Agency’s mission and role. Indeed, these participants have regular contact with the CRA compared to the rest of the population. Many tax intermediaries even say they have to communicate with the CRA on a daily basis. Their experiences are reflected in their opinion.
There were notable improvements in the CRA’s e-services and website.
The CRA's efforts to improve its e-services and website have been noted by SME decision-makers and tax intermediaries. They say that the CRA has been proactive in this area and seem to be pleased with the changes that have been made.
Interactions with CRA employees are frustrating.
SME decision-makers and tax intermediaries point out that CRA employees are always professional and courteous. Despite these positive aspects, many participants felt that their interactions with CRA agents are not always positive. They feel that they are not always well understood by them. They also criticize the impossibility of speaking with the same person during their various calls, which means they have to re-explain their case/problem every single time. It can be frustrating for them, especially if they get inconsistent advice from one employee to the next. They pointed out that CRA employees seem to lack training and they feel that efficiency varies a great deal from one individual to another.
Procedures and lack of flexibility are an issue.
Many decision-makers and intermediaries say that the Agency lacks flexibility. For them, excessive compliance with procedures and policies is a significant source of dissatisfaction. Beyond being mere bureaucratic annoyances, CRA procedures undermine the agents' effectiveness.
The My Account service has a strong reputation, whereas the Liaison Officer service is not known.
My Account’s reputation is quite strong among decision-makers and tax intermediaries. Although many feel that the registration process is laborious, most who use it are satisfied. On the other hand, the Liaison Officer service is not known. While some participants say they do not like the idea of inviting CRA agents into their business, many decision-makers pointed out their interest in this kind of service. They would have liked the CRA to advertise this service.
Views are similar to those of the general population regarding tax cheating, the underground Economy, and offshore tax havens.
Participants who are SME decision-makers or tax intermediaries do not have completely different views from the general public about tax cheating, the underground Economy, and offshore tax havens. SME decision-makers and tax intermediaries are confident that the CRA is well equipped to find tax cheaters. They would not be willing to denounce a tax cheater suspect. They don't see this as their responsibility. Tax intermediaries are more inclined to offer their help to a possible tax cheater in order to allow this person to save money legally, but they would not help someone cheat.
Regarding the tax haven issue, they had fairly broad knowledge of the subject but no specific information. Similarly to the general population, they were unable to say what the CRA is doing concretely to tackle the problem. They are unaware of the programs implemented by the CRA. However, some pointed out that tax havens are not necessarily illegal and that the CRA does not necessarily have the power to solve the problem. They tend to think that the solution might be political and needs to come from legislation. Tax intermediaries were probably the ones who knew the most about the subject and they doubted that offshore tax havens were as big of a problem as the underground Economy.
Underground Economy Message Testing
Overall six (6) messages were tested in the groups of SMEs and tax intermediaries. As in the general population groups, participants tended to prefer messages that were rather positive and rejected those they believed were more accusatory in nature. However, they would advise the CRA to use a mixed approach to communicate with the public: 1) a positive approach that informs the public about the underground Economy, fraud, and tax evasion, in order to increase general knowledge about these issues, and 2) an approach that would have a deterrent effect by publishing how many tax cheaters were caught, the consequences of tax evasion, and the amount of money recovered by the CRA.
Supplier name: Leger
Contract Number: 46575-188941/001/CY
Contract Award Date: 2017-11-10
The contract amount of this project was $156,578.45 (including HST).
Léger est heureux de présenter à l’Agence du revenu du Canada (Agence) le présent rapport sur les résultats d’une série de groupes de discussion et les détails méthodologiques de sondages quantitatifs et des groupes de discussion. L’Agence a mandaté Léger pour mener sa Recherche d’entreprise annuelle de 2017 (REA). Cette recherche annuelle évalue plusieurs indicateurs importants, comme le rendement global de l’Agence, ainsi que la confiance et la satisfaction globale à son égard, parmi la population générale canadienne, les petites et moyennes entreprises, et les intermédiaires fiscaux.
Le présent rapport a été préparé par Léger, qui a été engagé par Services publics et Approvisionnement Canada (numéro de contrat 46575-188941/001/CY, octroyé le 10 novembre 2017).
En 2005, l’Agence a lancé un sondage annuel mettant l’accent sur les enjeux touchant l’ensemble de l’organisation. Depuis, la recherche a évolué et le sondage a été réalisé pendant plusieurs années (mais pas chaque année). Parmi les changements apportés avec le temps à l’approche adoptée dans le cadre de la recherche, une phase qualitative a été ajoutée en 2011. De plus, chaque année, des modules peuvent être ajoutés ou retirés du sondage, selon les objectifs de la recherche. L’édition de 2017 comprend pour la première fois un module sur l’observation comprenant des questions sur l’économie clandestine et les paradis fiscaux à l’étranger.
La REA est d’une grande valeur pour l’Agence pour la contextualisation d’autres études, la gestion de la mobilisation et de la réputation, l’élaboration de stratégies de communication et la détermination des publics cibles pour les tactiques de communication, etc.
La recherche de cette année a permis d’étudier les éléments suivants :
Les résultats obtenus au moyen de la présente recherche permettront de fournir des renseignements généraux et des renseignements contextuels à l’Agence au sujet des perceptions du public et des entreprises. Avec cette information, l’Agence peut évaluer des facteurs, comme la confiance et la satisfaction à l’égard de l’Agence. Elle peut également contextualiser d’autres renseignements recueillis dans le cadre de la recherche et fournir des renseignements pour décrire les résultats sur la mobilisation et la gestion de la réputation. La compréhension des perceptions et des comportements de la population permet à l’Agence de déterminer des groupes cibles en vue de mesures et de communications précises. Les résultats de la recherche d’entreprise annuelle de 2017 sont destinés à être utilisés dans les exercices de planification stratégique de l’Agence et l’analyse des tendances de l’opinion du public. Les résultats peuvent aussi être utilisés dans le cadre d’autres initiatives d’établissement de rapports et de suivi d’entreprise, y compris l’indice de la perception du public pour le cadre d’établissement de rapports du ministère et les rapports annuels du commissaire aux gouvernements des provinces et des territoires, etc.
La REA comprend deux volets de recherche principaux : 1) une phase qualitative comprenant des groupes de discussion; 2) une phase quantitative comprenant des sondages. La population cible pour la totalité de ce projet de recherche comprenait trois groupes principaux : 1) la population adulte générale du Canada, 2) les décideurs de petites et moyennes entreprises (PME), 3) les intermédiaires fiscaux (en d’autres mots, les gens qui travaillent avec des clients de petites entreprises sur des questions d’ordre fiscal).
Léger a organisé 16 groupes de discussion dans 6 endroits différents dans l’ensemble du Canada : Toronto, Brampton, Calgary, Halifax, Montréal et Sherbrooke. Tous les groupes de discussion ont eu lieu entre le 22 janvier 2018, et le 5 février 2018. Tous les groupes ont été réalisés en anglais, sauf pour les groupes réalisés en français dans la province de Québec (Montréal et Sherbrooke).
Dans chacune des quatre provinces sélectionnées pour la recherche, deux séances ont été réalisées avec la population générale, une avec les décideurs de PME et une autre avec les intermédiaires fiscaux.
Le tableau suivant donne des précisions sur les 16 groupes de discussion qui ont eu lieu au cours de la Recherche d’entreprise annuelle de 2017 :
Tableau 1 : Détails des séances de discussion en groupe
| Ville | Participants | Cible | Heure | Langue | Date |
| Toronto, ON | 8 | Décideurs de PME (225 $) | 17 h 30 | anglais | Le 22 janvier 2018 |
| Toronto, ON | 10 | Intermédiaires fiscaux (250 $) | 19 h 30 | anglais | Le 22 janvier 2018 |
| Brampton, ON | 8 | Revenu faible ou moyen (100 $) | 17 h 30 | anglais | Le 23 janvier 2018 |
| Brampton, ON | 10 | Revenu élevé (100 $) | 19 h 30 | anglais | Le 23 janvier 2018 |
| Montréal QC | 10 | Décideurs de PME (225 $) | 17 h 30 | français | Le 24 janvier 2018 |
| Montréal QC | 9 | Intermédiaires fiscaux (250 $) | 19 h 30 | français | Le 24 janvier 2018 |
| Halifax, NS | 10 | Revenu faible ou moyen (100 $) | 17 h 30 | anglais | Le 29 janvier 2018 |
| Halifax, NS | 6 | Revenu élevé (100 $) | 19 h 30 | anglais | Le 29 janvier 2018 |
| Halifax, NS | 9 | Décideurs de PME(225 $) | 17 h 30 | anglais | Le 30 janvier 2018 |
| Halifax, NS | 7 | Intermédiaires fiscaux(250 $) | 19 h 30 | anglais | Le 30 janvier 2018 |
| Calgary, AB | 8 | Revenu faible ou moyen(100 $) | 17 h 30 | anglais | Le 31 janvier 2018 |
| Calgary, AB | 10 | Revenu élevé (100 $) | 19 h 30 | anglais | Le 31 janvier 2018 |
| Calgary, AB | 9 | Décideurs de PME(225 $) | 17 h 30 | anglais | Le 1er février 2018 |
| Calgary, AB | 10 | Intermédiaires fiscaux(250 $) | 19 h 30 | anglais | Le 1er février 2018 |
| Sherbrooke, QC | 8 | Revenu faible ou moyen(100 $) | 17 h 30 | français | Le 5 février 2018 |
| Sherbrooke, QC | 9 | Revenu élevé (100 $) | 19 h 30 | français | Le 5 février 2018 |
| Total | 141 |
Les séances de discussion duraient environ 120 minutes et comprenaient de 7 à 10 participants (sur 10 personnes recrutées pour chaque groupe). Au total, 141 personnes ont participé à ces séances de discussion en groupe.
Les participants ont été recrutés en utilisant une méthode hybride composée d’une composition téléphonique aléatoire et d’un panel en ligne de Canadiens qui ont accepté d’être contactés aux fins d’études de marché. Toutes les normes de l’Association de la Recherche et de l’Intelligence marketing (ARIM) et du gouvernement du Canada ont été respectées..
Les participants de la population générale ont reçu une compensation de 100 $, tandis que les décideurs de PME ont reçu 225 $ et les intermédiaires professionnels fiscaux ont reçu 250 $.
Énoncé des limites
Les résultats de cette recherche qualitative (c.-à-d. les groupes de discussion) devraient être considérés comme directionnels seulement et ne doivent pas être considérés comme représentatifs de toute la population canadienne et être inférés à son ensemble. Cette recherche qualitative est destinée à donner un aperçu plus précis des raisons sous-jacentes expliquant l’existence d’une opinion donnée ou son absence.
Sondage de la population générale du Canada
Léger a réalisé un sondage téléphonique auprès de 1 647 adultes canadiens entre le 16 janvier et le 21 février 2018. Des numéros de téléphone servant d’échantillon de base ont été générés et un échantillon aléatoire a été tiré à l’aide d’une méthode stratifiée régionale afin d’atteindre les tailles d’échantillon minimales dans chaque région du Canada. Un échantillon téléphonique aléatoire de cette taille donne une marge d’erreur de ± 2,4 % avec un intervalle de confiance de 95 % (19 fois sur 20).
La répartition régionale était comme suit :
Tableau 2 : Quotas régionaux| Région | Quotas | Échantillon effectif |
| Région de l’Atlantique (N.-É., N.-B., I.-P.É., T.N.) | 175 | 175 |
| Québec | 375 | 375 |
| Ontario et Nunavut | 525 | 525 |
| Région des Prairies (y compris Alb.)/T. N.-O. | 325 | 372 |
| C.-B./Yukon | 200 | 200 |
| Total | 1 600 | 1 647 |
Le questionnaire utilisé pour l’enquête menée auprès de la population générale avait une durée moyenne de 18 minutes.
Sondage auprès des répondants d’entreprises
En plus du sondage réalisé auprès de la population générale, Léger a réalisé un sondage en ligne auprès de décideurs de petites et moyennes entreprises et d’intermédiaires fiscaux. L’échantillon pour cette partie de l’étude a été acheté par Léger. La collecte de données a eu lieu entre les 17 janvier et 1er février 2018. Un total de 605 répondants ont pris part au sondage : 302 décideurs de PME et de 303 intermédiaires fiscaux.
Plus précisément, les décideurs de PME interrogés comprenaient des répondants ayant le profil suivant :
Les intermédiaires fiscaux comprenaient des répondants ayant le profil suivant :
Le résumé du présent rapport présente les principales constatations de la phase qualitative de la REA. Le résumé est suivi d’une analyse détaillée des constatations des groupes de discussion. Des détails supplémentaires sur la méthodologie de la REA (qualitatifs et quantitatifs) sont présentés à la section 3 du présent rapport. Les questionnaires de recrutement, les guides du modérateur et les questionnaires du sondage sont inclus dans l’annexe. Les tableaux de données des sondages quantitatifs sont présentés dans un document distinct.
La plupart des gens ne connaissent pas très bien le régime fiscal et l’Agence du revenu du Canada.
En général, même si l’Agence est bien connue, les participants des groupes de discussion ne connaissent pas tellement sa mission et son rôle. Son rôle est souvent confondu avec le rôle d’autres ministères fédéraux. Les répondants ne connaissaient pas tellement le régime fiscal du Canada. Certains participants aimeraient voir ce sujet dans le programme scolaire obligatoire.
En général, les gens font affaire avec l’Agence une fois par année pendant la période de production des déclarations et, pour certains, il n’y a pas de contact du tout. Les participants de la population générale préfèrent habituellement qu’un spécialiste prépare leurs déclarations de revenus annuelles. Ce processus est considéré comme trop long et complexe. Donner cette tâche à un spécialiste est une façon d’éviter les erreurs et de s’assurer d’obtenir le plus gros remboursement d’impôt possible. Seulement quelques participants préfèrent encore produire leur propre déclaration de revenus au moyen de logiciels.
Plusieurs participants de la population générale ont l’impression que le régime est injuste.
Les participants sont d’avis que le régime ne les favorise pas. Ils croient que le régime permet aux grandes sociétés et aux personnes riches d’éviter de payer leur juste part sans problème, alors que les gens ordinaires et les propriétaires de petites entreprises ne peuvent pas bénéficier de la même générosité. Ils considèrent clairement le régime comme injuste lorsqu’ils comparent les grands contribuables aux petits. Bon nombre de participants estiment également que l’Agence passe plus de temps « à déranger » les petits joueurs plutôt qu’à essayer d’attraper les gros joueurs.
L’Agence est généralement perçue de façon négative (malgré les améliorations perçues)...
À première vue, les participants ont une perception plutôt négative de l’Agence. Au mieux, leur impression est neutre. Même si certains participants ont mentionné que l’Agence s’est améliorée au cours des dernières années par la facilitation de la manière de produire et de soumettre les déclarations de revenus et l’amélioration de son site Web, d’autres perçoivent l’Agence comme une organisation complexe et rigide, ce qui peut être frustrant et entraîner bien des incohérences.
... contrairement à ses employés, qui sont perçus de façon positive.
Les participants des groupes de discussion établissent une distinction nette entre le régime, l’Agence et les employés qui y travaillent. Plusieurs participants ont affirmé que le problème découle du régime (lequel n’est pas juste ou éthique) et non des employés de l’Agence. En fait, les employés sont plutôt perçus de façon positive. Les qualités fréquemment associées aux employés de l’Agence sont le professionnalisme et le respect.
La fraude fiscale est perçue comme une infraction grave.
La majorité des participants de la population générale est d’avis que la fraude fiscale est une infraction grave. Toutefois, ils croient que les Canadiens sont principalement honnêtes et qu’ils respectent les règles. À leurs yeux, seule une minorité de Canadiens se livrent à de l’évasion fiscale. De plus, ils jugeraient très risqué de se livrer à la fraude fiscale. Ils croient que l’Agence a de nombreuses ressources pour détecter les fraudeurs et les attraper.
Plusieurs d’entre eux pensent que s’ils connaissaient une personne qui commettait de la fraude fiscale, ils conseilleraient à cette personne de tout déclarer à l’Agence. En fait, ils sont convaincus que l’Agence les attraperait éventuellement; par conséquent, ils encouragent fortement toute personne à être honnête dans sa déclaration de revenus. Cependant, il est hors de question que les participants deviennent des informateurs pour l’Agence. Aucun d’entre eux ne dénoncerait un fraudeur à l’Agence. Ils estiment que ce n’est pas leur travail de le faire et ils ne voudraient pas que les Canadiens créent une culture de dénonciation. Ils n’aiment pas l’idée que les citoyens se dressent les uns contre les autres.
L’économie clandestine et les paradis fiscaux sont des enjeux difficiles à comprendre pour la population générale.
L’économie clandestine : Quelle est l’ampleur du problème?
Les participants ne connaissent pas le concept de l’économie clandestine. Ils parlent du marché noir ou du travail au noir. Toutefois, ils ne connaissent pas très bien le phénomène. La plupart d’entre eux ne peuvent pas facilement évaluer l’étendue du problème au Canada. Pour certains, l’économie clandestine est répandue, alors que pour d’autres, il s’agit d’un phénomène qui devient de moins en moins important avec le temps. Ils ont beaucoup de difficulté à estimer les montants que perd le gouvernement annuellement en raison de l’économie clandestine. Une partie du problème est que, dans leur esprit, l’économie clandestine ne représente que de petites sommes d’argent. Ils ne comprennent pas que les petits montants s’accumulent avec le temps. Ils pensent également que l’économie clandestine est composée des gens ordinaires qui essaient de « survivre », et non de gens riches ou de grandes sociétés.
Paradis fiscaux
La plupart des participants des groupes de discussion se rappellent avoir récemment entendu parler des paradis fiscaux dans les médias. Quelques-uns ont mentionné les « Panama Papers » ou les « Paradise Papers » pendant la discussion. Toutefois, aucun d’entre eux n’était en mesure d’élaborer sur le sujet. En fait, la plupart des participants ne savaient absolument rien au sujet des paradis fiscaux. Les participants ne sont pas au courant de ce que fait l’Agence actuellement pour contrer ce problème. Ils ne sont pas au courant des programmes élaborés ou des mesures qui ont été prises contre l’évasion fiscale qui utilise les paradis fiscaux. Pour les participants, les paradis fiscaux sont utilisés par les personnes riches ou par les grandes sociétés afin de camoufler de grandes sommes d’argent à l’Agence. Ce n’est pas quelque chose qui est accessible à la population générale. Il faut de nombreuses ressources, des avocats et des comptables pour accéder aux paradis fiscaux.
Le problème des paradis fiscaux est plus important que l’économie clandestine.
Spontanément, de nombreux participants étaient plus enclins à croire que les paradis fiscaux étaient un plus grand problème pour le Canada que l’économie clandestine. Ils croient que l’Agence devrait consacrer davantage de ressources à récupérer l’argent de paradis fiscaux.
Test de messages sur l’économie clandestine
En tout, sept (7) messages ont été mis à l’essai dans les groupes de la population générale. En général, les participants avaient tendance à préférer les messages qui étaient plutôt positifs et à rejeter ceux qu’ils considéraient comme étant de nature plus accusatoire. De plus, les messages offrant des conseils allant au-delà des questions fiscales ont été perçus de façon positive (p. ex., comment un contrat écrit avec un entrepreneur les protégeait de plusieurs façons). Les participants ont indiqué qu’ils préféreraient un message ayant des exemples concrets leur indiquant comment l’argent recueilli au moyen des impôts est utilisé.
Communications de l’ARC
Les participants de la plupart des groupes étaient d’avis que l’Agence devrait informer les Canadiens et communiquer avec eux au sujet de certaines statistiques générales décrivant ses réussites dans la réduction de l’économie clandestine et des paradis fiscaux à l’étranger ou dans la lutte contre ces derniers. Les statistiques générales devraient se concentrer sur la taille du problème, sur le nombre de personnes ou de sociétés qui ont été attrapées, sur les conséquences qui en ont découlé et sur le montant de l’impôt qui a été remis au gouvernement du Canada dans le processus. Les participants croyaient qu’il s’agirait là d’une mesure positive puisque, de leur point de vue, un certain niveau de crainte envers l’Agence serait une mesure dissuasive efficace contre la fraude fiscale.
Les décideurs des petites et moyennes entreprises et les intermédiaires fiscaux ne semblent pas avoir une opinion complètement différente de celle des participants de la population générale. Sur la grande majorité des sujets, les opinions exprimées étaient semblables, et il est possible d’observer les mêmes tendances parmi les deux groupes cibles. Même si les opinions étaient similaires, certaines différences ont été observées. Ces différences principales sont décrites ci-dessous.
La notoriété de l’Agence et la connaissance de celle-ci sont supérieures chez les décideurs des PME et les intermédiaires fiscaux.
Ces participants ont, sans surprise, une connaissance plus approfondie de l’Agence et des points de vue beaucoup plus établis à son sujet. Contrairement à la population générale, ils connaissaient davantage la mission et le rôle de l’Agence. En effet, ces participants sont régulièrement en communication avec l’Agence comparativement au reste de la population. Plusieurs intermédiaires fiscaux disent même qu’ils ont à communiquer avec l’Agence sur une base quotidienne. Leurs expériences se reflètent dans leur opinion.
Des améliorations notables ont été observées dans le site Web et les services électroniques de l’Agence.
Les efforts de l’Agence en vue d’améliorer ses services électroniques et son site Web ont été remarqués par les décideurs de PME et les intermédiaires fiscaux. Ils disent que l’Agence a été proactive dans ce domaine et ils semblent être satisfaits des changements qui ont été apportés.
Les interactions avec les employés de l’Agence sont frustrantes.
Les décideurs de PME et les intermédiaires fiscaux soulignent que les employés de l’Agence sont toujours professionnels et courtois. Malgré ces aspects positifs, de nombreux participants étaient d’avis que leurs interactions avec les agents de l’Agence ne sont pas toujours positives. Ils estiment qu’ils ne sont pas toujours bien compris par ces derniers. Ils critiquent également l’impossibilité de parler avec la même personne au cours de leurs différents appels, ce qui signifie qu’ils doivent réexpliquer leur cas ou leur problème à chaque fois. Cela peut être frustrant pour eux, surtout s’ils reçoivent des conseils incohérents d’un employé à l’autre. Ils font remarquer que les employés de l’Agence semblent manquer de formation et ils estiment que l’efficience varie beaucoup d’une personne à l’autre.
Les procédures et le manque de souplesse sont un problème.
Plusieurs décideurs de PME et intermédiaires fiscaux disent que l’Agence manque de souplesse. Pour eux, l’observation excessive des procédures et des politiques est une source importante d’insatisfaction. En plus d’être de simples tracas bureaucratiques, les procédures de l’Agence nuisent à l’efficacité des agents.
Le service Mon dossier a une solide réputation, tandis que le service des agents de liaison n’est pas connu.
La réputation de Mon dossier est assez forte chez les preneurs de décisions et les intermédiaires fiscaux. Bien que bon nombre d’entre eux pensent que le processus d’inscription est laborieux, la majorité de ceux qui l’utilisent est satisfaite. Par ailleurs, le service des agents de liaison n’est pas connu. Même si certains participants ont affirmé qu’ils n’aiment pas l’idée d’inviter les agents de l’Agence dans leur entreprise, plusieurs décideurs ont souligné leur intérêt pour ce genre de service. Ils auraient aimé que l’Agence annonce ce service.
Les points de vue au sujet de la fraude fiscale, de l’économie clandestine et des paradis fiscaux à l’étranger sont semblables à ceux de la population générale.
Les participants qui sont des décideurs de PME ou des intermédiaires fiscaux n’ont pas des points de vue complètement différents de ceux de la population générale à l’égard de la fraude fiscale, de l’écoNomie clandestine et des paradis fiscaux à l’étranger. Les décideurs de PME et les intermédiaires fiscaux sont confiants que l’Agence est bien équipée pour déceler les fraudeurs fiscaux. Ils ne seraient pas disposés à dénoncer un suspect de fraude fiscale. Ils ne voient pas cela comme une de leurs responsabilités. Les intermédiaires fiscaux sont plus enclins à offrir leur aide à un potentiel fraudeur fiscal afin de permettre à cette personne d’économiser de l’argent légalement, mais ils n’aideraient pas quelqu’un à commettre de la fraude.
Pour ce qui est de l’enjeu des paradis fiscaux, ils avaient une assez bonne connaissance de la matière, mais pas de renseignements précis. Un peu comme la population générale, ils n’étaient pas capables de dire ce que fait l’Agence de manière concrète pour lutter contre le problème. Ils ne sont pas au courant des programmes mis en œuvre par l’Agence. Toutefois, certains participants ont souligné que les paradis fiscaux ne sont pas nécessairement illégaux et que l’Agence n’a pas nécessairement le pouvoir de régler le problème. Ils ont tendance à penser que la solution pourrait être politique et qu’elle doit venir de la législation. Les intermédiaires fiscaux étaient probablement ceux qui en connaissaient le plus sur le sujet et ils doutaient que les paradis fiscaux à l’étranger soient un problème aussi gros que celui de l’économie clandestine.
Test de messages sur l’économie clandestine
En tout, six (6) messages ont été mis à l’essai dans les groupes de PME et d’intermédiaires fiscaux. Comme pour les groupes de la population générale, les participants avaient tendance à préférer les messages qui étaient plutôt positifs et à rejeter ceux qu’ils considéraient comme étant de nature plus accusatoire. Toutefois, ils conseilleraient à l’Agence d’utiliser une approche mixte pour communiquer avec le public : 1) une approche positive qui informe le public au sujet de l’économie clandestine, de la fraude et de l’évasion fiscale, afin d’augmenter la connaissance générale au sujet de ces enjeux; 2) une approche qui aurait un effet dissuasif en publiant le nombre de fraudeurs fiscaux ayant été pris, les conséquences de la fraude fiscale et le montant d’argent recouvré par l’Agence.
Nom du fournisseur : Léger
Numéro du contrat : 46575-188941/001/CY
Date d’octroi du contrat : 2017-11-10
Le montant du contrat visant cette recherche s’est élevé à 156 578,45 $ (TVH comprise).
Important note: the detailed results are qualitative in nature; therefore they can't be inferred to the overall population under study.
Overall, participants tended to have a somewhat negative opinion of the CRA and the Canadian tax system when first asked to comment. They generally said they feel they are overtaxed both as individuals and corporations. In both the SME and tax intermediary groups, negative opinions tended to concern customer service issues and day-to-day interactions with the CRA.
Opinions varied between target groups mostly because the general population has a rather low level of knowledge of the CRA in general. When the subject was first introduced in the general population groups, it took participants quite some time before they started to get comfortable with the conversation. Some could not really say what they thought of the CRA and give their impressions simply because they did not know what the CRA does. The CRA’s mission, besides collecting taxes, remains unclear for a vast majority of the general population. Generally speaking these people deal with the CRA only once a year when they file their taxes and, as we will see later in this report, for multiple reasons most of them hire a professional to take care of their taxes. Since most do not interact with the CRA to any extent, they see it merely as a tax collection Agency. However, as the discussions progressed and the moderator explained what the CRA really does, people started to talk more freely about their experiences with the Agency and their attitudes became more positive compared to their preliminary comments. This was also partly true for SME decision-makers and tax intermediaries.
As for the other target groups comprised of SME decision-makers and tax intermediaries, their relationship with the CRA is much more elaborate and is sometimes a daily affair (tax accountants). They mostly mentioned that their communications with the Agency are not always positive, saying that they feel mostly misunderstood by the agents. Multiple problems were raised, ranging from being unable to speak to the same agent about a problem/question to the lack of training and competence that some agents have demonstrated. Some participants said that often times, agents are not well equipped to properly respond to their demands. This leads to a lack of efficiency, and too much time is spent on trying to resolve the issue. Participants believe that agents need to be better informed about who they are (business decision-makers) and to better understand their situation (what their business actually does). Overall, tax intermediaries seemed to be more frustrated with the CRA than SME decision-makers, as they deal more regularly with the CRA.
Tax intermediaries in particular, but also some SME decision-makers, believe that often times the CRA is not solution-oriented or result-oriented. According to these participants, the lack of flexibility and the blind observance of processes and procedures do not allow CRA agents to be efficient in dealing with issues. Participants understand that agents need to respect the letter of the law, but they indicate that this situation makes follow-ups with the CRA difficult and frustrating.
Despite tax intermediaries’ rather negative initial opinions, they said that calling the CRA for simple queries or demands will get them answers quickly. However, more complex cases that often require interpretation of tax laws seem to be a major issue for this specific target group. The lack of consistency among CRA representatives in terms of instructions was also seen as an important problem for both businesses and tax intermediaries.
Generally, businesses and tax intermediaries felt that the CRA had definitely improved its electronic and online services over the last few years, especially the website; most said they now find it easier to consult and navigate. They felt the CRA has been rather proactive in this area and that this has improved their opinion of the CRA when it comes to convenience. While this target group generally agreed that the situation has improved in recent years, they still see room for improvement, namely concerning broadening the range of documents that can be submitted online. Despite a perceived lack of consistency, and while some were critical of the varying levels of competence of CRA phone agents, participants felt agents always remained professional and courteous and that they demonstrated an eagerness to resolve issues. Participants tended to “blame the system,” the necessary “red tape,” and policies that regulate the CRA’s work.
When asked what words or characteristics best describe the Agency, the words or expressions generated were in line with participants’ initial comments on the CRA. Positive words used included interactive, responsive, upright, secure, feared, and strong. On the other hand, words like myopic, unfair, stressful, inconsistent, complex, confusing, frustrating, and rigid were among negative words used in more than one city. Some words like fairness and integrity left participants ambivalent. They largely felt that fairness was rather a reflection on the tax system itself (seen as unfair), more than about the work of the CRA. The big guy vs. little guy issue seemed to come up in most groups around the time that the word fairness was brought up. Participants often talked about this as they feel wealthy corporations and individuals find loopholes and “can hire the big name firms or lawyers” to find ways within the law to hide revenue from the CRA. Participants did not spontaneously refer to the Paradise Papers, Panama Papers, or other language used in the media recently. They seemed to be talking more broadly, and some commented that it has “always been this way.” Participants mostly felt disadvantaged as average taxpayers or small business owners. The feeling tended to be that they pay their fair share of taxes if not more, while some get away with it.
Filing Taxes
The majority of participants from the general population prefer to have a professional do their taxes. This tax professional files their tax return electronically on their behalf. Those who decide to do their own taxes also prefer filing them electronically. Participants in the SME groups also use the services of an accountant to both prepare and electronically file their business tax return. Participants in all groups said they like e-filing for its speed, convenience, and also for the speed at which their refund is directly deposited in their bank account.
Most participants claimed to have their taxes done by a professional mainly for three reasons: To avoid the hassle of preparing their tax return, for fear of making a mistake (perceived complexity of the return) and to ensure they get all the credits and deductions they are entitled to. General public participants feel that doing their own taxes can quickly become a fairly complex task as soon as their situation is different from “just having a T4” to include. Some also do not want to prepare their own returns to avoid making an error, as tax laws and regulations change from year to year and because they may not know or understand that they are entitled to a specific deduction. They also believe it will simply take too much of their valuable time. Another reason often mentioned is that they feel their tax professional will do a better job at ensuring they get the most out of credits and deductions they are entitled to. Many participants also said that the costs involved in hiring a tax professional are more than offset by what they believe they get in return. In some cases, the use of a tax professional has had a major positive impact on a taxpayer’s situation.
Seeking Information About the CRA
When asked where they would seek information if they were looking to do their own taxes, participants in the general population groups said they would probably visit the CRA’s website, call their accountant, or simply use Google to search a specific term. However, few participants said they have had to look up information about their taxes recently and many would not know where to begin. Participants who said they had recently visited the CRA website were rather divided on their experiences. Some easily found what they were looking for and felt the website was easy to navigate, while others felt the exact opposite. In general, participants believed Canadians should be better educated about the tax system and about how to properly prepare and file a tax return.
Liaison Officer Service
Awareness of the Liaison Officer service was very low in the SME groups. Most participants had never heard of the service, and when the service was briefly described to them, participants were divided. The main opinion was somewhat cynical, as participants questioned why a company would actually invite the CRA to look more closely into their tax files. For that reason, they would tend to stay away from the service if they had only briefly heard about it. At the opposite end of the spectrum, some business decision-makers would welcome the help offered.
My Account
Awareness of the service was fairly high in the general public groups and opinions were positive. While some felt the initial signup process was rather long and cumbersome and that the authentication procedure was too rigid, those who use My Account were overall satisfied with the service.
Exercise 1: Attitudes Toward Certain Behaviours
The first exercise was only used in the general public focus groups. Participants were presented with an individual questionnaire, which included seven behaviours most people would agree are wrong. Participants were asked to rank them in ascending order of gravity. The behaviour given a 7 would be the worst offence in participants’ view. The results of the exercise are shown below. Readers should remain cautious when interpreting the results of this exercise, as the information was collected using qualitative research, and should therefore only be interpreted as directional in nature. Numbers in brackets are average scores. The higher the score, the more the behaviour is seen as a serious offence.
Filing an inaccurate tax return to avoid paying what you really owe was rated among the top three worst offences on the list, while paying cash for goods and services to avoid paying the sales tax was in the bottom three. While an inaccurate tax return is seen to be almost as bad as insurance or employer fraud, avoiding the sales tax is considered as banal as littering while driving and speeding on the highway.
Participants generally felt that “playing by the rules” is valued in Canadian culture. In some way, being a law-abiding citizen is what allows Canada to remain a peaceful and generous society. From this perspective, the general population, SME decision-makers, and tax intermediaries tended to converge on the fact that all Canadians need to pay their “fair share” of the tax burden. However, there is a clear disconnect between doing the right thing and paying that fair share through one’s income tax return, and, simply getting a few dollars off by not paying the sales tax, something that is not seen as morally offensive.
Income tax fraud is a major offence, but most are believed to be playing by the rules.
When asked whether participants believed that avoiding taxes or under declaring income to the CRA was a major issue, most participants tended to understate the problem. While all agreed the problem is out there, they all felt most Canadians and Canadian businesses “play by the rules.” In all groups, regardless of the segment, participants tended to quickly separate between underreporting ones income on their tax return and avoiding the sales tax. The former was not seen as a major issue, as they felt the percentage of Canadians who would take that risk or purposely break the law would be small. The latter was a different issue. Many felt that avoiding to pay the sales tax was very common among Canadians, but that it only represented a small amount of money in the end. “It’s only a few dollars anyhow,” as many would say. For different reasons, focus group participants do not see income tax fraud and “getting a few dollars off by paying cash at a restaurant or on a landscaping job” as being part of the same problem.
Participants tend to believe it is very difficult to hide revenue and commit outright fraud on one’s tax return. The general perception is that the risk of being caught by the Agency for underreporting is pretty high. Conversely, since businesses that offer you to save by avoiding paying taxes are everywhere, then this must mean that this form of avoidance does not pose the same risk of “getting caught.”
For tax intermediaries and SME owners/managers, other variables are under consideration or motivate to work “above board.” An entrepreneur commented that contractors need to be properly insured, possess the correct licences to operate, and subscribe to different meaningful memberships, all of which imply that the company’s operations are legitimately reported. Another example that emerged from the Quebec focus groups was the restaurant industry. Some participants agreed that new regulations and processes put into place in recent years have had a direct impact on more accurate reporting of income in that specific industry sector.
However, many participants in the SME focus groups were particularly keen on mentioning that under declaring income was endemic in a few industry sectors. One participant from the construction sector mentioned his industry is particularly hit by fraudulent businesses that will pay employees cash, under declare income, omit to pay taxes on supplies, not conform to workplace safety standards, and accept payment in cash. This entrepreneur said that these fraudulent businesses are a direct threat to his business’s survival.
The big guy vs. little guy dilemma
When it comes to avoiding paying the sales tax, the big guy vs. little guy conundrum invariably came up in all focus groups. Whenever questions were asked about the gravity of avoiding to pay the sales tax, participants tended to legitimize that behaviour by indirectly suggesting that the real problem was somewhere else. The following phrase was heard in all cities visited, regardless of the segment, and tended to form a consensus: “Government should focus on going after the big fish, which is where the real problem is, instead of wasting its time going after the little fish who are just trying to get by.” The sentiment was often followed by comments about the fact that the cumulative amount of money from large corporations or wealthy Canadians that are not entering the coffers of our governments would be greater than the sum of all the small amounts of money from Canadians who avoid paying the sales tax.
The Survival Mode
The big fish vs. small fish analogy was usually closely linked to a second narrative regarding Canadians’ tax burden and how it is difficult for many to get by in today’s Economy. For many, thoughts were: how can we really blame cash-strapped Canadians for “just saving a few bucks” and “how can we blame the guy working on the side just so he can feed his family.” While some cities tied this to the rising cost of housing, the impact of the 2009 economic crisis, or the lack of good-paying jobs in their region, not declaring some income to the CRA or not paying the sales tax may just be what Canadians do to “get by” or “stay alive essentially.” When asked if this made it acceptable to underreport income, participants remained ambivalent. If a person is not reporting some income or not paying sales tax to survive or because it helps make ends meet, then so be it. This issue will further be addressed in the underground Economy section.
When participants were asked if they would be likely to report an individual or company they either suspected or knew were underreporting income to the CRA, participants in both the general public and business/tax intermediary groups adamantly said “No”. While participants recognized their responsibility in being honest and accurate when filing their income tax return, “catching the bad guy” was not their responsibility. Participants prefer looking the other way even if they disapprove of an individual’s behaviour regarding taxes. Participants also said they would be reluctant to report that individual because they believe they could not be one hundred percent certain the person is hiding income. The CRA, on the other hand, would have the resources and capacity to determine that.
Even when the moderator offered a scenario where they would know for certain that a person or company was committing an offence, they still would not report that individual or company to the Agency.
In the general population groups, participants were rather cynical about reporting either a person or business to the CRA. In their language, they would not “rat” on a person or “be a snitch.” This applied to both a person working “under the table” and underreporting income to the CRA and, for example, to a restaurant with two cash registers.
In the tax intermediary groups, participants believed that it was not their responsibility to report such an individual or company. They would instead refuse to do business with this client or terminate the relationship. They would refuse to participate in any fraudulent behaviour. In the SME groups, the response to reporting an offender to the CRA was the same. This refusal to report would still apply even if the offender was a direct competitor and that their illegal behaviour was hurting their own business.
However, some SME decision-makers disagreed. One participant did not agree with the consensus view and said that pervasive “tax cheating” in his industry sector was hurting his capacity to be profitable and to grow; he was rather of the opinion that “these companies are not only stealing money from government, but also stealing from honest entrepreneurs” like him. This business owner was the only exception to the general rule.
Finally, some participants questioned why the CRA would even ask Canadians to “turn against each other.” In fact, some were rather cynical about the fact the CRA would encourage Canadians to report suspect behaviour. They believed that ordinary Canadians reporting the “little guy” to the CRA while “the big guy” is not bothered by the government would not even make a real difference in the end.
Identifying the Issue
Underground Economy—or Économie clandestine in French—are terms that were not well understood by many participants. While this particular issue was discussed in all groups, participants did not use underground Economy spontaneously to refer to this type of behaviour. In English, some used the term black market and others used both black market and underground Economy as synonyms. In French, the use of marché au noir also referred to économie clandestine. However, participants were more familiar with expressions like “getting paid under the table”/“se faire payer en dessous de la table” and had used these terms spontaneously before the CRA terminology was introduced by the moderator. Once the term underground Economy was introduced, it quickly became the reference term, and participants understood what it entailed.
Recognizing the Issue
In general, participants felt the underground Economy is a somewhat important issue in Canada. They believe it is a fairly common practice for businesses to not charge the sales tax on their services. While participants feel they are overtaxed in general, they also said that taxes are “all about supporting the system” and that “Canada is a great country and Canadians get what they pay for.” At the same time, they tolerate and even participate in the underground Economy by not always paying the sales tax. This contradiction is explained or justified by their view that, altogether it “probably does not add up to a whole lot of money.” A majority appears to view tax evasion or tax fraud as a “macro” problem, while their “micro” behaviours would not have a major impact on the overall problem.
In several groups, some believed that, as we move away from cash transactions to credit or debit card payment, this will resolve a good portion of the problem. In Quebec, this comment about moving to a cashless society combined with recent changes in the regulations surrounding the restaurant industry will, according to many participants, go a long way in helping resolve the problem of the underground Economy.
The Issue of Recent Immigration
Some believe that part of the underground Economy issue may be tied to recent immigration. Some participants felt that some new Canadians may not be aware of the tax rules in Canada and may reproduce incorrect behaviours in Canada, as a result of a lack of education on how it works here. Some participants believe it is customary in many countries to deal in cash transactions only, and new Canadians could not be blamed if they did the same here in Canada upon arrival.
Exercise 2: Thought Bubbles
The thought bubble exercise simply required participants to write down what they would think if someone confided that they were underreporting their income to the CRA. A total of two (except for Toronto participants who saw three) scenarios were presented to participants:
Scenario 1: In the first option, a person would tell them they made $2,500 as a DJ and had decided not to report this income on their tax return.
At $2,500, participants would not report that individual. Participants recognized that the DJ’s decision was against the law, but were mostly not inclined to consider it as “wrong.” Common phrases such as “Good for him,” “Good for you, but be careful,” “He’s working hard to improve his condition,” and “Maybe he’s got children to feed,” suggested some level of acceptance of this type of behaviour. In the tax intermediary groups, participants were inclined to say they would advise that individual against this behaviour. They were of the opinion that the DJ would eventually get caught. Many tax intermediaries said they would refuse to file an inaccurate tax return for that individual. In all tax intermediary groups, some participants said they would advise that individual on how they can dramatically reduce the amount of taxes owed on that income by declaring expenses against it. This would be considered as encouraging proper reporting of income. But again, looking the other way remains the norm. In Toronto, a second scenario at $5,000 of undeclared income was also shown, but failed to have an impact on participants’ opinions. For this reason, and because of time challenges in the groups, this scenario was removed from the discussion.
Scenario 2: In the second scenario, the weekend DJ intended on not reporting $20,000 of income on his tax return.
The discussion around the second scenario was different. While they would still not report that individual to the CRA, their reactions to the situation were more negative. Participants tended to feel that this larger amount was not just the product of a hobby, but represented a minimum wage income/part-time job salary making the omission rather offensive. At the same time, the perceived risk of getting caught was perceived as being far greater. As several participants pointed out, “at this level of income, some of the DJ’s clients will likely report the expense on their side, which will lead back to the DJ,” while another said that “at $20,000, this is sure to leave a trace somewhere for the CRA to find.”
The exercise clearly showed that the dollar amount does have a direct impact on how participants react to a situation, yet it had no impact on their willingness to report the weekend DJ to the CRA.
After a fairly lengthy discussion on tax compliance, participants were asked to spontaneously mention what the CRA should communicate to Canadians to raise awareness of the underground Economy issue and to motivate Canadians to make the right decisions in this regard. Participants generally struggled to spontaneously come up with a key argument or catch phrase to encapsulate their thoughts on the underground Economy. As the discussion on compliance had failed to generate a consensus view on the importance of the issue and what clearly constituted an objectionable behaviour, participants had a hard time making that one suggestion. Some even questioned why the government would want to engage resources in changing the outlook of Canadians on the issue, as the amount spent may not be compensated by the increased tax revenue generated by the potential change in behaviour.
Participants were then randomly shown a number of messages and were asked to evaluate them individually for effectiveness and to discuss them collectively. Messages were different from one target group to another. A total of 6 messages were presented to the SME and tax intermediaries and 7 mostly different messages were shown to the general population.
Before presenting the results, it should be mentioned that there were no clear winners in terms of messages in either the general public or SME/tax intermediary groups. Each had some strengths and weaknesses. Most messages generated both positive and negative comments.
Following are the results of the message testing exercise for this target group. The average figure shown below takes into account all scores collected for each message. You will find the detailed results for each group in the appendix. The reader should bear in mind that the results have no statistical significance since they come out of a series of focus groups and are not the result of a quantitative exercise. They are used here as an indication of preference.
Message 1: If you’re getting paid in cash and not declaring all your income, you’re part of the $45 billion problem. Be part of the solution instead.
Message 1 received an average rating of 4.5 out of 10.
The $45 billion figure was at the center of most comments related to the message. Many challenged the credibility of this large number. What does it represent exactly? Does that include only domestic losses or offshore losses as well? Does the number represent the taxable income amount or the total amount of taxes lost? Participants also said that the figure was much larger than they would have predicted if it did represent the amount of domestic revenue not being reported back to government. If this figure can be trusted, then it does grab their attention. However, many said they reacted negatively to the fact that the message addresses them directly as if they were suspected of doing something wrong. Some who said they are beyond reproach when it comes to their taxes did not like being pointed at in the message. They felt this form of negative message could be a turn off. On the other hand, the sentence “be part of the solution” was liked since it is positive. Some participants commented that this sentence made no suggestion as to how they can be part of the solution.
Message 2: Under declaring your business’s income can affect its growth. Find out why.
Message 2 received the lowest average rating of all messages with a total of 4.4 out of 10.
The average score this message received does not match the rather positive discussion that followed its individual evaluation. One reason may be the fact that participants needed a discussion to understand why under declaring would indeed hurt a business’s growth. Getting financing, estimating the value of their business, and obtaining a grant or permit were the usual examples provided as to the why under declaring leads to potential opportunity losses. Some said that broadening the issue beyond compliance would likely grab the attention of businesses that are generally motivated by future growth and success. As they discussed the message, they tended to warm up to it. The “find out why” phrase at the end was generally seen as a good call to action to click on a link or seek more information.
Message 3: Think you can get out of paying taxes on that house you flipped? The CRA can detect undeclared real estate income.
Message 3 received an average rating of 4.7 out of 10.
In general, tax intermediaries tended to feel like this message was somewhat underwhelming as real estate transactions are now registered sales, making it very difficult to cheat. Some said that this particular issue has been largely resolved. Others also believed the message was too specific to a small segment of real estate transactions and potential sources of tax fraud for it to have a deep impact on the message’s target group.
Message 4: Your lifestyle doesn’t match your tax return? The CRA can find out if you’ve been hiding or underreporting your income.
Message 4 received an average rating of 4.9 out of 10.
In general, participants in this target group agreed with the statement. They believed that, indeed, the CRA would have the means and resources to signal out this type of evidence and act upon it. While they generally agreed with it, some felt that the number of individuals potentially guilty here would be very small. For this reason, they again doubted the efficiency of the message. That being said, many participants spontaneously said that there is a “fear of the CRA” subtext in the message that they generally agreed with. Business owners and tax intermediaries believe that Canadians should have a certain degree of fear of being caught and that the ability of the CRA to catch offenders is a good deterrent. “The CRA can find out” portion of the message was, in this light, positively evaluated.
Message 5: Business owner? Suppliers sending gift cards to keep your business? If you don’t declare it as income, that’s tax cheating. It’s not too late to fix your tax affairs. Visit [link].
Message 5 received an average rating of 2 out of 10, although the message was only presented in Toronto and Montréal to a total of 4 groups out of 8.
The message was quickly rejected by participants because of the example provided (the gift card). Most believed the message was a good example of “going after the wrong target,” since participants felt this was an example of going after the “little guy.” Some believed they would have reacted differently if the example provided used a much larger dollar amount or that the gift card was a regular method of payment. Because of the quick rejection by Toronto and Montréal participants, this message was taken out of the rotation for the Calgary and Halifax focus groups.
Message 6: Taxes are the price we pay for the Canada we love, like safe streets, beautiful parks, education, and healthcare. That’s why it’s important that all Canadians pay their taxes. Be part of the solution. Don’t cheat.
Message six received the highest average score with 7.1 out of 10.
Participants reacted rather positively to this message. They agreed with the message’s positive spin and the fact that it directly made an appeal to Canadian social values. The “pay your fair share” subtext was appreciated. They also believed the message was a good reminder as to why we pay taxes in the first place. Some suggested the number of examples could be broadened or more specific, but participants largely agreed with the message in general. Some doubted the impact of the message on cheaters themselves. Others felt that a certain level of knowledge of how government works was necessary to fully understand the meaning of the message itself.
Following are the results of the message testing exercise for the general population groups. The average figure shown below takes into account all scores collected for each message. You will find the detailed results for each group in the appendix. The reader should bear in mind that the results have no statistical significance since they come out of a series of focus groups and are not the results of a quantitative exercise. They are used here as an indication of preference.
Message 1: Population in Canada: Over 35 million. Let’s say about 1% of the population pays cash to avoid paying the tax. not that many right? Let’s say this tax is $200. Small amount right? When you add this all up, that’s $70,000,000. $70 million less to fund services for all Canadians. It all adds up. Be part of the solution. Find out how: [link]
Message 1 received an average rating of 5.1 out of 10.
In general, participants found this message too long and convoluted, but it did get mixed reviews. Some felt it could be an effective message, that the figures made sense, and that it dealt with dollar amounts they can come to grips with (in the groups that had seen the $45 billion figure in message 3 previously). The idea that the little amounts here and there combined added up to a big problem was appreciated. They basically liked the idea more than the message itself. Others tended to dismiss the message as ending up with too small a figure making the problem look not that important. As one put it: “$70 million is pocket change for the Government of Canada.” That being said, it is the complexity of the message, its length, and the math involved that generated the most negative comments. Some said they had to read it a second time to understand the message. Others believed they would glance over the message and potentially not read it if they stumbled on the ad somewhere.
Message 2: You’re an employee. Taxes are deducted from each of your paycheques. Let’s say you decide to pay for a service in cash to avoid paying the tax. You save a bit of money. Your service provider, on the other hand, saves a lot more money by not declaring any of it as income. He doesn’t pay any taxes, but yet you do … Be part of the solution. Find out how:
Message 2 received the lowest average rating with 3.2 out of 10.
This one seemed to create confusion among the general public. With just one read, they did not grasp the relationship between their status as an employee and the money the service provider was making. The difficulty in grasping the relationship and the cause and effect structure of the message created a situation where many participants felt they did not understand how they could be part of the solution. Participants liked the fact that the message was less accusatory than other messages, and pointed out that it recognizes that the average taxpayer actually pays its fair share.
Message 3: If you’re paying someone cash to avoid paying taxes, you’re part of the $45 billion problem. Be part of the solution instead.
Message 3 received an average rating of 3.7 out of 10.
Participants struggled to come to grips with a figure as large as $45 billion. They felt the figure was unrealistic and just too big to comprehend. Some said they would prefer a figure they can actually understand, whether it’s a number of hospitals, number of school teachers, or other ways of understanding just what that figure represents. Others suggested that a percentage of the government budget would be easier to understand. The $45 billion did not speak to them at all and they questioned its origin. They asked whether this number was just an approximation by the CRA to make the problem look tremendous. Two other adverse effects of the message were that some participants believed it would be impossible for all the taxes not paid on things such as restaurants or lawn grooming to amount to such a figure, while others failed to see how they could individually be part of the solution if the problem is this huge.
Message 4: Your lifestyle doesn’t match your tax return? The CRA can find out if you’ve been hiding or underreporting your income.
Message 4 received an average rating of 3.5 out of 10.
Compared to the SME/tax intermediary groups, the general public had an issue with this message. They tended to translate the message into what it means for them. They believed it depicted the CRA as a big brother figure that would know how much they had paid for this new pair of boots or that their new TV was not simply paid using a credit card but rather could be afforded because of undeclared income. Some believed that if it was aimed at the “big guys” it could have a deterrent effect, but that the fear tactic was out of place if the message is geared toward ordinary taxpayers. They all agreed fear is a factor that the CRA should use to target high earners and questionable businesses, but not them or the DJ in the exercise from earlier on in the session.
Message 5: Taxes are the price we pay for the Canada we love, like safe streets, beautiful parks, education, and healthcare. When people cheat on their taxes, there’s less money to fund our services, which leads to service cuts or an increase in taxes. That’s why it’s important that every Canadian pays their fair share. Be part of the solution.
Message 5 received the highest average score with 6 out of 10.
This message was appreciated by most participants. In fact, it collected the highest score of all seven messages, and the discussion surrounding it was more positive. They found the idea of connecting with the values Canadians hold dear was a good way to have them focus on the message. They also liked the fact that the message had a positive tone as well. However, despite liking it, they were not sure if it would be effective because people who cheat may not have a high sense of morals or the same level of belief in collectivity. Some also said they would like more precision on the examples used. As one participant put it: “If people stopped cheating on their taxes, what favourable impact would it have on our healthcare or education systems?”
This is very similar to message 6 tested with the SME/tax intermediary groups, and responses tended to be fairly positive as well.
Message 6: The average Canadian household receives about $41,000 in public services each year. You pay your taxes and get services, yet people who cheat on their taxes or pay cash to save on taxes also get services. How is that fair?
Message 6 received an average rating of 4.8 out of 10.
This message also garnered mixed reviews. On the positive side, some participants liked the fact that the message was about fairness and included a clear and punchy ending. Others also liked the fact that the message points out that cheaters also have access to the same services as law‑abiding citizens. However, the $41,000 figure used was a problem for many. First, it appeared too big an amount to be true. Some people challenged where the figure came from or how it was calculated, while others said it sounded wrong because it was by no means a reflection of their own situation. For example, some said “I live on my own and don’t have kids going to school. I’m not costing the government $41,000,” while others said “I am in perfect health and I have not been to the doctor’s in a while. That figure cannot be right.” Part of the confusion on the dollar amount may be that participants do not take into account the full spectrum of services they receive when considering that $41,000 figure, and therefore may doubt its credibility.
Message 7: Hiring a painter? Paying cash to avoid the tax is risky. No contract means no protection against damages or if a worker is injured at your house. Make sure to get a written contract.
Message 7 received an average rating of 5.7 out of 10.
Reactions to this message were fairly positive for three main reasons. First, many participants liked the fact that it uses a common example of the underground Economy they can understand and relate to. Second, several comments pointed to the fact that the message goes beyond the taxation issue and focuses on other risks one is taking when not getting a written contract, and risks to the contractor as well. To many, this is something they quickly learned when reading the message or it reminded them of other issues related to paying less by avoiding taxes. The last reason was its short, positive, and prescriptive nature. Some liked the very matter-of-fact, down-to-earth tone of the advice provided.
When asked what the CRA should be telling Canadians in order to increase awareness and initiate a conversation on the impact of non-compliance to tax laws, one topic was invariably brought up by participants, regardless of the segment: the CRA should publish some figures on the effectiveness of their efforts to battle tax fraud. To sum up comments related to this topic, participants want the CRA to make public, advertise, and communicate general figures on the following:
Participants felt that public knowledge of these figures would have a significant deterrent effect on cheaters and would likely generate more accurate reporting of income to the CRA when combined with rather positive advertising aimed at raising awareness of the merits and impact of paying one’s fair share of taxes. They felt this mixed approach would make sense to them.
Furthermore, this demand for knowing more about the successes of the CRA in catching those who willingly hide income is based on a certain level of confidence that the CRA is likely to be successful, but Canadians simply do not know about the tax fraud issue.
Participants believe that the average Canadian has a low level of awareness of the different tax-related issues discussed in the groups and of what the CRA actually does to catch those who cheat. They believe the CRA should better educate Canadians on both counts and should not hesitate to boast about its successes.
Lastly, when asked about the ideal media placement for the types of messages they were asked to evaluate, answers varied and did not point to a clear placement strategy. However, given that the research was held in large cities, public transit tended to be seen as a very effective placement, followed by online/Facebook advertising. Most if not all media were mentioned to some degree (e.g. television, radio, print).
With a couple of exceptions, the issue of offshore tax havens was not brought up by participants until the moderator probed for it. Although participants did discuss the “big fish vs. small fish” issue spontaneously earlier on, the reference was rather generic. Terms like Paradise Papers or the difference between tax evasion and tax avoidance were not raised. Once fairly late into the session when the moderator mentioned the term offshore tax havens, most participants said they had heard something about it in the news over the last few months. Awareness was of course higher among tax intermediaries, but it still did not appear as a hot topic for most. When referring to offshore tax havens, participants used the terms Panama Papers and Paradise Papers alternatively. Most participants remained rather vague about the issue.
In the SME/tax intermediary groups, there was fairly broad knowledge that offshore tax havens are often not illegal. Participants tended to say only large corporations and very wealthy individuals can afford the “fancy” tax lawyers or services from the large accounting firms to be able to benefit from offshore tax havens. In the general public, most participants were not aware of the difference between offshore tax havens and issues like tax evasion. All forms of not reporting revenue were seen as part of the issue of the same privileged few escaping their burden here and of the average Canadian having to pay for those who have enough to avoid paying taxes. The sense was that this has always been going on and will likely continue.
When asked if they knew whether the CRA was doing something about the tax haven issue, most said they had not heard anything related to that specific topic. A minority of participants said they had heard that the CRA had taken action but could not be more specific. There was a sense of confidence that the CRA must be doing something about it, but again the reference as to what it was doing was rather vague.
In the SME/tax intermediary groups, participants mentioned that the CRA cannot act against tax havens, which are often times entirely legal. Therefore, participants indicated that the solution is legislative and not about the CRA itself. While there is a broad understanding of the complexity of the issue for the CRA, most comments again tended to be fairly general on the matter.
When asked what they think of companies that get creative and/or find loopholes in the government system, participants in the general population groups were rather negative and accusatory, while the perspective in the SME\tax intermediary groups was different. These participants were of the opinion that if the corporations or individuals are acting legally, then “good for them.” Although they believed that any general loopholes should be closed and that governments should work together globally to solve the problem, they tended to remain quite balanced in their comments about the role the CRA could play in the short term.
When asked if they thought tax havens are a bigger problem than the underground Economy, both the general population and the SME/tax intermediary groups tended to lean on the side of offshore tax havens representing a larger portion of the government’s loss in tax revenue. However, participants admitted they did not know that for a fact. They tended to comment that while the number of corporations or individuals who benefit from offshore tax havens may be small, the total amount of money leaving the country is likely larger than the sum of all the “small” amounts of money being sunk into the domestic underground Economy. While the opposite view was also heard, it remained the minority view in all groups.
Some participants in the general population groups added that offshore tax havens should be the priority because it represents money leaving Canada, while money transacted in the underground Economy stays in the country and may even be spent on taxable products and services later.
The ACR is structured according to two main research phases: 1) a qualitative phase consisting of focus groups and 2) a quantitative phase consisting of surveys. The target population for this entire research project comprised three main groups: 1) the general adult population of Canada, 2) SME decision-makers, and 3) tax intermediaries (that is to say, people who work with small business clients).
Leger conducted 16 focus groups in six different locations across Canada: Toronto, Brampton, Calgary, Halifax, Montréal, and Sherbrooke. All focus groups were done between January 22, 2018, and February 5, 2018. All groups were held in English except for the French groups held in the province of Quebec (Montréal and Sherbrooke).
The target population for this entire research project consisted of three main groups:
The Annual Corporate Research includes three research components:
This report focuses on qualitative findings only. This portion of the research project will serve to provide more in-depth details, opinions, and perceptions, which would not be captured through a quantitative survey. Conducted concomitantly with the quantitative phase, the qualitative phase provides a more comprehensive analysis of themes raised in the surveys.
Responsibilities of the Research Firm
Leger was responsible for recruiting the participants, reviewing the recruitment and moderation guides, managing the technical aspect of the project (facilities and audio, video recording), moderating the groups and reporting in English.
Participants from the general population received an honorarium of $100, while SME decision-makers received $225, and tax intermediaries received $250.
The recruitment screener informed participants of their rights under Canada’s privacy legislation and of the Standards for the Conduct of Government of Canada Public Opinion Research. Specifically, confidentiality was guaranteed and it was made clear that participation was voluntary.
As outlined in the statement of work, focus groups were conducted in six (6) different locations: Halifax, Montréal, Sherbrooke, Toronto, Brampton, and Calgary. Four separate groups—one with each specific CRA target—were conducted in Halifax (4) and Calgary (4). Two separate groups—one with SME decision-makers and another one with tax intermediaries—were conducted in Montréal (2) and Toronto (2). Two separate groups— one with low/middle income Canadians and another with high income Canadians—were conducted in Sherbrooke (2) and Brampton (2). A total of 16 groups were planned under this mandate.
The following table provides further details on the focus group sessions.
Table 3: Details of the Focus Group Sessions
| City | Participants | Target | Time | Language | Date |
| Toronto, ON | 8 | SME decision-makers($225) | 5:30 p.m. | EN | January 22, 2018 |
| Toronto, ON | 10 | Tax intermediaries($250) | 7:30 p.m. | EN | January 22, 2018 |
| Brampton, ON | 8 | Low/Middle income($100) | 5:30 p.m. | EN | January 23, 2018 |
| Brampton, ON | 10 | High income($100) | 7:30 p.m. | EN | January 23, 2018 |
| Montréal, QC | 10 | SME decision-makers($225) | 5:30 p.m. | FR | January 24, 2018 |
| Montréal, QC | 9 | Tax intermediaries($250) | 7:30 p.m. | FR | January 24, 2018 |
| Halifax, NS | 10 | Low/Middle income($100) | 5:30 p.m. | EN | January 29, 2018 |
| Halifax, NS | 6 | High income($100) | 7:30 p.m. | EN | January 29, 2018 |
| Halifax, NS | 9 | SME decision-makers($225) | 5:30 p.m. | EN | January 30, 2018 |
| Halifax, NS | 7 | Tax intermediaries($250) | 7:30 p.m. | EN | January 30, 2018 |
| Calgary, AB | 8 | Low/Middle income($100) | 5:30 p.m. | EN | January 31, 2018 |
| Calgary, AB | 10 | High income($100) | 7:30 p.m. | EN | January 31, 2018 |
| Calgary, AB | 9 | SME decision-makers($225) | 5:30 p.m. | EN | February 1, 2018 |
| Calgary, AB | 10 | Tax intermediaries($250) | 7:30 p.m. | EN | February 1, 2018 |
| Sherbrooke, QC | 8 | Low/Middle income($100) | 5:30 p.m. | FR | February 5, 2018 |
| Sherbrooke, QC | 9 | High income($100) | 7:30 p.m. | FR | February 5, 2018 |
| Total | 141 |
All of the sessions were held in professional discussion group facilities, except for those in Sherbrooke where groups had to be conducted in a hotel conference room.
The focus groups in Quebec (Montréal and Sherbrooke) were conducted in French, while the other focus groups were conducted in English. Leger was in charge of recruiting 10 participants for each group to ensure a minimum of 8 participants.
All groups were moderated by Leger professionals authorized under the current Government of Canada standing offer.
For tracking and comparability purposes, the methodology used for the quantitative portion (type of data collection, sampling, and questionnaire) is the same as for previous ACR editions. Only small changes were made to the survey tools.
Quantitative research was conducted over the phone using Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) technology. This approach is the most appropriate to measure and explore the opinion of different subgroups of the Canadian population. It also provides highly representative results and the ability to make statistical inferences.
As a Certified Gold-Seal MRIA Member, Leger adheres to the most stringent guidelines for quantitative research. The survey was registered with the MRIA in accordance with Government of Canada requirements for quantitative research, including the MRIA Code of Conduct and the Standards of the Conduct of Government of Canada Public Opinion Research – Series B – Fieldwork and Data Tabulation for Telephone Surveys.
Respondents were assured of the voluntary, confidential, and anonymous nature of the research. As with all research conducted by Leger, any information that could identify participants was removed from the data in accordance with the Privacy Act of Canada.
All interviews were conducted out of our Montréal call centre. This call centre is divided into three distinct divisions: One consisting of English-only interviewers, one of French-only interviewers, and one of bilingual interviewers. This ensures that all telephone surveys can easily be conducted in either official language.
Fieldwork for the survey was conducted from January 16 to February 21, 2018. The national response rate for the survey was 19.22%. Complete call dispositions are presented in the following section. A pre-test of 39 interviews conducted in both official languages was completed on January 16 and 17, 2018. More specifically, 16 interviews were conducted in French and 23 were conducted in English. Survey interviews lasted 18 minutes on average.
To achieve data reliability in all subgroups, a total sample of 1,647 adult Canadians was surveyed in all regions of the country. Only one adult respondent was surveyed per selected household. The national margin of error for the survey is +/- 2.42% (19 times out of 20).
A sample of 1,647 adult Canadians was drawn using a stratified regional sampling approach. Quotas were applied to ensure that a sufficient number of interviews were completed within each region of Canada. The following table shows the regional quotas.
The regional distribution was as follows:
Table 4: Regional Quotas| Region | Quotas | Effective Sample |
| Atlantic Region (NB, NS, PEI, NFL) | 175 | 175 |
| Quebec | 375 | 375 |
| Ontario/Nunavut | 525 | 525 |
| Prairies (including AB)/NWT | 325 | 372 |
| BC/Yukon | 200 | 200 |
| Total | 1,600 | 1,647 |
Canadians 18-34
It is now part of Leger’s usual way of conducting telephone surveys to automatically inject an approximate cell phone sample of 25%–30% (but not necessarily cell phone-only households) into our base samples. It helps us reach the more mobile segments of the population (namely, more affluent and younger Canadians). This way, we naturally reach approximately 20%–22% of Canadians between 18 to 34 years of age.
Since younger Canadians (18 to 34) represent 27.3% of the actual population, we used a firm quota for this cohort to ensure that we had a minimum of 400 youths in our final sample. This strategy worked well, as we obtained 411 young Canadians in our final sample. Lastly, the statistical weighting of results helped correct the slight discrepancy between our sample and the actual population of Canada.
Leger weighted the results of this survey by age, gender, region, and language (mother tongue) based on data from Statistics Canada’s 2016 national census.
Phone numbers were generated according to a stratified regional sampling approach. Telephone interviewing was conducted using Leger’s Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) technology. Leger’s CATI system handles sampling electronically, randomly selecting and dialling the phone number to call. To ensure perfect coverage of a population, the sample consisted of residential phone numbers located in all Canadian provinces and territories, as well as cell phone numbers. Quotas were applied to ensure a sufficient number of individuals were interviewed within each region of Canada. In addition to these regional quotas, fieldwork was conducted using soft quotas to ensure a good distribution of respondents in terms of gender (men and women) and language (English and French-speaking Canadians).
Pan-Canadian Sample
We constructed a pan-Canadian sample of telephone numbers. All numbers were randomly drawn to generate this core sample. Each telephone number for this sampling frame was associated with a Canadian province. Subsequently, we used this pan-Canadian sample to randomly draw numbers by province/region in proportion to the provincial/regional quotas that were expected for the project.
Low response rates threaten a survey’s reliability and validity. Based on Leger’s experience surveying various populations, we have established the following methods to maximize response rates:
The overall response rate for this study is 19.22%. The response rate is calculated using the following formula: (Completed interviews + Out of sample) / (Total sample - Invalid sample). This is the Market Research and Intelligence Association’s standard calculation method for the response rate of a telephone survey. The table below presents the calculation details.
Table 5. Call Disposition and Response Rate
| TOTAL SAMPLE | 52,324 |
| Invalid sample | 26,027 |
| No service | 25,447 |
| Non-residential | 356 |
| Fax/Modem/Pager | 213 |
| Duplicate | 11 |
| Numbers outside of sample | 3,407 |
| Language Barrier | 821 |
| Unqualified (deaf-mute, etc.) | 603 |
| Quota attained | 1,983 |
| EFFECTIVE SAMPLE | 22,890 |
| Non-completed interviews | 21,243 |
| Refusal | 8,668 |
| No answer | 5,160 |
| Answering machine | 6,182 |
| Line busy | 393 |
| Incomplete | 523 |
| Appointment | 317 |
| COMPLETED INTERVIEWS | 1,647 |
| Response rate | 19,22% |
Even if it seems to be low, a participation rate of 19.22% is the average when conducting national telephone surveys. National telephone surveys’ participation rate rarely goes beyond 25%.
Nevertheless, a basic comparison of the unweighted and weighted sample sizes was conducted to identify potential non-response bias that could be introduced by lower response rates among specific demographic subgroups (see tables below). As is typically the case for a telephone survey mainly targeting homes, younger individuals are more difficult to reach. To compensate for this, Leger injected a sample of cell phone numbers of about 30% into the base sample. Using this procedure, we see that our unweighted sample closely matches the weighted numbers obtained using Statistics Canada’s updated data.
The table below presents the geographic distribution of respondents, before and after weighting. The slight imbalance stems from quotas that were set to obtain large enough samples in all regions of the country in order to ensure accurate analyses. The weighting process mainly adjusted the weight of Ontario, which had been slightly under-represented in the sample in order to allow for more respondents in the smaller regions.
Table 6. Unweighted and Weighted Sample Distribution by Province
| Province / Territory | Weighted | Unweighted |
| Atlantic | 113 | 175 |
| Quebec | 387 | 375 |
| Ontario | 627 | 525 |
| Prairies | 298 | 372 |
| British Columbia | 222 | 200 |
The following tables present the demographic distribution of respondents according to gender, age, first language, education, and household income.
With respect to gender, we see that weighting adjusted the proportion of female respondents vs. male respondents, as women were slightly underrepresented in the final sample.
Table 7. Unweighted and Weighted Sample Distribution by Gender
| Gender | Weighted | Unweighted |
| Male | 800 | 872 |
| Female | 847 | 775 |
As shown in the following table, only small adjustments were made at the age level to obtain a final sample representative of the age groups of the Canadian population.
Table 8. Unweighted and Weighted Sample Distribution by Age Group
| Age | Weighted | Unweighted |
| Between 18 and 34 | 449 | 411 |
| Between 35 and 54 | 562 | 638 |
| 55 or older | 635 | 596 |
The last tables present distribution based on education and household income, although these variables were not included in the weighting procedures.
Table 9. Unweighted and Weighted Sample Distribution by Education Level
| Education Level | Weighted | Unweighted |
| High school diploma or less | 534 | 377 |
| Some university | 65 | 88 |
| University/College graduate | 1017 | 1162 |
Table 10. Unweighted and Weighted Sample Distribution by Household Income
| Household Income | Weighted | Unweighted |
| Less than $40,000 | 477 | 413 |
| Between $40,000 and $79,999 | 444 | 450 |
| Between $80,000 and $119,999 | 269 | 300 |
| $120,000 and above | 256 | 298 |
However, there is no evidence from the data that having achieved a different age or gender distribution prior to weighting would have significantly changed the results for this study. The relatively small sizes of the weights and of the differences in responses between various subgroups suggest that data quality was not affected. The weight that was applied corrected the initial imbalance for data analysis purposes and no further manipulations were necessary.
Occasionally, some subgroups are under or overrepresented in a sample compared to the general population. The weighting of a sample makes it possible to correct the differences that exist between the representation of the various subgroups of this sample and what is usually observed in the entire population under study. The weighting factors are therefore the weight given to each respondent corresponding to a subgroup of the sample.
The following tables present the weight given to each target in the sample.
Table 11. Weight by Gender and Age
Table 12. Weight by Gender and Region
Table 13. Weight by Education Level
Quantitative research was conducted via an online panel using Computer Aided Web Interviewing (CAWI) technology. This approach is the most appropriate to reach very specific targets, such as SME decision-makers and tax intermediaries. Leger obtained the business sample from its trusted partner ASDE. As a professional sampler, ASDE was able to provide a targeted sample list for the purposes of this research.
As a Certified Gold-Seal MRIA Member, Leger adheres to the most stringent guidelines for quantitative research. The survey was registered with the MRIA in accordance with Government of Canada requirements for quantitative research, including the MRIA Code of Conduct and the Standards of the Conduct of Government of Canada Public Opinion Research – Series A – Fieldwork and Data Tabulation for Online Surveys.
Respondents were assured of the voluntary, confidential, and anonymous nature the research. As with all research conducted by Leger, any information that could identify participants was removed from the data in accordance with the Privacy Act of Canada.
The French and English questionnaires are available in the appendix.
A panel-based Internet survey with a sample of 605 Canadian SME decision-makers and tax intermediaries (302 SME decision-makers and 303 tax intermediaries) was conducted by Leger.
Respondents for this survey were selected from among those who volunteered/registered to participate in online surveys. The results of these types of surveys cannot be described as statistically projectable to the target population. Since the sample is based on people who offered to participate, no sampling error estimate can be calculated.
The Expertise of a Team Dedicated to Online Surveys
The LegerWeb team includes some ten professionals and technicians who specialize in information technology and e-marketing and who ensure follow-up from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. every day of the week. Most members of our team come from the field of telephone polling and face-to-face interviews and draw on their mastery of the art of the interview.
With its customer support, the LegerWeb team provides panellists with all the technical information and assistance they may need when answering an online survey.
The LegerWeb team works in close collaboration with the research and statistics teams and shares any pertinent information concerning a polling project. Constant communication allows us to respond very quickly, to detect errors or problems as soon as they arise, and to resolve them in record time.
Software developed by the LegerWeb team to conduct online surveys was designed to allow maximum flexibility, efficiency, and security when administering the questionnaire. Furthermore, the team performs continuous monitoring of each online survey.
Finally, it should be specified that Leger strives to develop its online polling expertise by implementing the same quality standards and criteria from its renowned telephone surveys.
Quality Controls
For all of our quantitative research projects, Leger has established quality control measures that are identical to the ISO process, in which all stages are verified, which also allows us to check previous stages. In practical terms, the quality assurance process is based on the following elements:
We consider that the implementation of all these procedures is a guarantee of optimal quality when conducting online surveys.
Data Cleaning
Upon completion of data collection, Leger’s data analysts and data processing department thoroughly clean the data, ensuring that:
The data was checked and cleaned after the first night of fieldwork and at project completion. During analysis, all numbers were double-checked and any outliers were double-checked to ensure the data had been entered accurately in the first place.
Fieldwork for the survey was conducted from January 17 to February 1, 2018. A pre-test of 52 interviews conducted in both official languages was completed on January 17 and 18, 2018. More specifically, 9 interviews were conducted in French and 22 were conducted in English. Survey interviews lasted 10 minutes on average.
Detailed statistical tables of results are available under separate cover.
The overall response rate for this study is 10.14%.
Below is the calculation of the web survey’s participation rate. The calculation of the participation rate is as follows: Participation rate = Number of completed questionnaire / Total number of invitations sent.
Table 14. Participation Rate
| ITEMS | n= |
| Total number of invitations sent | 5,967 |
| Total number of clicks on the link | 728 |
| Number of completed questionnaires | 605 |
| Number of screened out | 364 |
| Number of incompletes | 123 |
| Participation Rate | 10.14% |
An effective response rate of 10.14% is an average participation rate for a national web survey of 605 respondents conducted in about two weeks with a targeted sample of corporate respondents. This response rate minimizes the risks of an important non-response bias in the survey, as it decreases the likelihood of any particular audience not responding to the survey.
Hello, my name is __________. I'm calling from [SUPPLIER NAME], a national public opinion research firm. First off, let me assure you that we are not trying to sell you anything. On behalf of the Government of Canada, we’re organizing a series of discussion groups to explore various issues of importance to the country.
EXPLAIN FOCUS GROUPS. About eight to ten people will be taking part, all of them randomly recruited just like you. The discussion will last no more than two hours and will take place during the evening. For their time, participants will receive an honorarium of $100. But before we invite you to attend, we need to ask you a few questions to ensure that we get a good mix and variety of people. May I ask you a few questions? This will take about 5 minutes.
Participation is voluntary and individual’s decision to take part will not affect any dealings they may have with the Government of Canada. We are interested in hearing your opinions, no attempt will be made to sell you anything or change your point of view. The format is a "round table" discussion lead by a research professional. All opinions expressed will remain anonymous and views will be grouped together to ensure no particular individual can be identified.
READ TO ALL: "This call may be monitored or audio taped for quality control and evaluation purposes."
ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION IF NEEDED:
S1) Do you or any member of your household work in or has retired from: READ LIST. IF "YES" TO ANY, THANK AND TERMINATE
S2) Are you a Canadian citizen at least 20 years old who normally resides in the [XX] area?
S3) How long have you lived in [CITY]?__________TERMINATE IF LESS THAN 2 YEARS.
S4) Are you the head or co-head of your household?
S5) Have you ever attended a consumer group discussion, an interview or survey which was arranged in advance and for which you received a sum of money?
S6) How long ago was it?__________TERMINATE IF IN THE PAST 6 MONTHS
S7) How many consumer discussion groups have you attended in the past 5 years?__________TERMINATE IF MORE THAN 4 DISCUSSION GROUPS
ASK ALL
Q1)For each of the following statements, I would like to know whether you agree or disagree. Please respond using a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 means you strongly disagree and 10 means you strongly agree. How about …
Q2) Could you please tell me what age category you fall in to? Are you... ENSURE GOOD MIX PER GROUP
Q3)What is your current employment status?
Q4) And what sector of the Economy do you work in? ENSURE A GOOD MIX
Q5) Including yourself, how many people above the age of 18 are there in your household?
Q6a) [IF Q5=1 ASK] Was your household’s income for 2016 greater or less than 75 thousand dollars?
Q6b) [IF Q5=2 ASK] Was your household’s income for 2016 greater or less than 100 thousand dollars?
Q6c) [IF Q6A OR Q6B =2 ASK] And would that be:
Q7) Could you please tell me what is the highest level of education that you have attained? ENSURE GOOD MIX PER GROUP.
Q8) DO NOT ASK – NOTE GENDER. ENSURE 50-50 SPLIT
Invitation
Q9) Great, you qualify for one of our focus group sessions. Would you be available to attend a focus group on (DATE @ TIME)? It will last approximately 2 hours.
Q10) Participants in group discussions are asked to voice their opinions and thoughts, how comfortable are you in voicing your opinions in front of others (IF APPROPRIATE: In English/French)? Are you (read list)
Q11) Sometimes participants are asked to read text, review images or write down things during the discussion. Is there any reason why you could not participate?
TERMINATE IF RESPONDENT OFFERS ANY REASON FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY OR TAKE PART IN THE DISCUSSION IN ANY WAY, SUCH AS SIGHT OR HEARING PROBLEM, A WRITTEN OR VERBAL LANGUAGE PROBLEM.
ALSO TERMINATE IF YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT PARTICIPANTS’ ABILITY TO BE UNDERSTOOD IN THE LANGUAGE TO BE USED DURING SESSION.
As I mentioned earlier, the group discussion will take place the evening of, DATE @ TIME for 2 hours and participants will receive $100 for their time. Would you be willing to attend?
Privacy Questions
Now I have a few questions that relate to privacy, your personal information and the research process. We will need your consent on a few issues that enable us to conduct our research. As I run through these questions, please feel free to ask me any questions you would like clarified.
P1) First, we will be providing the hosting facility and session moderator with a list of respondents’ names and profiles (screener responses) so that they can sign you into the group. This information will not be shared with the Government of Canada department organizing this research. Do we have your permission to do this? I assure you it will be kept strictly confidential.
We need to provide the facility hosting the session and the moderator with the names and background of the people attending the focus group because only the individuals invited are allowed in the session and the facility and moderator must have this information for verification purposes. Please be assured that this information will be kept strictly confidential. GO TO P1A.
P1a) Now that I’ve explained this, do I have your permission to provide your name and profile to the facility?
P2) An audio and/or video tape of the group session will be produced for research purposes. The tapes will be used only by the research professional to assist in preparing a report on the research findings and will be destroyed once the report is completed.
Do you agree to be audio and/or video taped for research purposes only?
It is necessary for the research process for us to audio/video tape the session as the researcher needs this material to complete the report.
P2a) Now that I’ve explained this, do I have your permission for audio/video taping?
P3) Each month we submit the names of individuals that have participated in our focus groups to the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association Qualitative Central system. Qualitative Central serves as a centralized database to review participation in qualitative research and focus groups. You will not be contacted for any reason whatsoever as a result of being on this list.
Do we have your permission to submit your name and phone number to MRIA’s Qualitative Central system?
P3a) To participate in this focus group, we must have your permission to add your name to the Qualitative Central system as it is the only way for us to ensure the integrity of the research process and track participation in qualitative research. The system is maintained by the industry body, the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association, and is solely used to track your participation in qualitative research (such as focus groups). You will not be contacted for any reason whatsoever as a result of being on this list.
Now that I've explained this, do I have your permission to add your name to our qualitative central list?
AS REQUIRED, ADDITIONAL INFO FOR THE INTERVIEWER:
Please be assured that this information is kept confidential and is strictly accessed and used by professional market research firms to review participation and prevent "professional respondents" from attending sessions. Research firms participating in MRIA’s Qualitative Central require your consent to be eligible to participate in the focus group - the system helps ensure the integrity of the research process.
AS REQUIRED, NOTE ABOUT MRIA:
The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association is a non-profit organization for marketing research professionals engaged in marketing, advertising, social, and political research. The Association's mission is to be the leader in promoting excellence in the practice of marketing and social research and in the value of market information.
Invitation:
Do you have a pen handy so that I can give you the address where the group will be held? It will be held at:
We ask that you arrive fifteen minutes early to be sure you find parking, locate the facility and have time to check-in with the hosts. The hosts will be checking respondents’ identification prior to the group, so please be sure to bring some personal identification with you (for example, a driver’s license). If you require glasses for reading, make sure you bring them with you as well.
As we are only inviting a small number of people, your participation is very important to us. If for some reason you are unable to attend, please call us so that we may get someone to replace you. Please do not arrange for your own replacement. You can reach us at [NUMBER] at our office. Please ask for [NAME]. Someone will call you the day before to remind you about the discussion.
So that we can call you to remind you about the focus group or contact you should there be any changes, can you please confirm your name and contact information for me? [READ INFO WE HAVE AND CHANGE AS NECESSARY.]
First name__________
Last Name_________
Email_________
Day time phone number_________
Night time phone number_________
If the respondent refuses to give his/her first or last name or phone number, please assure them that this information will be kept strictly confidential in accordance with the privacy law and that it is used strictly to contact them to confirm their attendance and to inform them of any changes to the focus group. If they still refuse, THANK & TERMINATE.
Introduction
*** READ THE APPLICABLE INTRO***
FOR DAYTIME CALLING ONLY
Hello, my name is __________. I'm calling from [SUPPLIER NAME], a national public opinion research firm. First off, let me assure you that we are not trying to sell you anything. On behalf of the Government of Canada, we’re organizing a series of discussion groups to explore various issues of importance to the country.
A. We are looking to speak to tax-intermediaries who are individuals who work with small business clients on tax-related or payroll matters. Would you be this person?
B. We are also looking to speak to someone who has shared or sole decision making responsibilities in your organization. Would you be this person?
EXPLAIN FOCUS GROUPS. About eight to ten people will be taking part, all of them randomly recruited just like you. The discussion will last no more than two hours and will take place during the evening. For their time, participants will receive an honorarium of [SME: $225 / INTERMEDIARY: $250]. But before we invite you to attend, we need to ask you a few questions to ensure that we get a good mix and variety of people. May I ask you a few questions? This will take about 5 minutes.
FOR EVENING CALLING ONLY
Hello, my name is ___________. I'm calling from [supplier name], a national public opinion research firm. First off, let me assure you that we are not trying to sell you anything. On behalf of the Government of Canada we’re organizing a series of discussion groups to explore various issues of importance to the country. Can I speak with/am I speaking with ____(CHECK NAME ON THE COMPUTER SCREEN).
We are looking to speak to tax-intermediaries who are individuals who work with small business clients on tax-related or payroll matters as well as sole or shared decision makers within organizations.
EXPLAIN FOCUS GROUPS. About eight to ten people will be taking part, all of them randomly recruited just like you. The discussion will last no more than two hours and will take place during the evening. For their time, participants will receive an honorarium of [SME: $225 / INTERMEDIARY: $250]. But before we invite you to attend, we need to ask you a few questions to ensure that we get a good mix and variety of people. May I ask you a few questions? This will take about 5 minutes.
Participation is voluntary and individual’s decision to take part will not affect any dealings they may have with the Government of Canada. We are interested in hearing your opinions, no attempt will be made to sell you anything or change your point of view. The format is a “round table” discussion lead by a research professional. All opinions expressed will remain anonymous and views will be grouped together to ensure no particular individual can be identified.
READ TO ALL: "This call may be monitored or audio taped for quality control and evaluation purposes."
ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION IF NEEDED:
1a) Do you or any member of your household work in or has retired from: READ LIST. IF "YES" TO ANY, THANK AND TERMINATE
1b) DO NOT ASK – NOTE GENDER. ENSURE 50-50 SPLIT
1c) Approximately how many employees, including yourself, does your company have? Please think of all full-time and permanent part-time personnel, from all locations or branches if more than one exists. ENSURE GOOD MIX PER GROUP
1d) Do you have sole or shared responsibilities in your organization for matters related to taxes, payroll, GST/HST preparation or bookkeeping? [AN OWNER WHO OVERSEES THE WHOLE ORGANIZATION WOULD QUALIFY HERE. PLEASE ENSURE THAT THE GROUPS ARE NOT COMPRISED ONLY OF ACCOUNTANTS AND BOOKKEEPERS.]
1d a) What is your job title ? (if acceptable job titles – Go to 1e)
[Small and medium-sized businesses (fewer than 100 employees) – include decision-makers or those involved in decisions related to tax matters, payroll, GST/HST preparation, or bookkeeping. Acceptable job titles include:]
1e) Do you personally deal with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) or does this fall under someone else’s responsibilities?
1f) Are you a tax-intermediary, that is, someone who works with small business clients on tax-related or payroll matters? For this study, small businesses are defined as firms with fewer than 100 employees. (IF NEEDED: For example, people working at H&R block, accounting firms, etc.)
INTERVIEWER NOTE:
Respondent qualifies as follows:
SME Groups 1,3,5,7: fewer than 100 employees (Q1c=1-5), has decision-making responsibilities (Q1d=1) and deals with the CRA (Q1e=1).
Tax Intermediary Groups 2,4,6,8: fewer than 100 employees (Q1c=1-5) and is a tax intermediary (Q1f=1).
*If a respondent qualifies for both, place them in the Tax Intermediary Group.
2)[ASK SMEs ONLY:] For each of the following statements, I would like to know whether you agree or disagree. Please respond using a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 means you strongly disagree and 10 means you strongly agree. How about …
3) Before we ask you further qualification questions, would you be available to attend a focus group on Date, at Time? It will last no more than 2 hours, and as mentioned, you would be receiving [SME: $225.00 / INTERMEDIARY: $250.00].
4) Participants in group discussions are asked to voice their opinions and thoughts, how comfortable are you in voicing your opinions in front of others (IF APPROPRIATE: In English/French)? Are you (read list)
5a) Have you participated in a focus group before? A focus group brings together a few people in order to know their opinion about a given subject.
5b) And how many of these sessions have you attended? _____ IF >3 THANK AND TERMINATE. OTHERWISE CONTINUE
5c) Have you been invited to participate in one of these sessions in the next few weeks?
Sometimes participants are asked to read text, review images or write down things during the discussion. Is there any reason why you could not participate?
TERMINATE IF RESPONDENT OFFERS ANY REASON FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY OR TAKE PART IN THE DISCUSSION IN ANY WAY, SUCH AS SIGHT OR HEARING PROBLEM, A WRITTEN OR VERBAL LANGUAGE PROBLEM.
ALSO TERMINATE IF YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT PARTICIPANTS’ ABILITY TO BE UNDERSTOOD IN THE LANGUAGE TO BE USED DURING SESSION.
As I mentioned earlier, the group discussion will take place the evening of, DATE @ TIME for 2 hours and participants will receive $100 for their time. Would you be willing to attend?
Privacy Questions
Now I have a few questions that relate to privacy, your personal information and the research process. We will need your consent on a few issues that enable us to conduct our research. As I run through these questions, please feel free to ask me any questions you would like clarified.
P1) First, we will be providing the hosting facility and session moderator with a list of respondents’ names and profiles (screener responses) so that they can sign you into the group. This information will not be shared with the Government of Canada department organizing this research. Do we have your permission to do this? I assure you it will be kept strictly confidential.
We need to provide the facility hosting the session and the moderator with the names and background of the people attending the focus group because only the individuals invited are allowed in the session and the facility and moderator must have this information for verification purposes. Please be assured that this information will be kept strictly confidential. GO TO P1A.
P1a) Now that I’ve explained this, do I have your permission to provide your name and profile to the facility?
P2) An audio and/or video tape of the group session will be produced for research purposes. The tapes will be used only by the research professional to assist in preparing a report on the research findings and will be destroyed once the report is completed.
Do you agree to be audio and/or video taped for research purposes only?
It is necessary for the research process for us to audio/video tape the session as the researcher needs this material to complete the report.
P2a) Now that I’ve explained this, do I have your permission for audio/video taping?
P3) Each month we submit the names of individuals that have participated in our focus groups to the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association Qualitative Central system. Qualitative Central serves as a centralized database to review participation in qualitative research and focus groups. You will not be contacted for any reason whatsoever as a result of being on this list.
Do we have your permission to submit your name and phone number to MRIA’s Qualitative Central system?
P3a) To participate in this focus group, we must have your permission to add your name to the Qualitative Central system as it is the only way for us to ensure the integrity of the research process and track participation in qualitative research. The system is maintained by the industry body, the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association, and is solely used to track your participation in qualitative research (such as focus groups). You will not be contacted for any reason whatsoever as a result of being on this list.
Now that I've explained this, do I have your permission to add your name to our qualitative central list?
AS REQUIRED, ADDITIONAL INFO FOR THE INTERVIEWER:
Please be assured that this information is kept confidential and is strictly accessed and used by professional market research firms to review participation and prevent "professional respondents" from attending sessions. Research firms participating in MRIA’s Qualitative Central require your consent to be eligible to participate in the focus group - the system helps ensure the integrity of the research process.
AS REQUIRED, NOTE ABOUT MRIA:
The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association is a non-profit organization for marketing research professionals engaged in marketing, advertising, social, and political research. The Association's mission is to be the leader in promoting excellence in the practice of marketing and social research and in the value of market information.
Invitation:
Do you have a pen handy so that I can give you the address where the group will be held? It will be held at:
We ask that you arrive fifteen minutes early to be sure you find parking, locate the facility and have time to check-in with the hosts. The hosts will be checking respondents’ identification prior to the group, so please be sure to bring some personal identification with you (for example, a driver’s license). If you require glasses for reading, make sure you bring them with you as well.
As we are only inviting a small number of people, your participation is very important to us. If for some reason you are unable to attend, please call us so that we may get someone to replace you. Please do not arrange for your own replacement. You can reach us at [NUMBER] at our office. Please ask for [NAME]. Someone will call you the day before to remind you about the discussion.
So that we can call you to remind you about the focus group or contact you should there be any changes, can you please confirm your name and contact information for me? [READ INFO WE HAVE AND CHANGE AS NECESSARY.]
First name__________
Last Name_________
Email_________
Day time phone number_________
Night time phone number_________
If the respondent refuses to give his/her first or last name or phone number, please assure them that this information will be kept strictly confidential in accordance with the privacy law and that it is used strictly to contact them to confirm their attendance and to inform them of any changes to the focus group. If they still refuse, THANK & TERMINATE.
Bonjour, je m’appelle _____________ et je vous téléphone de [NOM], une firme nationale de recherche sur l’opinion publique. Tout d’abord, laissez-moi vous assurer que nous n’essayons pas de vous vendre quoi que ce soit. Nous organisons des groupes de discussion pour le compte du gouvernement du Canada afin d’examiner divers enjeux d’importance pour le pays.
EXPLIQUEZ CE QUE SONT LES GROUPES DE DISCUSSION. . Environ huit à dix personnes qui auront tout comme vous été choisies au hasard prendront part à la discussion. La discussion ne durera pas plus de deux heures et aura lieu enn soirée. Les participants recevront une prime de 100 $ en guise de remerciement pour le temps qu’ils nous auront accordé. Toutefois, avant de vous inviter à vous joindre à nous, j’aimerais vous poser quelques questions pour m’assurer que le groupe sera composé d’une bonne diversité de personnes. Puis-je vous poser quelques questions? Cela devrait prendre 5 minutes tout au plus.
Votre participation est volontaire, et la décision d’y participer n’aura aucun effet sur les négociations que les participants pourraient avoir avec le gouvernement du Canada. Nous désirons connaître votre opinion et nous ne tenterons pas de vous vendre quoi que ce soit ni de vous faire changer d’avis. La discussion se déroulera sous forme de table ronde et sera animée par un professionnel de la recherche. Toutes les opinions exprimées demeureront anonymes et les points de vue seront regroupés de sorte qu’il sera impossible d’identifier qui que ce soit.
LISEZ À TOUS : « Cet appel peut être écouté ou enregistré à des fins d’évaluation ou de contrôle de la qualité. »
CLARIFICATIONS SUPPLÉMENTAIRES AU BESOIN :
S1) Est-ce que vous, ou un membre de votre ménage, travaillez ou avez déjà travaillé pour…? [LIRE LA LISTE] SI « OUI » À L’UNE DE CES OPTIONS, REMERCIEZ ET TERMINEZ
S2) Êtes-vous un(e) citoyen(ne) canadien(ne), âgé(e) d’au moins 20 ans, qui réside habituellement dans la région de [XX]?
S3) Depuis combien de temps vivez-vous à [VILLE]?______________ TERMINEZ SI MOINS DE 2 ANS.
S4) Êtes-vous le chef ou l’un des chefs de votre ménage?
S5) Avez-vous déjà participé à un groupe de discussion de consommateurs, à une entrevue ou à un sondage pour lequel ou laquelle vous avez été recruté(e) à l’avance et vous avez reçu une somme d’argent?
S6) Il y a combien de temps de cela?__________TERMINEZ SI AU COURS DES 6 DERNIERS MOIS
S7) À combien de groupes de discussion de consommateurs avez-vous participé au cours des 5 dernières années? __________ TERMINEZ SI PLUS DE 4 GROUPES DE DISCUSSION
POSEZ À TOUS
Q1)Pouvez-vous me dire à quel groupe d’âge vous appartenez? Avez-vous...?
Q2) Quelle est votre situation d’emploi actuelle?
Q3) Dans quel secteur d’activité travaillez-vous? BONNE DIVERSITÉ
Q4) En vous incluant, combien de personnes de plus de 18 ans composent votre ménage?
Q5a) [SI Q4=1, POSEZ] En 2016, le revenu de votre ménage a-t-il été supérieur ou inférieur à 75 000 dollars?
Q5b) [SI Q4=2, POSEZ] En 2016, le revenu de votre ménage a-t-il été supérieur ou inférieur à 100 000 dollars?
Q5c) [SI Q5A OU Q5B =2, POSEZ] Et a-t-il été :
Q6) Pourriez-vous me dire quel est le plus haut niveau de scolarité que vous avez atteint? BONNE DIVERSITÉ
Q7) NE DEMANDEZ PAS – NOTEZ LE SEXE. RÉPARTITION 50-50
Invitation
Q8) Excellent, vous êtes admissible pour participer à l’un de nos groupes de discussion. Seriez-vous disponible pour participer à un groupe de discussion le (DATE À HEURE)? La séance durera environ 2 heures.
Q9) Nous demandons aux participants des groupes de discussion d’exprimer leurs opinions et de verbaliser leurs pensées. Dans quelle mesure êtes-vous à l’aise d’exprimer votre opinion (AU BESOIN : en français/anglais) devant d’autres personnes? Êtes-vous…? (lisez la liste)
Q10) Parfois, on demande aux participants de lire un texte, d’examiner des images ou d’écrire des choses pendant la discussion. Y a-t-il une raison pour laquelle vous ne pourriez pas participer?
METTRE FIN À L’APPEL SI LE RÉPONDANT DONNE UNE RAISON D’INCAPACITÉ À COMMUNIQUER EFFICACEMENT OU À PARTICIPER À LA DISCUSSION D’UNE QUELCONQUE FAÇON, COMME UN PROBLÈME DE VUE OU D’OUÏE, UN PROBLÈME DE LANGAGE ÉCRIT OU VERBAL.
METTRE AUSSI FIN À L’APPEL SI VOUS AVEZ DES PRÉOCCUPATIONS CONCERNANT LA CAPACITÉ DES PARTICIPANTS À SE FAIRE COMPRENDRE DANS LA LANGUE UTILISÉE PENDANT LA SÉANCE.
Comme je l’ai mentionné plus tôt, le groupe de discussion aura lieu en soirée le Jour Date Mois @ Heure et durera 2 heures. Les participants recevront une prime de 100 $ en guise de remerciement pour le temps qu’ils nous auront accordé. Accepteriez-vous d’y participer?
Enjeux relatifs à la confidentialité :
J’aurais maintenant quelques questions à vous poser à propos de la confidentialité, de vos renseignements personnels et du déroulement de la recherche. Nous devrons obtenir votre permission par rapport à certains sujets pour pouvoir effectuer notre recherche. Lorsque je vous poserai ces questions, n’hésitez pas à me demander de les clarifier si vous en ressentez le besoin.
P1) Tout d’abord, nous fournirons une liste des noms et des profils (réponses au questionnaire) des participants aux hôtes et au modérateur, afin qu’ils puissent vous inscrire. Votre information ne sera pas partager avec le département du gouvernement du Canada qui organise ces sessions. Acceptez-vous que nous leur transmettions ces renseignements? Je peux vous assurer que ceux-ci demeureront strictement confidentiels.
Malheureusement, nous devons donner votre nom et votre profil aux hôtes et au modérateur du groupe de discussion, puisque seuls les gens qui sont invités à participer peuvent prendre part à la séance. Les hôtes et le modérateur ont besoin de ces renseignements à des fins de vérification uniquement. Soyez assuré(e) que ces renseignements demeureront strictement confidentiels. PASSEZ À P1A
P1a)Maintenant que je vous ai expliqué cela, acceptez-vous que nous transmettions votre nom et votre profil aux hôtes et au modérateur du groupe de discussion?
P2) Il y aura un enregistrement audiovisuel de la séance et celui-ci servira uniquement à des fins de recherche. Les enregistrements seront uniquement utilisés par un professionnel de la recherche pour préparer le rapport sur les résultats de la recherche.
Acceptez-vous qu’un enregistrement audiovisuel de la séance soit effectué?
Malheureusement, nous devons faire un enregistrement audiovisuel de la séance puisque le professionnel de la recherche en a besoin pour rédiger son rapport.
P2a) Maintenant que je vous ai expliqué cela, acceptez-vous que nous fassions un enregistrement audiovisuel de la séance?
P3) Chaque mois, nous soumettons le nom des personnes qui ont participé à nos séances au Registre central de recherche qualitative de l'Association de la recherche et de l'intelligence marketing. Le Registre central de recherche qualitative est une base de données centrale qui vérifie la participation aux entrevues de recherches qualitatives. Personne ne communiquera avec vous parce que votre nom se trouve sur cette liste.
Nous permettez-vous de soumettre votre nom et votre numéro de téléphone au Registre central de recherche qualitative de l’ARIM?
P3a) Malheureusement, pour que vous puissiez participer à cette entrevue, nous devons avoir votre permission pour ajouter votre nom au Registre central de recherche qualitative puisqu’il s’agit du seul moyen qui nous permet d’assurer l’intégrité du processus de recherche et de faire le suivi de la participation aux recherches qualitatives. Le système est tenu à jour par l’Association de la recherche et de l’intelligence marketing et il est uniquement utilisé pour faire le suivi de votre participation aux recherches qualitatives (comme les groupes de discussion). Personne ne communiquera avec vous parce que votre nom se trouve sur cette liste.
Maintenant que je vous ai expliqué cela, acceptez-vous que nous ajoutions votre nom au Registre central de recherche qualitative?
AU BESOIN, RENSEIGNEMENTS SUPPLÉMENTAIRES POUR L’INTERVIEWEUR :
Soyez assuré(e) que cette information demeurera confidentielle et seules les firmes de recherche marketing professionnelles pourront y accéder et l’utiliser pour vérifier la participation et empêcher les « répondants professionnels » de participer aux séances. Les firmes de recherche qui participent au Registre central de recherche qualitative de l’ARIM ont besoin de votre autorisation avant que vous ne soyez admissible à participer au groupe. Cette procédure contribue à assurer l’intégrité du processus de recherche.
AU BESOIN, NOTE À PROPOS DE L’ARIM :
L’Association de la recherche et de l’intelligence marketing est un organisme à but non lucratif qui regroupe des professionnels de la recherche marketing impliqués dans le marketing, la publicité, les recherches sociales et politiques. La mission de l’Association est d’être le leader dans la promotion de l’excellence dans la pratique du marketing et des recherches sociales ainsi que dans la valeur de l’information sur les marchés.
Invitation :
Avez-vous un crayon à portée de la main pour prendre en note l’adresse de l’endroit où se tiendra le groupe de discussion? Il aura lieu à : insérer les lieux et dates.
Nous vous demandons d’arriver quinze minutes avant l’heure prévue pour vous permettre de stationner votre voiture, de trouver l’endroit et de vous présenter. On vous demandera de vous identifier avant la tenue de la séance. Par conséquent, assurez-vous d’avoir une pièce d’identité (par exemple, un permis de conduire). De plus, si vous avez besoin de lunettes pour lire, veuillez les apporter.
Comme nous n’invitons qu’un petit nombre de personnes, votre participation est très importante pour nous. Si, pour une raison ou une autre vous ne pouvez pas vous participer, veuillez nous en aviser pour que nous puissions vous remplacer. Vous pouvez nous joindre au [#]. Demandez à parler à [nom]. Quelqu’un communiquera avec vous la veille du groupe de discussion pour confirmer votre présence.
Afin que nous puissions vous appeler pour confirmer votre présence ou pour vous informer si des changements survenaient, pourriez-vous me confirmer votre nom et vos coordonnées? [LISEZ LES COORDONNÉES QUE NOUS AVONS ET MODIFIEZ AU BESOIN.]
Prénom__________
Nom de famille_________
Courriel_________
Nº de téléphone le jour_________
Nº de téléphone le soir_________
Si le répondant refuse de donner son prénom, son nom ou son numéro de téléphone, dites-lui que ces renseignements demeureront strictement confidentiels en vertu de la loi sur le respect de la vie privée et que ceux-ci seront uniquement utilisés pour le contacter afin de confirmer sa participation et pour l’informer de tout changement concernant l’entrevue. S’il refuse toujours, REMERCIEZ ET TERMINEZ.
Introduction
*** LISEZ L’INTRODUCTION APPROPRIÉE***
UNIQUEMENT LORSQUE VOUS FAITES DES APPELS PENDANT LES HEURES OUVRABLES
Bonjour, je m’appelle _____________ et je vous téléphone de [NOM], une firme nationale de recherche sur l’opinion publique. Tout d’abord, laissez-moi vous assurer que nous n’essayons pas de vous vendre quoi que ce soit. Nous organisons des groupes de discussion pour le compte du gouvernement du Canada afin d’examiner divers enjeux d’importance pour le pays.
A. Nous désirons parler à des intermédiaires fiscaux, c’est-à-dire des gens qui travaillent avec des clients de petites entreprises sur des questions de fiscalité ou de paie. Est-ce votre cas?
B. Nous désirons également parler à une personne qui est responsable, seule ou avec d’autres, de la prise de décisions dans votre organisation. Est-ce votre cas?
EXPLIQUEZ CE QUE SONT LES GROUPES DE DISCUSSION. Environ huit à dix personnes qui auront tout comme vous été choisies au hasard prendront part à la discussion. La discussion ne durera pas plus de deux heures et aura lieu en soirée. Les participants recevront une prime de [225 $ SI PME et 250 $ SI INTERMÉDIAIRE] en guise de remerciement pour le temps qu’ils nous auront accordé. Toutefois, avant de vous inviter à vous joindre à nous, j’aimerais vous poser quelques questions pour m’assurer que le groupe sera composé d’une bonne diversité de personnes. Puis-je vous poser quelques questions? Cela devrait prendre 5 minutes tout au plus.
UNIQUEMENT LORSQUE VOUS FAITES DES APPELS APRÈS LES HEURES OUVRABLES
Bonjour, je m’appelle ______________ et je vous téléphone de [nom], une firme nationale de recherche sur l’opinion publique. Tout d’abord, laissez-moi vous assurer que nous n’essayons pas de vous vendre quoi que ce soit. Nous organisons des groupes de discussion pour le compte du gouvernement du Canada afin d’examiner divers enjeux d’importance pour le pays. Puis-je parler à/Est-ce que je parle bien à ____(VÉRIFIEZ LE NOM AFFICHÉ À L’ÉCRAN)?
Nous désirons parler à des intermédiaires fiscaux, c’est-à-dire des gens qui travaillent avec des clients de petites entreprises sur des questions de fiscalité ou de paie, ou encore à des gens qui sont responsables, seuls ou avec d’autres, de la prise de décisions dans votre organisation.
EXPLIQUEZ CE QUE SONT LES GROUPES DE DISCUSSION. Environ huit à dix personnes qui auront tout comme vous été choisies au hasard prendront part à la discussion. La discussion ne durera pas plus de deux heures et aura lieu en soirée. Les participants recevront une prime de [225 $ SI PME et 250 $ SI INTERMÉDIAIRE] en guise de remerciement pour le temps qu’ils nous auront accordé. Toutefois, avant de vous inviter à vous joindre à nous, j’aimerais vous poser quelques questions pour m’assurer que le groupe sera composé d’une bonne diversité de personnes. Puis-je vous poser quelques questions? Cela devrait prendre 5 minutes tout au plus.
Votre participation est volontaire, et la décision d’y participer n’aura aucun effet sur les négociations que les participants pourraient avoir avec le gouvernement du Canada. Nous désirons connaître votre opinion et nous ne tenterons pas de vous vendre quoi que ce soit ni de vous faire changer d’avis. La discussion se déroulera sous forme de table ronde et sera animée par un professionnel de la recherche. Toutes les opinions exprimées demeureront anonymes et les points de vue seront regroupés de sorte qu’il sera impossible d’identifier qui que ce soit.
LISEZ À TOUS : « Cet appel peut être écouté ou enregistré à des fins d’évaluation ou de contrôle de la qualité. »
CLARIFICATIONS SUPPLÉMENTAIRES AU BESOIN :
1a) Est-ce que vous, ou un membre de votre ménage, travaillez ou avez déjà travaillé pour…? [LIRE LA LISTE] SI « OUI » À L’UNE DE CES OPTIONS, REMERCIEZ ET TERMINEZ
1b) NE DEMANDEZ PAS – NOTEZ LE SEXE (Visez 50-50 dans tous les groupes)
1c) Vous y compris, environ combien d'employés votre entreprise compte-t-elle? Veuillez inclure tous les employés à temps plein et les employés permanents à temps partiel qui travaillent dans tous les emplacements et toutes les succursales de votre entreprise, s’il y a lieu. BONNE DIVERSITÉ
1d) Avez-vous la responsabilité unique ou partagée dans votre organisation pour les questions liées aux taxes, à la paie, à la préparation de la TPS / TVH ou à la tenue de livres? [UN PROPRIETAIRE QUI SUPERVISERA L'ENSEMBLE DE L'ORGANISATION SERAIT QUALIFIE ICI. VEUILLEZ VOUS ASSURER QUE LES GROUPES NE COMPRENNENT PAS SEULEMENT DES COMPTABLES.]
1d a) Quel est votre rôle au sein de l’entreprise? (Si rôle acceptable – GO to 1e)
[Les petites et moyennes entreprises (moins de 100 employés) - comprennent les décideurs ou les personnes impliquées dans les décisions liées aux questions fiscales, à la paie, à la préparation de la TPS / TVH ou à la tenue de livres. Les titres d'emploi acceptables comprennent:]
1e) Traitez-vous personnellement avec l'Agence du revenu du Canada (ARC) ou est-ce que cela relève des responsabilités de quelqu'un d'autre?
1f) Êtes-vous un intermédiaire fiscal, c’est-à-dire quelqu’un qui travaille avec des clients de petites entreprises sur des questions de fiscalité ou de paie? Dans le cadre de cette étude, les petites entreprises désignent les firmes de moins de 100 employés. (AU BESOIN : Par exemple, un travailleur de H&R Block, d’un cabinet comptable, etc.)
NOTE À L’INTERVIEWEUR :
Critères d’admissibilité des répondants :
Groupes de PME 1,3,5,7 : moins de 100 employés (Q1c=1-5), Responsable de la prise de décisions Q1d=1) et Traite avec l’ARC (Q1e=1).
Groupes d’intermédiaires fiscaux 2,4,6,8 : moins de 100 employés (Q1c=1-5) et Est un intermédiaire fiscal (Q1f=1)
*Si le répondant est admissible aux deux catégories, inscrivez-le dans le groupe des intermédiaires fiscaux.
2)[POSER AUX PME SEULEMENT :] Veuillez me dire si vous êtes d’accord ou en désaccord avec chacun des énoncés suivants. Veuillez utiliser une échelle de 0 à 10, où 0 signifie que vous êtes fortement en désaccord et 10 signifie que vous êtres fortement d’accord. Qu’en est-il de l’énoncé … ?
3) Avant de vous poser d’autres questions pour vérifier votre admissibilité, seriez-vous disponible pour participer à un groupe de discussion qui aura lieu le Date à Heure? Le groupe durera tout au plus 2 heures et, comme je l’ai mentionné, vous recevrez [225 $ SI PME et 250 $ SI INTERMÉDIAIRE].
4) Nous demandons aux participants des groupes de discussion d’exprimer leurs opinions et de verbaliser leurs pensées. Dans quelle mesure êtes-vous à l’aise d’exprimer votre opinion devant d’autres personnes? Êtes-vous…? (lisez la liste)
5a) Avez-vous déjà participé à un groupe de discussion? Un groupe de discussion réunit diverses personnes dans le but d’obtenir leurs opinions sur un sujet donné.
5b) À combien de ces séances avez-vous participé?_____ SI >3 REMERCIEZ ET TERMINEZ; SINON, CONTINUEZ
5c) Vous a-t-on invité(e) à participer à une séance qui aura lieu au cours des prochaines semaines?
Parfois, on demande aux participants de lire un texte, d’examiner des images ou d’écrire des choses pendant la discussion. Y a-t-il une raison pour laquelle vous ne pourriez pas participer?
METTRE FIN À L’APPEL SI LE RÉPONDANT DONNE UNE RAISON D’INCAPACITÉ À COMMUNIQUER EFFICACEMENT OU À PARTICIPER À LA DISCUSSION D’UNE QUELCONQUE FAÇON, COMME UN PROBLÈME DE VUE OU D’OUÏE, UN PROBLÈME DE LANGAGE ÉCRIT OU VERBAL.
METTRE AUSSI FIN À L’APPEL SI VOUS AVEZ DES PRÉOCCUPATIONS CONCERNANT LA CAPACITÉ DES PARTICIPANTS À SE FAIRE COMPRENDRE DANS LA LANGUE UTILISÉE PENDANT LA SÉANCE.
Comme je vous l’ai mentionné un peu plus tôt, le groupe de discussion aura lieu le Date à Heure. Accepteriez-vous d’y participer?
Enjeux relatifs à la confidentialité :
J’aurais maintenant quelques questions à vous poser à propos de la confidentialité, de vos renseignements personnels et du déroulement de la recherche. Nous devrons obtenir votre permission par rapport à certains sujets pour pouvoir effectuer notre recherche. Lorsque je vous poserai ces questions, n’hésitez pas à me demander de les clarifier si vous en ressentez le besoin.
P1) Tout d’abord, nous fournirons une liste des noms et des profils (réponses au questionnaire) des participants aux hôtes et au modérateur, afin qu’ils puissent vous inscrire. Votre information ne sera pas partager avec le département du gouvernement du Canada qui organise ces sessions. Acceptez-vous que nous leur transmettions ces renseignements? Je peux vous assurer que ceux-ci demeureront strictement confidentiels.
Malheureusement, nous devons donner votre nom et votre profil aux hôtes et au modérateur du groupe de discussion, puisque seuls les gens qui sont invités à participer peuvent prendre part à la séance. Les hôtes et le modérateur ont besoin de ces renseignements à des fins de vérification uniquement. Soyez assuré(e) que ces renseignements demeureront strictement confidentiels. PASSEZ À P1A
P1a)Maintenant que je vous ai expliqué cela, acceptez-vous que nous transmettions votre nom et votre profil aux hôtes et au modérateur du groupe de discussion?
P2) Il y aura un enregistrement audiovisuel de la séance et celui-ci servira uniquement à des fins de recherche. Les enregistrements seront uniquement utilisés par un professionnel de la recherche pour préparer le rapport sur les résultats de la recherche.
Acceptez-vous qu’un enregistrement audiovisuel de la séance soit effectué?
Malheureusement, nous devons faire un enregistrement audiovisuel de la séance puisque le professionnel de la recherche en a besoin pour rédiger son rapport.
P2a) Maintenant que je vous ai expliqué cela, acceptez-vous que nous fassions un enregistrement audiovisuel de la séance?
P3) Chaque mois, nous soumettons le nom des personnes qui ont participé à nos séances au Registre central de recherche qualitative de l'Association de la recherche et de l'intelligence marketing. Le Registre central de recherche qualitative est une base de données centrale qui vérifie la participation aux entrevues de recherches qualitatives. Personne ne communiquera avec vous parce que votre nom se trouve sur cette liste.
Nous permettez-vous de soumettre votre nom et votre numéro de téléphone au Registre central de recherche qualitative de l’ARIM?
P3a) Malheureusement, pour que vous puissiez participer à cette entrevue, nous devons avoir votre permission pour ajouter votre nom au Registre central de recherche qualitative puisqu’il s’agit du seul moyen qui nous permet d’assurer l’intégrité du processus de recherche et de faire le suivi de la participation aux recherches qualitatives. Le système est tenu à jour par l’Association de la recherche et de l’intelligence marketing et il est uniquement utilisé pour faire le suivi de votre participation aux recherches qualitatives (comme les groupes de discussion). Personne ne communiquera avec vous parce que votre nom se trouve sur cette liste.
Maintenant que je vous ai expliqué cela, acceptez-vous que nous ajoutions votre nom au Registre central de recherche qualitative?
AU BESOIN, RENSEIGNEMENTS SUPPLÉMENTAIRES POUR L’INTERVIEWEUR :
Soyez assuré(e) que cette information demeurera confidentielle et seules les firmes de recherche marketing professionnelles pourront y accéder et l’utiliser pour vérifier la participation et empêcher les « répondants professionnels » de participer aux séances. Les firmes de recherche qui participent au Registre central de recherche qualitative de l’ARIM ont besoin de votre autorisation avant que vous ne soyez admissible à participer au groupe. Cette procédure contribue à assurer l’intégrité du processus de recherche.
AU BESOIN, NOTE À PROPOS DE L’ARIM :
L’Association de la recherche et de l’intelligence marketing est un organisme à but non lucratif qui regroupe des professionnels de la recherche marketing impliqués dans le marketing, la publicité, les recherches sociales et politiques. La mission de l’Association est d’être le leader dans la promotion de l’excellence dans la pratique du marketing et des recherches sociales ainsi que dans la valeur de l’information sur les marchés.
Invitation :
Avez-vous un crayon à portée de la main pour prendre en note l’adresse de l’endroit où se tiendra le groupe de discussion? Il aura lieu à : insérer les lieux et dates.
Nous vous demandons d’arriver quinze minutes avant l’heure prévue pour vous permettre de stationner votre voiture, de trouver l’endroit et de vous présenter. On vous demandera de vous identifier avant la tenue de la séance. Par conséquent, assurez-vous d’avoir une pièce d’identité (par exemple, un permis de conduire). De plus, si vous avez besoin de lunettes pour lire, veuillez les apporter.
Comme nous n’invitons qu’un petit nombre de personnes, votre participation est très importante pour nous. Si, pour une raison ou une autre vous ne pouvez pas vous participer, veuillez nous en aviser pour que nous puissions vous remplacer. Vous pouvez nous joindre au [#]. Demandez à parler à [nom]. Quelqu’un communiquera avec vous la veille du groupe de discussion pour confirmer votre présence.
Afin que nous puissions vous appeler pour confirmer votre présence ou pour vous informer si des changements survenaient, pourriez-vous me confirmer votre nom et vos coordonnées? [LISEZ LES COORDONNÉES QUE NOUS AVONS ET MODIFIEZ AU BESOIN.]
Prénom__________
Nom de famille_________
Courriel_________
Nº de téléphone le jour_________
Nº de téléphone le soir_________
Si le répondant refuse de donner son prénom, son nom ou son numéro de téléphone, dites-lui que ces renseignements demeureront strictement confidentiels en vertu de la loi sur le respect de la vie privée et que ceux-ci seront uniquement utilisés pour le contacter afin de confirmer sa participation et pour l’informer de tout changement concernant l’entrevue. S’il refuse toujours, REMERCIEZ ET TERMINEZ.
Section 1: Introduction (10 Minutes)
Introduction
Explanation
Describe how a discussion group functions
Section 2: Impressions of CRA (20 Minutes)
Tonight we are going to be speaking about the CRA, or the Canada Revenue Agency. From what you know, what does the CRA do exactly?
The Canada Revenue Agency is the Agency of the federal government responsible for such things as: the collection of income tax, administration of the GST/HST (or Goods and Services Tax), and the Canada Child Tax Benefit Program.
[MODERATOR TO WRITE ON FLIP CHART. (For each) What makes you say that?]
Section 3: Current Issues and Behaviour (15 Minutes)
Let’s talk for a few minutes about tax filing. Most people don’t like doing their taxes, but I am interested in learning a bit more about the process that you go through each year when you do your taxes.
Section 4: Integrity of the Tax System (25 minutes)
I would now like to do an exercise with you. [HAND OUT AN EXERCISE SHEET TO EACH RESPONDENT.] Here is a list of actions most people would agree are wrong. I would like you to rank them from the most serious to the least serious.
Out of curiousity, where did you place “Filing an inaccurate tax return” and “Paying cash for goods and services”?
As you know, the income tax Canadians pay is based on the amount of income they voluntarily disclose to the Government.
Section 5: Underground Economy Message Testing (30 minutes)
A few years ago, the CRA presented the DJ scenarios in a survey and asked respondents whether they felt such acts constituted serious tax cheating. As the dollar amounts went up, so did the proportions who felt the scenarios constituted cheating. (if asked: rose from 52% to 90%).
Also based on research previously conducted, we know that most Canadians think it’s wrong to pay cash for a job to avoid paying taxes. But then many will do it anyway.
I will now show you a few messages the CRA is considering using to increase awareness of the underground Economy and its impact. I’d like to know what you think of the effectiveness of each of them. You can use the green pen in front of you to circle what you like and the red pen to circle what you don’t like. Also, feel free to write down your thoughts on the sheet of paper. When you’re done, please rate each message on a scale of 0 to 10 where 10 means this message is very effective and 0 means this message is not effective at all.
[PRESENT MESSAGES ONE AT A TIME. ROTATE ORDER. EACH PARTICIPANT GETS ITS OWN COPY.]
Message 1: Population in Canada: 35+ million. Let’s say about 1% of the population pay cash to avoid paying the tax. not that many right? Let’s say this tax is $200. Small amount right? When you add this all up, that’s $70,000,000. $70 million less to fund services for all Canadians. It all adds up. Be part of the solution. Find out how: [link]
Message 2: You’re an employee. Taxes are deducted from each of your paycheques. Let’s say you decide to pay for a service in cash to avoid paying the tax. You save a bit of money. Your service provider, on the other hand, saves a lot more money by not declaring any of it as income. He doesn’t pay any taxes. But yet you do … Be part of the solution. Find out how: [link]
Message 3: If you’re paying someone cash to avoid paying taxes, you’re part of the $45 billion problem. Be part of the solution instead.
Message 4: Your lifestyle doesn’t match your tax return? The CRA can find out if you’ve been hiding or underreporting your income.
Message 5: Taxes are the price we pay for the Canada we love, like safe streets, beautiful parks, education and healthcare. When people cheat on their taxes, there’s less money to fund our services which leads to service cuts or an increase in taxes. That’s why it’s important that every Canadian pays their fair share. Be part of the solution.
Message 6: The average Canadian household receives about $41,000 in public services each year. You pay your taxes and get services, yet people who cheat on their taxes or pay cash to save on taxes also get services. How is that fair?
Message 7 [Used in the past and moving away from this but want to see where it falls among the new ones]: Hiring a painter? Paying cash to avoid the tax is risky. No contract means no protection against damages or if a worker is injured at your house. Make sure to get a written contract.
AFTER EACH MESSAGE HAS BEEN REVIEWED, ASK:
Now that we have reviewed all messages, which one do you believe would be best at discouraging people from cheating on taxes?
Section 6: Offshore Compliance (15 minutes)
Section 7: Conclusion (5 minutes)
[MODERATOR TO VISIT BACKROOM FOR ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS]
We have covered a lot of topics today and I really appreciate you taking the time and energy to come down here and give your opinion. Your input is very important and insightful!
To conclude, I wanted to ask you whether you have any last thoughts that you want to provide the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA).
Section 1: Introduction (10 Minutes)
Introduction
Explanation
Describe how a discussion group functions
Section 2: Impressions of CRA (20 Minutes)
Tonight we are going to be speaking about the CRA, or the Canada Revenue Agency.
The Canada Revenue Agency is the agency of the federal government responsible for such things as: the collection of income tax, administration of the GST/HST (or Goods and Services Tax), and the Canada Child Tax Benefit Program. We are interested in talking with you tonight about the business side of your relationship with the CRA – we will be talking to others about the personal side.
[MODERATOR TO WRITE ON FLIP CHART. (For each) What makes you say that?]
Section 3: Current Issues and Behaviour (15 Minutes)
Let’s talk for a few minutes about tax filing.
Section 4: Online Interactions (10 Minutes)
I would like to explore some of the issues/considerations about CRA online services for a few minutes.
Section 5: Integrity of the Tax System (15 minutes)
As you know, the income tax Canadians pay is based on the amount of income they voluntarily disclose to the Government.
Section 6: Underground Economy Message Testing (30 minutes)
A few years ago, the CRA presented the DJ scenarios in a survey and asked respondents whether they felt such acts constituted serious tax cheating. As the dollar amounts went up, so did the proportions who felt the scenarios constituted cheating. (if asked: rose from 52% to 90%).
Also based on research previously conducted, we know that most Canadians think it’s wrong to pay cash for a job to avoid paying taxes. But then many will do it anyway.
I will now show you a few messages the CRA is considering using to increase awareness of the underground Economy and its impact. I’d like to know what you think of the effectiveness of each of them. You can use the green pen in front of you to circle what you like and the red pen to circle what you don’t like. Also, feel free to write down your thoughts on the sheet of paper. When you’re done, please rate each message on a scale of 0 to 10 where 10 means this message is very effective and 0 means this message is not effective at all.
[PRESENT MESSAGES ONE AT A TIME. ROTATE ORDER. EACH PARTICIPANT GETS ITS OWN COPY.]
Message 1: If you’re getting paid in cash and not declaring all your income, you’re part of the $45 billion problem. Be part of the solution instead.
Message 2: Under declaring your business’ income can affect its growth. Find out why.
Message 3: Think you can get out of paying tax on that house you flipped? The CRA can detect undeclared real estate income.
Message 4: Your lifestyle doesn’t match your tax return? The CRA can find out if you’ve been hiding or underreporting your income.
Message 6: Taxes are the price we pay for the Canada we love, like safe streets, beautiful parks, education and healthcare. That’s why it’s important all Canadians pay their taxes. Be part of the solution, don’t cheat.
AFTER EACH MESSAGE HAS BEEN REVIEWED, ASK:
Now that we have reviewed all messages, which one do you believe would be best at discouraging people from cheating on taxes?
Section 7: Offshore Compliance (15 minutes)
Section 8: Conclusion (5 minutes)
[MODERATOR TO VISIT BACKROOM FOR ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS]
We have covered a lot of topics today and I really appreciate you taking the time and energy to come down here and give your opinion. Your input is very important and insightful!
To conclude, I wanted to ask you whether you have any last thoughts that you want to provide the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA).
Section 1 : Introduction (10 Minutes)
Introduction
Explication
Description du fonctionnement du groupe de discussion
Section 2 : Impressions de l’ARC (20 minutes)
Ce soir, nous parlerons de l'ARC, l'Agence du revenu du Canada. À votre connaissance, quelles sont les activités de l'ARC?
L’Agence du revenu du Canada est l’agence du gouvernement fédéral qui est responsable, par exemple, de la perception de l’impôt sur le revenu, de l’administration de la TPS/TVH (ou taxe sur les produits et services) et du programme de Prestation fiscale canadienne pour enfants.
[MODÉRATEUR FERA LA LISTE AU TABLEAU] (Pour chaque caractéristique) Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela?
Section 3 : Enjeux actuels et comportements (15 minutes)
Prenons quelques minutes pour discuter de la production des déclarations de revenus. La plupart des gens n'aiment pas faire leur déclaration de revenus, mais j'aimerais en savoir un peu plus au sujet du processus que vous suivez chaque année lorsque vous faites votre déclaration de revenus.
Section 4 : L’intégrité du régime fiscal (25 minutes)
J’aimerais maintenant faire un exercice avec vous. [REMETTRE UNE FEUILLE D’EXERCICE À CHAQUE PARTICIPANT.] Il s’agit d’une liste d’actions que la plupart des gens jugent mauvaises. J’aimerais que vous les classiez en ordre décroissant de gravité.
Par curiosité, où avez-vous classé « Produire sciemment sa déclaration de revenus de façon incorrecte » et « Payer pour des biens ou des services en argent comptant »?
Comme vous le savez, l’impôt que les canadiens payent est basé sur le total des revenus divulgué volontairement au gouvernement.
Section 5 : Test de messages sur l’économie clandestine (30 minutes)
Il y a quelques années, l’ARC a présenté les scénarios de disc-jockey dans un sondage et a demandé aux répondants s’ils pensaient que de tels actes constituaient une fraude fiscale grave. Plus le montant d’argent était élevé, plus le nombre de répondants pensant que les scénarios constituaient une fraude était élevé. (Si la question est posée : hausse de 52 % à 90 %).
En outre, en fonction des recherches précédemment menées, nous savons que la plupart des Canadiens pensent qu’il est mal de payer en argent comptant afin d’éviter de payer la taxe de vente. Toutefois, beaucoup vont tout de même le faire.
Je vais maintenant vous montrer quelques messages que l’ARC envisage d’utiliser pour accroître la sensibilisation à l’économie clandestine et à son incidence. J’aimerais savoir ce que vous pensez de l’efficacité de chacun d’entre eux. Vous pouvez utiliser le stylo vert devant vous pour entourer ce que vous aimez et le stylo rouge pour entourer ce que vous n’aimez pas. De plus, n’hésitez pas à noter vos pensées sur la feuille de papier. Lorsque vous avez terminé, veuillez donner une note à chaque message sur une échelle de 0 à 10 où 10 signifie que le message est très efficace et 0 signifie que le message n’est pas du tout efficace.
[PRÉSENTER LES MESSAGES UN PAR UN. VARIER L’ORDRE. CHAQUE PARTICIPANT A SA PROPRE COPIE.]
Message 1 : La population du Canada s’élève à un peu plus de 35 millions d’habitants. Supposons qu’environ 1 % de la population paie en argent comptant pour se sauver de la taxe. Ce n’est pas beaucoup n’est-ce pas? Supposons que cette taxe est de 200 $. C’est un petit montant n’est-ce pas? Lorsqu’on additionne tout ça, on obtient un total de 70 millions de dollars. C’est donc 70 millions de dollars en moins pour offrir des services à tous les Canadiens. Tout s’additionne. Faites partie de la solution. Découvrez comment : [lien]
Message 2 : Vous êtes un employé. Des impôts sont prélevés à partir de chacune de vos paies. Supposons que vous décidez de payer pour un service en argent comptant pour éviter de payer les impôts. Vous sauvez un peu d’argent. Par contre, celui qui vous a fourni le service sauve beaucoup plus d’argent en ne déclarant pas ce montant en tant que revenu. Il ne paie aucun impôt. Mais vous, si. Faites partie de la solution. Découvrez comment : [lien]
Message 3 : Si vous payez en argent comptant pour éviter des taxes, vous faites partie du problème des 45 milliards de dollars. Faites plutôt partie de la solution.
Message 4 : Votre style de vie ne correspond pas à votre déclaration de revenus? L’ARC peut savoir si vous avez dissimulé un revenu ou fait une déclaration partielle.
Message 5 : Les impôts sont le prix que nous payons pour bâtir le Canada que nous aimons, notamment avec des routes sécuritaires, des parcs magnifiques et l’accès aux études et aux soins de santé. Lorsque des personnes trichent pour ne pas payer d’impôts, il y a moins d’argent pour financer nos services, ce qui cause des coupures au niveau des services ou des hausses au niveau des impôts. C’est pourquoi il importe que chaque Canadien paie sa juste part. Faites partie de la solution.
Message 6 : Chaque année, le ménage canadien moyen reçoit environ 41 000 $ en services publics. Vous payez vos impôts et bénéficiez de services, mais les personnes qui trichent pour ne pas payer les impôts ou paient en argent comptant pour se sauver des taxes bénéficient des mêmes services. En quoi cela est-il équitable?
Message 7 [Utilisé par le passé et en voie d’être éliminé mais nous voulons voir comment il s’inscrit par rapport aux nouveaux.]: Vous embauchez un peintre? Payer en argent comptant pour éviter de payer de l’impôt est une affaire risquée! Un contrat conclu oralement signifie que vous n’avez aucune protection contre des dégâts, et qu’un travailleur qui se blesse chez vous ne dispose d’aucune protection. Assurez-vous d’exiger un contrat écrit.
APRÈS EXAMEN DE CHAQUE MESSAGE, POSEZ CES QUESTIONS :
Maintenant que vous avez examiné tous les messages, selon vous, lequel serait le meilleur pour décourager les gens de pratiquer la fraude fiscale?
Section 6 : Observation à l’étranger (15 minutes)
Section 7 : Conclusion (5 minutes)
[LE MODÉRATEUR VISITERA LA SALLE D’OBSERVATION POUR S’ASSURER QU’IL N’Y A PAS D’AUTRES QUESTIONS.]
Nous avons couvert de nombreux sujets ce soir et j’apprécie réellement le temps et l’énergie que vous avez mis pour vous rendre ici et donner votre opinion. Vos commentaires sont très importants et apportent un éclairage nouveau.
En conclusion, j’aimerais vous demander si vous avez d’autres commentaires à formuler à l’Agence du revenu du Canada (ARC).
Section 1 : Introduction (10 Minutes)
Introduction
Explication
Description du fonctionnement du groupe de discussion
Section 2 : Impressions de l’ARC (20 minutes)
Ce soir, nous parlerons de l'ARC, c'est-à-dire de l'Agence du revenu du Canada.
L’Agence du revenu du Canada est l’agence du gouvernement fédéral qui est responsable, par exemple, de la perception de l’impôt sur le revenu, de l’administration de la TPS/TVH (ou taxe sur les produits et services) et du programme de Prestation fiscale canadienne pour enfants. Nous nous intéresserons ce soir aux échanges que vous avez avec l’ARC dans vos fonctions au sein de votre entreprise – nous parlerons à d’autres personnes concernant leurs échanges en tant que particuliers.
[MODÉRATEUR FERA LA LISTE AU TABLEAU] (Pour chaque caractéristique) Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela?
Section 3 : Enjeux actuels et comportements (30 minutes)
Prenons quelques minutes pour discuter de la production des déclarations de revenus.
Section 4: Interactions en ligne (10 minutes)
J’aimerais explorer pendant quelques minutes certaines questions/considérations à propos des services électroniques de l’ARC.
Section 5 : L’intégrité du régime fiscal (25 minutes)
Comme vous le savez, l’impôt que les canadiens payent est basé sur le total des revenus divulgué volontairement au gouvernement.
Section 6 : Test de messages sur l’économie clandestine (30 minutes)
Il y a quelques années, l’ARC a présenté les scénarios de disc-jockey dans un sondage et a demandé aux répondants s’ils pensaient que de tels actes constituaient une fraude fiscale grave. Plus le montant d’argent était élevé, plus le nombre de répondants pensant que les scénarios constituaient une fraude était élevé. (Si la question est posée : hausse de 52 % à 90 %).
En outre, en fonction des recherches précédemment menées, nous savons que la plupart des Canadiens pensent qu’il est mal de payer en argent comptant afin d’éviter de payer la taxe de vente. Toutefois, beaucoup vont tout de même le faire.
Je vais maintenant vous montrer quelques messages que l’ARC envisage d’utiliser pour accroître la sensibilisation à l’économie clandestine et à son incidence. J’aimerais savoir ce que vous pensez de l’efficacité de chacun d’entre eux. Vous pouvez utiliser le stylo vert devant vous pour entourer ce que vous aimez et le stylo rouge pour entourer ce que vous n’aimez pas. De plus, n’hésitez pas à noter vos pensées sur la feuille de papier. Lorsque vous avez terminé, veuillez donner une note à chaque message sur une échelle de 0 à 10 où 10 signifie que le message est très efficace et 0 signifie que le message n’est pas du tout efficace.
[PRÉSENTER LES MESSAGES UN PAR UN. VARIER L’ORDRE. CHAQUE PARTICIPANT A SA PROPRE COPIE.]
Message 1 : Si vous êtes payé en argent comptant et ne déclarez pas la totalité de votre revenu, vous faites partie du problème des 45 milliards de dollars. Faites plutôt partie de la solution.
Message 2 : Déclarer un revenu d’entreprise inférieur à la réalité peut toucher la croissance de cette entreprise. Apprenez-en davantage.
Message 3 : Vous pensez que vous pouvez échapper à l’impôt sur cette maison que vous avez rénovée pour la revendre? L’ARC peut déceler les revenus immobiliers non déclarés.
Message 4 : Votre style de vie ne correspond pas à votre déclaration de revenus? L’ARC peut savoir si vous avez dissimulé un revenu ou fait une déclaration partielle.
Message 5 : Un propriétaire d’entreprise? Des fournisseurs qui envoient des cartes-cadeaux pour rester en affaires avec vous? Si vous ne les déclarez pas comme revenu, c’est de la fraude fiscale. Il n’est jamais trop tard pour régler vos affaires fiscales. Consultez [lien].
Message 6 : Les taxes sont le prix que nous payons pour bâtir le Canada que nous aimons, notamment avec des routes sécuritaires, des parcs magnifiques et l’accès aux études et aux soins de santé. C’est pourquoi il importe que tous les Canadiens paient leurs impôts. Faites partie de la solution, ne fraudez pas.
APRÈS EXAMEN DE CHAQUE MESSAGE, POSEZ CES QUESTIONS :
Maintenant que vous avez examiné tous les messages, selon vous, lequel serait le meilleur pour décourager les gens de pratiquer la fraude fiscale?
Section 7 : Observation à l’étranger (15 minutes)
Section 8 : Conclusion (5 minutes)
[LE MODÉRATEUR VISITERA LA SALLE D’OBSERVATION POUR S’ASSURER QU’IL N’Y A PAS D’AUTRES QUESTIONS.]
Nous avons couvert de nombreux sujets ce soir et j’apprécie réellement le temps et l’énergie que vous avez mis pour vous rendre ici et donner votre opinion. Vos commentaires sont très importants et apportent un éclairage nouveau.
En conclusion, j’aimerais vous demander si vous avez d’autres commentaires à formuler à l’Agence du revenu du Canada (ARC).
EXERCISE 1
Here is a list of actions that most people find bad. Please rank them in order of gravity from 1 to 7: 1 being the least serious action and 7 the most serious action.
Speeding on the highway. |
|
Parking in a disabled parking spot without a permit |
|
Filing an inaccurate tax return in order to avoid paying what you really owe. |
|
Paying cash for goods or services to avoid paying sales tax |
|
Littering while driving |
|
Taking money or equipment from a company you work for |
|
Selling some jewelry and then filing an insurance claim saying it was stolen |
EXERCISE 2
Here is a scenario. Please write in the empty box what you think about this statement.
Someone employed full time also works on the side as a DJ on weekends, but does not report these weekend earnings on his tax return.
I just earned $2,500 / $20,000 last year as a DJ and wasn’t thinking of reporting it on my tax return.
Your thinking: ___________________________________
EXERCISE 3—GENERAL POPULATION
Here is a message the CRA is considering using to increase awareness of the underground Economy and its impact. What do you think of its effectiveness? Please circle what you like in green and what you dislike in red. Feel free to write down your thoughts on the sheet of paper.
Message 1:
Population in Canada: 35+ million. Let’s say about 1% of the population pay cash to avoid paying the tax. not that many right? Let’s say this tax is $200. Small amount right? When you add this all up, that’s $70,000,000. $70 million less to fund services for all Canadians. It all adds up. Be part of the solution. Find out how: [link]
Message 2:
You’re an employee. Taxes are deducted from each of your paycheques. Let’s say you decide to pay for a service in cash to avoid paying the tax. You save a bit of money. Your service provider, on the other hand, saves a lot more money by not declaring any of it as income. He doesn’t pay any taxes. But yet you do … Be part of the solution. Find out how: [link]
Message 3:
If you’re paying someone cash to avoid paying taxes, you’re part of the $45 billion problem. Be part of the solution instead.
Message 4:
Your lifestyle doesn’t match your tax return? The CRA can find out if you’ve been hiding or underreporting your income.
Message 5:
Taxes are the price we pay for the Canada we love, like safe streets, beautiful parks, education and healthcare. When people cheat on their taxes, there’s less money to fund our services which leads to service cuts or an increase in taxes. That’s why it’s important that every Canadian pays their fair share. Be part of the solution.
Message 6:
The average Canadian household receives about $41,000 in public services each year. You pay your taxes and get services, yet people who cheat on their taxes or pay cash to save on taxes also get services. How is that fair?
Message 7:
Hiring a painter? Paying cash to avoid the tax is risky. No contract means no protection against damages or if a worker is injured at your house. Make sure to get a written contract.
When you’re done, please rate this message on a scale of 0 to 10, with 10 meaning this message is very effective and 0 meaning this message is not effective at all.
Scales: from 0 to 10.
EXERCISE 3—SME AND TAX INTERMEDIARIES
Here is a message the CRA is considering using to increase awareness of the underground economy and its impact. What do you think of its effectiveness? Please circle what you like in green and what you dislike in red. Feel free to write down your thoughts on the sheet of paper.
Message 1:
If you’re getting paid in cash and not declaring all your income, you’re part of the $45 billion problem. Be part of the solution instead.
Message 2:
Under declaring your business’ income can affect its growth. Find out why.
Message 3:
Think you can get out of paying tax on that house you flipped? The CRA can detect undeclared real estate income.
Message 4:
Your lifestyle doesn’t match your tax return? The CRA can find out if you’ve been hiding or underreporting your income.
Message 5:
Business owner? Suppliers sending gift cards to keep you business? If you don’t declare it as income, that’s tax cheating. It’s not too late to fix your tax affairs. Visit [link].
Message 6:
Taxes are the price we pay for the Canada we love, like safe streets, beautiful parks, education and healthcare. That’s why it’s important all Canadians pay their taxes. Be part of the solution, don’t cheat.
When you’re done, please rate this message on a scale of 0 to 10, with 10 meaning this message is very effective and 0 meaning this message is not effective at all.
Scales: from 0 to 10.
GENERAL PROGRAMMING INSTRUCTIONS:
READER NOTE: Text in green and in grey = Programming instructions.
Quotas
Simple quota
PROVINCES
AGE
18-34 Min. 400
INTRODUCTION
Hello / Bonjour (pause), the Government of Canada is conducting a telephone survey on current issues of interest to Canadians. Would you prefer that I continue in English or French? (IF NEEDED: Je vous remercie. Quelqu'un vous rappellera bientôt pour mener le sondage en français.)
My name is _______ of [SUPPLIER NAME], the company hired to do the survey. The survey takes about 15 minutes and is voluntary and completely confidential. Your answers will remain anonymous. If at any time during the survey you would prefer not to answer a specific question, you are allowed to do so. May I continue?
(IF NEEDED): Your decision to participate is voluntary and will in no way affect your relationship with the Government of Canada. This call may be monitored or recorded for quality control purposes only. This survey is registered with the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association (MRIA) and the information provided will be administered according to the requirements of the Privacy Act.
(QS1) To begin, does a person between the ages of 18 and 34 live in your household?{/b}{br}{i}- If not, continue the interview and ask:{/i} {b}Can you please tell me if you are at least 18 years old?{/b}{br}{i}- If so:{/i} {b}May I please speak to this person who is between 18 and 34 years old?{/b}{br}{i}If 18-34 year old not there, make an appointment.{/i}
(QS2) Your participation in this survey is voluntary, but would be extremely helpful. Would you be willing to take part in this survey? We can do it now or at a time more convenient for you.
(QS3) Have I reached you on your cellphone?
IF YES : Are you in an environment that allows you to comfortably continue with this survey?
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#S4. RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (DO NOT ASK – RECORD GENDER BASED ON INTERVIEWER OBSERVATION)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#S5. In which province or territory do you live?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (DO NOT READ LIST. ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
Section B. OVERALL PERCEPTIONS OF CRA
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#B1.
The Canada Revenue Agency is the agency of the federal government responsible for such things as:
[[BASE : S5=1,2,3,4, 11,12, 13]: the collection of income tax, administration of the GST (or Goods and Services Tax), and the Canada Child Benefit Program]
[[BASE : S5=6]: the collection of federal income tax and the Canada Child Benefit Program]
[[BASE : S5=5,7,8,9,10]: the collection of federal income tax, administration of the GST/HST, and the Canada Child Benefit Program]
(READ): Throughout this survey, we will refer to the Canada Revenue Agency as the CRA.
How would you rate the overall performance of the CRA? Please use a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 means “terrible” and 10 means “excellent”.
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (REPEAT SCALE AS NECESSARY; ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[BASE: ASK IF B1≠99]
[OPEN-END]
Q#B2.
Why do you rate the performance of the CRA as [RESPONSE FROM B1] out of 10?
(PROBE): Any other reason?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (RECORD RESPONSE, ACCEPT MULTIPLE RESPONSES)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION GRID]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
[STATEMENT LIST ORDER: Randomized]
Q#B3.
I would now like you to rate the CRA on a series of statements. Please use a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means completely disagree and 10 means completely agree.
(IF ASKED): We are asking for your opinion based on your general impressions of the CRA, whether from personal experience, what you have seen, read or heard.
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (REPEAT SCALE AS NECESSARY)
[RESPONSE LIST (Scale):]
[STATEMENT LIST]
Section C. EXPERIENCE WITH CRA – INCOME TAX FILING
I would now like to ask you about your experiences as a taxpayer.
[READ IF NECESSARY, ANY PAUSE IN RESPONDING IN THIS SECTION: Please be reminded that these questions are for research purposes only. Your answers are appreciated and will help us improve Canadians’ filing experiences with the CRA.]
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#C1.
Have you sent in your personal [QUEBEC ONLY: federal] income tax return for 2016?
(IF ASKED): This would be the tax return you filed this year for the income you earned in 2016, which were due May 1st, 2017.
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (DO NOT READ LIST. ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK IF C1=01]
QINF#1.
The following set of questions will focus on your 2016 taxes.
[BASE: ASK IF C1=01]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#C2.
Did you complete your 2016 tax return on your own, or did you receive help from someone else? (USING A TAX SOFTWARE DOES NOT COUNT AS RECEIVING HELP)
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (DO NOT READ LIST. ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK IF C2=02]
[MULTIPLE MENTIONS: Max=Y]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#C3.
From whom did you get help?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (READ CATEGORIES ONLY IF NECESSARY; SEVERAL MENTIONS POSSIBLE: CODE MORE THAN ONE IF MENTIONED; INCLUDE PEOPLE WHO GAVE ADVICE.)
[BASE: ASK IF C1=01]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#C4.
[BASE: ASK IF C2=01,99] : How did you file your taxes?
(IF NEEDED): That is, for example, did you file by mail or online?
[BASE: ASK IF C2=02]: How were your taxes filed?
(IF NEEDED): That is, for example, did the individual/tax preparer file your taxes by mail or online?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (DO NOT READ LIST. ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
Section D. EXPERIENCE WITH CRA – CONTACTS
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#D1.
In the last 12 months, have you contacted the CRA, other than for sending in personal or business tax returns?
(CONTACT INCLUDES SEEKING INFORMATION; BUSINESS REFERS TO CORPORATE, GST/HST, OR PAYROLL)
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (DO NOT READ LIST. ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK IF D1=01]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#D2A.
In which way have you most recently contacted the CRA in the past 12 months?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: CLARIFY AS NECESSARY; CONTACT INCLUDES SEEKING INFORMATION (READ LIST / ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK IF D1=01 - DO NOT ASK IF QD2A= 99]
[MULTIPLE MENTIONS: Max=Y]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#D2B.
Are there any other ways that you have used to contact the CRA in the past 12 months?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ACCEPT MULTIPLE MENTIONS - CLARIFY AS NECESSARY; CONTACT INCLUDES SEEKING INFORMATION)
[BASE: ASK IF D2A=01, 02, 04]
[MULTIPLE MENTIONS: Max=Y]
[LIST ORDER: Randomized 01 TO 05]
Q#D3.
Was the purpose of your MOST RECENT contact to…?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (READ LIST- ACCEPT MULTIPLE RESPONSES)
[BASE: ASK IF D2A=01]
[SINGLE MENTION]
Q#D4.
How satisfied are you with the overall quality of the service you received when you contacted the CRA by telephone on this most recent occasion? Please use a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 means completely dissatisfied and 10 means completely satisfied.
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK IF D2A=01]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#D5.
Did you get what you needed from the CRA on this particular occasion?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (DO NOT READ LIST. ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK IF D1=01]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#D6.
Based on your experience, would you say the level of customer service provided by the CRA is better, about the same, or worse than the service you might receive from financial institutions with which you currently do business?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (INCLUDES ALL TYPES, SUCH AS BANKS, CREDIT UNIONS)
Section E. CRA WEBSITE
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
Q#E1.
Have you ever visited the CRA website to search for information on tax-related matters?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (DO NOT READ LIST. ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK IF E1=01]
[SINGLE MENTION GRID]
[STATEMENT LIST ORDER: Randomized]
Q#E2.
I would now like to read you a couple of statements about the CRA website. For each one, please use a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 means you completely disagree, and 10 means you completely agree.
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (READ SCALE IF NEEDED)
[RESPONSE LIST (Scale):]
[STATEMENT LIST]
Section CM. GENERAL ATTITUDES ABOUT COMPLIANCE
The next few questions cover issues related to cheating on income taxes. By tax cheating, we mean individuals who deliberately do not declare some of their income. Nothing in this section is about you personally, but we are interested in getting Canadians’ opinions on this topic.
[IF ASKED, CLARIFY THAT THE QUESTIONS ARE ABOUT PERSONAL TAXES ONLY.]
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM1.
On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means not at all common and 10 means very common, how common do you think income tax cheating is in Canada?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM2.
Over the past couple of years, do you think income tax cheating has:
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (READ LIST; CHOOSE ONE RESPONSE ONLY)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM3.
Do you think the CRA is currently putting too much, too little, or about the right amount of effort into reducing income tax cheating?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM4.
On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means very unlikely and 10 means very likely, how likely do you think it is for Canadians who cheat on their income taxes to get caught?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM5A.
Thinking about a situation where someone you know may be cheating on his or her taxes. Using a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means not at all likely and 10 means very likely, what is the likelihood you would report this person if … You suspected he or she was cheating?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
Q#CM5B.
Thinking about a situation where someone you know may be cheating on his or her taxes. Using a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means not at all likely and 10 means very likely, what is the likelihood you would report this person if … You knew for certain he or she was cheating?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
Q#CM6.
Thinking about the level of taxes that Canadians pay compared to the services they receive from governments, do you feel that Canadians pay too much, about the right amount, or too little in taxes?
(IF “TOO MUCH”, PROBE): Do you think Canadians pay “significantly” too much, or “somewhat” too much in taxes?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION GRID]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
[STATEMENT LIST ORDER: Randomized]
Q#CM7.
Please tell me how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements. Use a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 means you completely disagree, and 10 means you completely agree.
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (READ– REPEAT SCALE AS NEEDED)
[RESPONSE LIST (Scale):]
[STATEMENT LIST]
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM8A.
Please tell me if you would consider the following situations to be cheating or not cheating on one’s income taxes:
(if “cheating”, prompt for “serious” or “not serious”)
Someone employed full time also works on the side as a DJ on weekends, but does not report these weekend earnings on his or her tax return.
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (READ IF NEEDED, ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK IF CM8A≠01]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM8B.
What if this individual earns $2500 per year as a DJ that is not reported on his or her tax return?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (READ IF NEEDED, ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK IF CM8B≠01]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM8C.
What if this individual earns $5000 per year as a DJ that is not reported on his or her tax return?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (READ IF NEEDED, ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK IF CM8C≠01]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM8D.
What if this individual earns $20,000 per year as a DJ that is not reported on his or her tax return?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (READ IF NEEDED, ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION GRID]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
[STATEMENT LIST ORDER: Randomized]
Q#CM9.
Using a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 means “not cheating at all” and 10 means “serious cheating”, how would you rate the following behaviours?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (READ– REPEAT SCALE AS NEEDED)
[RESPONSE LIST (Scale):]
[STATEMENT LIST]
Section CM. VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURES PROGRAM
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[OPEN LIST – MULTIPLE CHOICES (Min =1 ; Max= 7]]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM10A.
Say you discovered a mistake from the taxes you filed two years ago, where you realize you still owed $100. What would you do?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (DO NOT READ LIST)
[BASE: ASK IF CM10A=01]
[OPEN LIST – MULTIPLE CHOICES (Min =1 ; Max= 7]]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM10B.
And if you realize you still owed $1,000, what would you do?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (DO NOT READ LIST)
[BASE: ASK IF CM10B=01]
[OPEN LIST – MULTIPLE CHOICES (Min =1 ; Max= 7]]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM10C.
And if you realize you still owed $10,000, what would you do?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (DO NOT READ LIST)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION GRID]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
[STATEMENT LIST ORDER: Randomized]
Q#CM11.
Using a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 means « not at all important » and 10 means « very important », how important is it … ?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (READ– REPEAT SCALE AS NEEDED)
[RESPONSE LIST (Scale):]
[STATEMENT LIST]
Section G. RESPONDENT PROFILE
To finish up, I would like to ask you a few questions about you and your household for statistical purposes only. Please be assured that all of your answers will remain completely confidential.
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#G1.
Which is the highest level of education that you have completed?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (DO NOT READ LIST; ACCEPT ONE RESPONSE ONLY)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[NUMERIC: RANGE= MIN 1917, MAX 1999]
[DECIMALS: 0.]
[SYMBOL TYPE: None]
[SYMBOL LOCATION: None]
Q#G2.
In what year were you born?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ENTER 4-DIGIT YEAR)
ENTER 4-DIGIT YEAR 0000
(DO NOT READ) I prefer not to answer 9999
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#G3.
In what country were you born?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (DO NOT READ LIST. ACCEPT ONE RESPONSE ONLY)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#G4.
Which of the following categories best describes your current employment status? Are you:
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (READ LIST IN SEQUENCE – STOP ONCE RESPONDENT CONFIRMS CATEGORY; ACCEPT ONE RESPONSE ONLY)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#G5.
What is your primary source of income?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (READ LIST IN SEQUENCE – STOP ONCE RESPONDENT CONFIRMS CATEGORY – IF MORE THAN ONE, ASK FOR LARGEST SOURCE; ACCEPT ONE RESPONSE ONLY)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#G6.
Please tell me which of the following categories best represents your 2016 total household income, before taxes?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (READ LIST – STOP ONCE RESPONDENT CONFIRMS CATEGORY; ACCEPT ONLY ONE RESPONSE)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#G7.
Are you an Aboriginal person, that is, First Nations, Métis or Inuk (IF NEEDED: Inuit)? First Nations includes Status and non-Status Indians.
(NOTE: ABORIGINALS ASKED SEPARATELY, IN LINE WITH STATISTICS CANADA APPROACH)
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (DO NOT READ LIST; ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[OPEN-END]
[VALIDATION: OPEN – RECORD THE POSTAL CODE IN THE FORMAT A9A]
Q#G8.
Could you please provide the first three digits of your postal code?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (RECORD THE POSTAL CODE IN THE FORMAT A9A)
Specify Response
(DO NOT READ) I don’t know / I prefer not to answer 999
That concludes the survey. This survey was conducted on behalf of the Canada Revenue Agency. In the coming months the report will be available from Library and Archives Canada. We thank you very much for taking the time to participate, it is greatly appreciated.
GENERAL PROGRAMMING INSTRUCTIONS:
[TYPE OF PROJECT: Web]
[LANGUAGES: FR/EN]
[TRACKING: No]
[PROJECT PARTICULARITIES: Federal Government project, Do not ask the question about the subscription to the Leger panel]
[PROGRAMMER NOTES:]
READER NOTE: Text in green and in grey = Programming instructions.
Section Info
The Government of Canada is conducting this research survey on behalf of the Canada Revenue Agency. Leger has been hired to administer the survey. Si vous préférez répondre au sondage en français, veuillez cliquer sur FRANÇAIS [DIRECT RESPONDENT TO THE FRENCH LANGUAGE VERSION]. The survey takes about 15 minutes to complete and is voluntary and completely confidential. Your answers will remain anonymous. The survey is registered with the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association. Click here if you wish to verify its authenticity. To view our privacy policy, click here.
Section A. Preliminary Profiling
[QUESTIONS TO INCLUDE IN THIS SECTION: A1 to A6]
The following questions are for statistical purposes only.
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#A1.
Do you work with small and medium business clients on tax-related matters? For this study, small and medium businesses are defined as firms with annual gross revenue of $50 million or less.
RESPONDENT INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK IF A1=02]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
[PROGRAMMER NOTES:]
[VALIDATION:]
Q#A2.
How many employees work for your company in Canada, including yourself? This includes full-time, part-time and seasonal staff, but does not include contract staff or outsourced work.
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK IF A1=02]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#A3.
Would you say that your company’s annual revenue is approximately?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK IF A1=02]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#A4.
Is your company…?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK IF A1=02]
[MULTIPLE MENTIONS: Max 4]
[LIST ORDER: Choose an item.]
Q#A5.
In your business do you make decisions about, or are you directly involved with, any of the following?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: Please select all that apply.
[ASK IF A1=2]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: Choose an item.]
Q#A6.
Which of the following best describes your position within the business
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION:
Calculation Variable
Respondent type
[QT NAME]
Section B. Overall Perceptions of CRA
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#B1.
On a scale of 0 to 10, how would you rate the overall performance of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA)?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK IF B1≠99]
[OPEN-END]
Q#B2.
Why do you rate the performance of the CRA as (RESPONSE FROM B1) out of 10?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION:
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION GRID]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
[STATEMENT LIST ORDER: Rotated]
Q#B3.
On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means completely disagree and 10 means completely agree, based on your general impressions of the CRA, how would you rate the following statements about the CRA:
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION:
[RESPONSE LIST (Scale):]
[STATEMENT LIST]
Information from the CRA arrives in time for your business. L
Section C. Income Tax Filing and Planning
[QUESTIONS TO INCLUDE IN SECTION: ]
[PROGRAMMER NOTES: ASK TO SMEs ONLY (Type 2 / A1≠01, A3=01-05, A5=01-04, A6=01-07]
[ASK SMEs / Type 2]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#C1.
When filing business income taxes, does your business:
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK SMEs / Type 2]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: Choose an item.]
Q#C2.
And what about tax planning? Does your business …
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
Section D. Experience with CRA – Contacts
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#D1.
In the last 12 months, have you contacted the CRA for business purposes, other than for sending a business tax return?
RESPONDENT INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK IF D1=01]
[MULTIPLE MENTIONS: Max 5]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#D2.
How did you contact the CRA?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: Please select all that apply.
[ASK IF MORE THAN ONE RESPONSE AT D2, ASK D3]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: Choose an item.]
[PROGRAMMER NOTES: ONLY SHOW THOSE SELECTED AT D2]
Q#D3.
Thinking about your most recent contact, how did you get in touch with the CRA?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: Please select all that apply.
[ASK IF D1=01 ET D2=01,02,04,05 ET D3=01,02,04,05]
[MULTIPLE MENTIONS: Max 5]
[LIST ORDER: Randomized]
5
Q#D4.
What was the purpose of your most recent contact?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: Please select all that apply.
[ASK IF D1=01 ET D2=01,02,04,05 ET D3=01,02,04,05]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#D5.
On a scale of 0 to 10, how satisfied are you with the overall quality of the service you received when you contacted the CRA (INSERT RESPONSE FROM D3, OR FROM D2 IF D3 WASN’T ASKED) on this most recent occasion?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK IF D3=01 or D2=01]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#D6.
Did you get what you needed from the CRA on this particular occasion?
RESPONDENT INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
Yes 01
No 02
I can’t recall 99 F
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION GRID]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
[STATEMENT LIST ORDER: Randomized]
Q#D7.
Based on your experience, how would you compare CRA’s level of customer service with the service you might receive from …
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (READ LIST/DO NOT READ LIST.)
[RESPONSE LIST (Scale):]
[STATEMENT LIST]
Label Value Attribute Termination
Section E. CRA Website
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#E1.
Have you ever visited the CRA website to search for information on tax-related matters?
RESPONDENT INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK IF E1=01]
[SINGLE MENTION GRID]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
[STATEMENT LIST ORDER: Rotated]
Q#E2.
On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means completely disagree and 10 means completely agree, based on your general impressions of the CRA, how would you rate the following statements about the CRA:
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION:
[RESPONSE LIST (Scale):]
[STATEMENT LIST]
Section F. Compliance Burden
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION GRID]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
[STATEMENT LIST ORDER: Randomized]
Q#F1.
“Red tape” is defined as the unnecessary and undue compliance burden – that is, the time and resources spent by business to demonstrate compliance with the federal government regulations. With respect to your business, please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements.
[RESPONSE LIST (Scale):]
[STATEMENT LIST]
Section CM. General Attitudes About Compliance
The next few questions cover issues related to businesses cheating on taxes in general. By tax cheating, we mean businesses who deliberately do not declare some of their income. Nothing in this section is related to your organization, but we are interested in getting your views on this topic.
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM1.
On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means it is not at all common and 10 means it is very common, how common do you think tax cheating by businesses is in Canada?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM2.
Over the past couple of years, do you think tax cheating by businesses has:
RESPONDENT INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM3.
Do you think the CRA is currently putting too much, too little, or about the right amount of effort into reducing tax cheating by businesses?
RESPONDENT INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM4.
On a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 means very unlikely and 10 means very likely, how likely do you think it is for Canadian businesses that cheat on their taxes to get caught?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM5A.
Thinking about a situation where a company you know may be cheating on their taxes. Using a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means not at all likely and 10 means very likely, what is the likelihood you would report his company if … You suspected the company was cheating?
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM5B.
Thinking about a situation where a company you know may be cheating on their taxes. Using a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means not at all likely and 10 means very likely, what is the likelihood you would report his company if … You knew for certain the company was cheating?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM6.
Thinking about the level of taxes that Canadian businesses pay compared to the services that are provided by governments, do you feel that businesses pay significantly too much, somewhat too much, about the right amount, or too little in taxes?
RESPONDENT INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION GRID]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
[STATEMENT LIST ORDER: Randomized]
[PROGRAMMER NOTES: ASK ALL except for statement I, which is asked only to SMEs or Type 2 respondents]
Q#CM7.
Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements. Use a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 means you completely disagree, and 10 means you completely agree.
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION:
[RESPONSE LIST (Scale):]
[STATEMENT LIST]
[ASK SMEs only/ Type 2] It impacts my business when competitors do not correctly report all their income to the CRA.
Section CM. Severity of Types of Cheating
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION GRID]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
[STATEMENT LIST ORDER: Randomized]
[PROGRAMMER NOTES: ASK ALL except for statement D, E, G, H, J, K, which is asked only to SMEs or INTERMEDIAIRES respondents. Also, note that label B changes according to respondents type]
Q#CM8.
Using a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 means “not cheating at all” and 10 means “serious cheating”, how would you rate the following behaviours?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION:
[RESPONSE LIST (Scale):]
[STATEMENT LIST]
[ASK IF CM8 A à M≤5]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
[PROGRAMMER NOTES: For any ratings 5 or less in CM8, choose one at random and ask:
Please create a filter so this is not completely randomized choice of a QCM8 scenario. Add a screening variable to equilibrate the choice between the different scenarios that will be chosen for QCM9.Q#CM9A. ]
Q#CM9A.
You rated the scenario “[INSERT SCENARIO HERE]” as [RESPONSE FROM CM8] out of 10, which is not serious cheating.
Please consider the following scenario and rate on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means “not cheating at all” and 10 means “serious cheating”. How serious would you rate the following scenario:
“[INSERT SCENARIO HERE]” where the business is able to avoid paying $1,000 in taxes?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION:
[RESPONSE LIST (Scale):]
[ASK IF CM9A ≤ 5]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM9B.
You rated the scenario “[INSERT SCENARIO HERE]” as [RESPONSE FROM CM8] out of 10, which is not serious cheating.
Please consider the following scenario and rate on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means “not cheating at all” and 10 means “serious cheating”. How serious would you rate the following scenario:
“[INSERT SCENARIO HERE]” where the business is able to avoid paying $10,000 in taxes?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION:
[RESPONSE LIST (Scale):]
[ASK IF CM9B ≤ 5]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#CM9C.
You rated the scenario “[INSERT SCENARIO HERE]” as [RESPONSE FROM CM8] out of 10, which is not serious cheating.
Please consider the following scenario and rate on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means “not cheating at all” and 10 means “serious cheating”. How serious would you rate the following scenario:
“[INSERT SCENARIO HERE]” where the business is able to avoid paying $50,000 in taxes?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION:
[RESPONSE LIST (Scale):]
Section CM. Voluntary Disclosure Program
[ASK ALL]
[OPEN LIST]
[SYMBOL TYPE: None]
[SYMBOL LOCATION: None]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
[PROGRAMMER NOTES: Do not show codes 02 to 06]
Q#CM10A.
Say you discovered a mistake (SMEs: from the business taxes you filed two years ago, where you realize you still owed $1,000) / (Intermediaries: on a client’s taxes from two years ago, where you realize they still owed $1,000). What would you do?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (SEVERAL MENTIONS POSSIBLE.)
[ASK IF CM10A=01]
[OPEN LIST]
[SYMBOL TYPE: None]
[SYMBOL LOCATION: None]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
[PROGRAMMER NOTES: Do not show codes 02 to 06]
Q#CM10B.
And if you realized (SME: your business / Intermediaries: they) still owed $10,000, what would you do?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (SEVERAL MENTIONS POSSIBLE.)
[ASK IF CM10B=01]
[OPEN LIST]
[SYMBOL TYPE: None]
[SYMBOL LOCATION: None]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
[PROGRAMMER NOTES: Do not show codes 02 to 06]
Q#CM10C.
And if you realized (SME: your business / Intermediaries: they) still owed $20,000, what would you do?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION: (SEVERAL MENTIONS POSSIBLE.)
Single Mention Grid Question
[BASE: ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION GRID]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
[STATEMENT LIST ORDER: Randomized]
Q#CM11.
Using a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 means « not at all important » and 10 means « very important », how important is it … ?
RESPONDENT/INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTION:
[RESPONSE LIST (Scale):]
[STATEMENT LIST]
Section H. Corporate Profile
These last few questions will be used for statistical purposes only. Please be assured that all of your answers will remain completely anonymous and confidential.
Single Mention Question
[ASK SMEs only / Type 2]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#H1.
In which industry or sector does your business operate? If you are active in more than one sector, please identify the main sector of operations.
RESPONDENT INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK INTERMEDIARIES only / Type 1]
[MULTIPLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#H2.
What types of tax-related work does your company do on behalf of your small business clients?
RESPONDENT INSTRUCTION: (Please choose all that apply.)
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#H3.
How long has your business been in operation?
RESPONDENT INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
[ASK ALL]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST ORDER: In order]
Q#H4.
In which region is your business based:
RESPONDENT INSTRUCTION: (ONLY ONE MENTION POSSIBLE)
Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. Your opinions are important to us.
INSTRUCTIONS GÉNÉRALES DE PROGRAMMATION :
[TYPE DE PROJET : Tel]
[LANGUES : FR/EN]
[TRACKING : Non]
[PARTICULARITÉS DU PROJET :]
[NOTES AU PROGRAMMEUR : Il s’agit d’un projet pour le gouvernement fédéral, NE PAS poser la question au sujet de l’inscription au panel Léger]
NOTE AU LECTEUR : Texte en vert et en gris = consignes de programmation.
Section info
Bonjour / Hello (pause). Le gouvernement du Canada mène un sondage téléphonique sur des questions d’actualité qui intéressent les Canadiens. Voulez-vous que je continue en français ou en anglais? (AU BESOIN : Thank you. Someone will call you back shortly to complete the survey in English.)
Je m’appelle _______ et je suis de Léger, l’entreprise embauchée pour réaliser le sondage. Le sondage prend environ 15 minutes et il est entièrement confidentiel. Vos réponses demeureront anonymes. À tout moment, vous êtes libre de choisir de ne pas répondre à l’une des questions du sondage. Puis-je continuer?
AU BESOIN : La participation à ce sondage est volontaire et votre décision d’y participer ou non n’aura aucune incidence sur votre relation avec le gouvernement du Canada. Cet appel peut être écouté ou enregistré aux fins de contrôle de la qualité. Ce sondage est enregistré auprès de l’Association de la Recherche et de l’Intelligence Marketing (ARIM). Les renseignements qu’il contient seront traités conformément aux exigences de la Loi sur la protection des renseignements personnels.
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#S1.
Puis-je parler à un membre du ménage qui est âgé de 18 ans ou plus? Serait-ce vous? [SI LA PERSONNE N’EST PAS DISPONIBLE, PRENEZ UN RENDEZ-VOUS POUR LA RAPPELER]
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE. UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#S2.
Votre participation au sondage est volontaire, mais elle serait d’une grande utilité. Seriez-vous disponible pour prendre part à ce sondage? Nous pouvons le faire dès maintenant ou à un moment plus propice pour vous.
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE. UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#S3.
Est-ce que je vous ai appelé sur votre téléphone cellulaire?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE. UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI S3=01]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#S3A.
Êtes-vous dans un environnement qui vous permet de continuer aisément à répondre à ce sondage?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE. UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#S4.
NE PAS LIRE : INSCRIVEZ LE SEXE DE LA PERSONNE
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE CETTE QUESTION. INSCRIRE LA RÉPONSE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#S5.
Dans quelle province ou quel territoire vivez-vous?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE. UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
Section B. Impressions générales de l’ARC
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#B1.
L’Agence du revenu du Canada est l’organisme du gouvernement fédéral responsable, entre autres :
[MANITOBA, SASKATCHEWAN, ALBERTA ET COLOMBIE-BRITANNIQUE, Yukon, Territoires du Nord-Ouest, Nunavut] : de la perception de l’impôt sur le revenu, de l’administration de la TPS (ou taxe sur les produits et services) et du Programme d’allocation canadienne pour enfants.]
[QUÉBEC SEULEMENT : de la perception de l’impôt fédéral sur le revenu et du Programme d’allocation canadienne pour enfants.]
[PROVINCES DE L’ATLANTIQUE ET ONTARIO : de la perception de l’impôt sur le revenu fédéral, de l’administration de la TPS/TVH et du Programme d’allocation canadienne pour enfants.]
LISEZ : Tout au long de ce sondage, nous utiliserons le sigle ARC pour désigner l’Agence du revenu du Canada.
Comment évalueriez-vous le rendement global de l’Agence du revenu du Canada? Veuillez utiliser une échelle de 0 à 10, où 0 signifie « affreux » et 10, « excellent ».
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (LIRE L’ÉCHELLE AU BESOIN. UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI B1≠99]
[OUVERTE]
Q#B2.
Pourquoi évaluez-vous le rendement de l’ARC en donnant une cote de (RÉPONSE À LA B1) sur 10?
INSISTEZ : Y-a-t-il d’autres raisons?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (ENREGISTREZ LA RÉPONSE, ACCEPTEZ PLUS D’UNE RÉPONSE)
[POSER À TOUS]
[GRILLE À MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[ORDRE DES ÉNONCÉS : Aléatoire]
Q#B3.
J’aimerais maintenant que vous évaluiez l’ARC sur une série d’énoncés. Veuillez utiliser une échelle de 0 à 10, où 0 signifie que vous êtes totalement en désaccord et 10 signifie que vous êtes totalement d’accord.
(SI ON LE DEMANDE : On vous demande votre opinion selon vos impressions de l’Agence du revenu du Canada basées sur votre expérience personnelle ou sur ce que vous avez vu, lu ou entendu.)
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : LISEZ L’ÉCHELLE AU BESOIN.
[LISTE DE RÉPONSE (Échelle) :]
[LISTE D’ÉNONCÉS :]
Section C. Expérience vécue auprès de l’ARC – Production de déclarations de revenus
J’aimerais vous poser des questions au sujet de vos expériences vécues en tant que contribuable.
[LISEZ AU BESOIN, S’IL Y A UNE PAUSE DANS LES RÉPONSES AUX QUESTIONS DE CETTE SECTION : Je vous rappelle que ces questions ne servent qu’à des fins de recherche. Nous vous sommes reconnaissants d’y répondre et vous nous aiderez ainsi à ce que ce soit plus facile pour vous de produire vos déclarations de revenus auprès de l’Agence du revenu du Canada.]
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#C1.
Avez-vous envoyé votre déclaration de revenus [QUÉBEC SEULEMENT : fédérale] pour 2016?
SI ON LE DEMANDE : Il s’agit de la déclaration que vous avez produite cette année pour les revenus que vous avez gagnés en 2016. La date limite de production de cette déclaration était le 1 mai 2017.
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE. UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
Page info
[POSER SI C1=01]
[NOTES AU PROGRAMMEUR :]
QINF#1.
La série de questions suivante portera principalement sur vos impôts de l’année 2016.
[POSER SI C1=01]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#C2.
Avez-vous rempli votre déclaration de revenus de 2016 vous-même, ou avez-vous reçu de l’aide?
(L’UTILISATION D’UN LOGICIEL D’IMPÔT NE COMPTE PAS COMME DE L’AIDE REÇUE)
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE. UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI C2=02]
[MENTIONS MULTIPLES : Max=4]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#C3.
De qui avez-vous reçu de l’aide?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : LISEZ LES CATÉGORIES SEULEMENT SI NÉCESSAIRE; INDIQUEZ PLUS D’UN CODE SI C’EST LE CAS; INCLUEZ LES PERSONNES QUI DONNENT DES CONSEILS
[POSER SI C1=01]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#C4.
[SI C2=01 ou 99] : Comment avez-vous produit vos déclarations de revenus? [AU BESOIN : Par exemple, l’avez-vous envoyée par courrier ou par voie électronique? ]
[SI C2=02] : De quelle façon votre déclaration a-t-elle été produite ? [AU BESOIN : Par exemple, cette personne ou le préparateur de déclarations de revenus l’a-t-il envoyée par courrier ou par voie électronique? ]
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE. UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
Section D. Expérience vécue auprès de l’ARC – Communications
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#D1.
Au cours des 12 derniers mois, avez-vous communiqué avec l’ARC dans des cas autres que pour envoyer des déclarations de revenus des particuliers ou des entreprises?
(LA COMMUNICATION COMPREND LA DEMANDE DE RENSEIGNEMENTS; ENTREPRISE RENVOIE À LA SOCIÉTÉ, À LA TPS/TVH OU À LA PAIE)
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE. UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI D1=01]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#D2A.
De quelle façon avez-vous communiqué avec l’ARC lors de votre plus récent rapport avec cette dernière au cours des 12 derniers mois?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : PRÉCISEZ SI NÉCESSAIRE; « COMMUNIQUER » COMPREND RECHERCHER DES RENSEIGNEMENTS (LIRE LA LISTE / UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI D1=01, NE PAS POSER SI QD2A=99]
[MENTIONS MULTIPLES : Max=Y]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#D2B.
Avez-vous communiqué avec l’ARC d’une autre façon au cours des 12 derniers mois?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : LIRE LA LISTE / ACCEPTEZ PLUSIEURS RÉPONSES
[POSER SI D2A=01, 02,04]
[MENTIONS MULTIPLES : Max=6]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : Aléatoire]
Q#D3.
Votre DERNIÈRE communication était-elle pour…?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : LISEZ LA LISTE – ACCEPTEZ PLUS D’UNE RÉPONSE
[POSER SI D2A=01]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#D4
Quel est votre niveau de satisfaction concernant la qualité globale du service que vous avez reçu lors de votre dernière communication avec l’Agence du revenu du Canada par téléphone? Veuillez utiliser une échelle de 0 à 10, où 0 signifie que vous êtes totalement insatisfait et 10 signifie que vous êtes totalement satisfait.
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI D2A=01]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#D5.
Avez-vous de l’Agence du revenu du Canada ce dont vous aviez besoin à ce moment-là?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE. UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI D1=01]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#D6.
Selon votre expérience, diriez-vous que le niveau du service à la clientèle offert par l’ARC est meilleur, à peu près semblable ou pire que le service que vous pourriez recevoir des institutions financières avec lesquelles vous faites affaire?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : COMPREND TOUS LES TYPES, COMME LES BANQUES ET LES CAISSES POPULAIRES
[LISTE DE RÉPONSE (Échelle) :]
Section E. Le site Web de l’ARC
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#E1.
Avez-vous déjà visité le site Web de l’Agence du revenu du Canada pour y chercher des renseignements sur des sujets fiscaux?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE. UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI E1=01]
[GRILLE À MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[ORDRE DES ÉNONCÉS : Aléatoire]
Q#E2.
J’aimerais maintenant vous lire une liste d’énoncés au sujet du site Web de l’Agence du revenu du Canada. Pour chaque énoncé, veuillez utiliser une échelle de 0 à 10, où 0 signifie que vous êtes tout à fait en désaccord et 10 signifie que vous êtes tout à fait d’accord.
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : LIRE L’ÉCHELLE AU BESOIN
[LISTE DE RÉPONSE (Échelle) :]
[LISTE D’ÉNONCÉS :]
Section CM. Attitude générale à l’égard de l’observation
Les prochaines questions portent sur des enjeux liés à la fraude fiscale dans les déclarations de revenus. Par fraude fiscale, nous voulons dire les personnes qui choisissent délibérément de ne pas déclarer une partie de leurs revenus. Rien dans cette section ne vous concerne personnellement. Nous voulons plutôt connaître votre opinion à ce sujet.
[SI ON VOUS DEMANDE, PRÉCISEZ QUE LES QUESTIONS PORTENT UNIQUEMENT SUR LES DÉCLARATIONS DE REVENUS DES PARTICULIERS.]
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM1.
Sur une échelle de 0 à 10, où « 0 » signifie « Pas du tout courant » et « 10 » signifie « Très courant », selon vous, dans quelle mesure la fraude fiscale est-elle courante au Canada?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM2.
Au cours des dernières années, croyez-vous que la fraude fiscale par les entreprises a :
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (LISEZ LA LISTE; UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM3.
Pensez-vous que l’Agence du revenu du Canada en fait trop, pas assez ou juste assez pour réduire la fraude fiscale par les entreprises?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM4.
Sur une échelle de 0 à 10, où « 0 » signifie « Très improbable » et « 10 » signifie « Très probable », selon vous, dans quelle mesure les entreprises canadiennes qui trichent dans leurs déclarations de revenus sont-elles susceptibles de se faire prendre?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM5A.
Pensez à une situation où une personne que vous connaissez pratique peut-être la fraude fiscale. Sur une échelle de 0 à 10, où « 0 » signifie « Pas du tout probable » et « 10 » signifie « Très probable », quelle est la probabilité que vous dénonciez cette personne si vous soupçonniez qu’elle pratiquait la fraude fiscale?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM5B.
Pensez à une situation où une personne que vous connaissez pratique peut-être la fraude fiscale. Sur une échelle de 0 à 10, où « 0 » signifie « Pas du tout probable » et « 10 » signifie « Très probable », quelle est la probabilité que vous dénonciez cette personne si vous saviez avec certitude qu’elle pratiquait la fraude fiscale?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM6.
Si vous comparez l’impôt payé par l’ensemble des Canadiens et Canadiennes aux services offerts par les gouvernements, pensez-vous que les Canadiens et les Canadiennes paient trop d’impôt, juste assez d’impôt ou trop peu d’impôt?
SI LE CONTRIBUABLE RÉPOND « TROP » D’IMPÔT, SONDEZ : Croyez-vous que les Canadiens et Canadiennes paient « beaucoup » trop d’impôt ou « un peu » trop d’impôt?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[GRILLE À MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[ORDRE DES ÉNONCÉS : Aléatoire]
[NOTES AU PROGRAMMEUR : POSER À TOUS]
Q#CM7.
Veuillez me dire si vous êtes d’accord ou en désaccord avec chacun des énoncés suivants. Pour chaque énoncé, veuillez utiliser une échelle de 0 à 10, où 0 signifie que vous êtes tout à fait en désaccord et 10 signifie que vous êtes tout à fait d’accord.
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : RÉPÉTEZ L’ÉCHELLE, AU BESOIN.
[LISTE DE RÉPONSE (Échelle) :]
[LISTE D’ÉNONCÉS :]
Section CM. Gravité des types de fraude
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM8A.
Veuillez confirmer si vous considérez les situations suivantes comme étant des cas de fraude fiscale ou non (dans l’affirmative, demandez si c’est grave ou non).
Un employé à temps plein travaille également comme disc-jockey les fins de semaine, mais il ne déclare pas ces gains dans sa déclaration de revenus.
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (LIRE AU BESOIN, UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI CM8A≠01]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM8B.
Qu’advient-il si cette personne gagne un revenu de 2 500 $ par année en travaillant comme disc-jockey et qu’elle ne déclare pas cette somme dans sa déclaration de revenus?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (LIRE AU BESOIN, UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI CM8B≠01]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM8C.
Qu’advient-il si cette personne gagne un revenu de 5 000 $ par année en travaillant comme disc-jockey et qu’elle ne déclare pas cette somme dans sa déclaration de revenus?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (LIRE AU BESOIN, UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI CM8C≠01]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM8D.
Qu’advient-il si cette personne gagne un revenu de 20 000 $ par année en travaillant comme disc-jockey et qu’elle ne déclare pas cette somme dans sa déclaration de revenus?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (LIRE AU BESOIN, UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[GRILLE À MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[ORDRE DES ÉNONCÉS : Aléatoire]
[NOTES AU PROGRAMMEUR :]
[VALIDATION :]
Q#CM9.
Sur une échelle de 0 à 10, où « 0 » signifie « Pas du tout un cas de fraude fiscale » et « 10 » signifie « Grave cas de fraude fiscale », quelle cote accorderiez-vous aux comportements suivants?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : RÉPÉTEZ L’ÉCHELLE, AU BESOIN.
[LISTE DE RÉPONSE (Échelle) :]
[LISTE D’ÉNONCÉS :]
Section CM. Programme des divulgations volontaires
[POSER À TOUS]
[LISTE OUVERTE – MENTIONS MULTIPLES; Min=1 ; Max=7]]
[TYPE DE SYMBOLE : Aucun]
[EMPLACEMENT DU SYMBOLE : Aucun]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM10A.
Supposons que vous découvrez une erreur dans votre déclaration de revenus produite il y a deux ans et vous réalisez que vous devez toujours 100 $. Que feriez-vous?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE)
[POSER SI Q10A=01]
[LISTE OUVERTE – MENTIONS MULTIPLES; Min=1 ; Max=7]]
[TYPE DE SYMBOLE : Aucun]
[EMPLACEMENT DU SYMBOLE : Aucun]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM10B.
Si vous réalisez que vous devez toujours 1 000 $, que feriez-vous?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE)
[POSER SI Q10B=01]
[LISTE OUVERTE – MENTIONS MULTIPLES; Min=1 ; Max=7]]
[TYPE DE SYMBOLE : Aucun]
[EMPLACEMENT DU SYMBOLE : Aucun]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM10C.
Si vous réalisez que vous devez toujours 10 000 $, que feriez-vous?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE)
[POSER À TOUS]
[GRILLE À MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[ORDRE DES ÉNONCÉS : Aléatoire]
Q#CM11.
Sur une échelle de 0 à 10, où 0 signifie « pas du tout important » et 10 signifie « très important », dans quelle mesure est-il important … ?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : RÉPÉTEZ L’ÉCHELLE, AU BESOIN.
[LISTE DE RÉPONSE (Échelle) :]
[LISTE D’ÉNONCÉS :]
Section G. Profil de du répondant
Pour terminer, j’aimerais vous poser quelques questions sur vous et votre ménage aux fins de statistique seulement. Soyez assuré que vos réponses demeureront confidentielles.
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#G1.
Quel niveau de scolarité le plus élevé avez-vous terminé?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE. UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER ÀTOUS]
[NUMÉRIQUE : BORNES Min=1917, Max=1999]
[DÉCIMALE : 0.]
[TYPE DE SYMBOLE : Aucun]
[EMPLACEMENT DU SYMBOLE : Aucun]
Q#G2.
Quelle est votre année de naissance?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (ENTREZ LES QUATRE CHIFFRES DE L’ANNÉE)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#G3.
Quel est votre pays de naissance?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE. UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#G4.
Laquelle des catégories suivantes décrit le mieux votre emploi actuel? Vous êtes :
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (LISEZ LA LISTE EN ORDRE – ARRÊTEZ LORSQUE LE RÉPONDANT CONFIRME LA CATÉGORIE; ACCEPTEZ SEULEMENT UNE RÉPONSE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#G5.
Quelle est votre principale source de revenus?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (LISEZ LA LISTE EN ORDRE – ARRÊTEZ LORSQUE LE RÉPONDANT CONFIRME LA CATÉGORIE – S’IL Y EN A PLUS D’UNE, DEMANDEZ LAQUELLE EST LA PRINCIPALE; ACCEPTEZ SEULEMENT UNE RÉPONSE)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#G6.
Veuillez indiquer laquelle des catégories suivantes représente le mieux le revenu total de votre ménage en 2016 avant les impôts.
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (LISEZ LA LISTE EN ORDRE – ARRÊTEZ LORSQUE LE RÉPONDANT CONFIRME LA CATÉGORIE – S’IL Y EN A PLUS D’UNE, DEMANDEZ LAQUELLE EST LA PRINCIPALE; ACCEPTEZ SEULEMENT UNE RÉPONSE)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#G7
Faites-vous partie de la population autochtone, c’est-à-dire Première Nation, Métis ou Inuk (AU BESOIN : Inuit)? Première Nation comprend les Indiens avec statut et les Indiens sans statut.
REMARQUE : AUTOCHTONES MENTIONNÉS SÉPARÉMENT, CONFORMÉMENT À L’APPROCHE DE STATISTIQUE CANADA
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE. UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[OUVERTE : VALIDATION - FORCER LE FORMAT A9A]
Q#G8.
Pourriez-vous me fournir les trois premiers caractères de votre code postal?
INSTRUCTION À L'INTERVIEWEUR : (INSCRIRE LE CODE POSTAL EN FORMAT A9A)
(NE PAS LIRE) Je préfère ne pas répondre 999
Voilà qui met fin au sondage que nous avons effectué pour le compte de l’Agence du revenu du Canada. Dans les mois à venir, le rapport sera disponible de Bibliothèque et Archives Canada. Je vous remercie beaucoup d’avoir pris le temps de répondre au sondage. Nous vous en sommes très reconnaissants.
INSTRUCTIONS GÉNÉRALES DE PROGRAMMATION :
[TYPE DE PROJET : Web]
[LANGUES : FR/EN]
[TRACKING : Non]
[PARTICULARITÉS DU PROJET : Il s’agit d’un projet pour le gouvernement fédéral, NE PAS poser la question au sujet de l’inscription au panel Léger]
NOTE AU LECTEUR : Texte en vert et en gris = consignes de programmation.
Section info
Le gouvernement du Canada mène ce sondage de recherche au nom de l’Agence du revenu du Canada. Léger a été embauché pour réaliser le sondage. Si vous préférez répondre au sondage en français, veuillez cliquer sur FRANÇAIS [LIEN DIRECT VERS LA VERSION FRANÇAISE]. Le sondage prend environ 15 minutes et il est entièrement confidentiel. Votre participation est volontaire, et vos réponses demeureront anonymes. Le sondage est enregistré auprès de l’Association de la Recherche et de l’Intelligence marketing. Cliquez ici si vous désirez vérifier son authenticité. Pour consulter notre politique sur la protection des renseignements personnels, cliquez ici.
Section infoA. Établissement préliminaire du profil
[QUESTIONS À INCLURE DANS LA SECTION : A1 à A6]
Les prochaines questions serviront à des fins statistiques seulement.
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#A1.
Travaillez-vous avec des petites et moyennes entreprises sur des questions fiscales? Pour les besoins de l’étude, les petites et moyennes entreprises sont définies comme des entreprises ayant des recettes brutes annuelles de 50 millions de dollars ou moins.
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI A1=02]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#A2.
Combien d’employés travaillent pour votre entreprise au Canada, y compris vous-même? Cela comprend les employés à temps plein, à temps partiel et saisonniers, mais n’inclut pas les employés contractuels ou le travail sous-traité.
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI A1=02]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#A3.
Quel est le revenu annuel approximatif de votre entreprise?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI A1=02]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#A4.
Votre entreprise est …?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI A1=02]
[MENTIONS MULTIPLES : Max=4]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : Sélectionner un item.]
Q#A5.
Dans votre entreprise, prenez-vous des décisions par rapport aux éléments suivants ou y participez-vous directement?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : Veuillez choisir tout ce qui s’applique à vous.
[POSER SI A1=02]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#A6.
Lequel des choix suivants décrit le mieux votre poste dans l’entreprise?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
Variable de calculs
Type de répondants
INTERMÉDIAIRE FISCAL (A1=01)
PME = (A1≠01, A3=01-05, A5=01-04, A6=01-07)
Section B. Impressions générales de l’ARC
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#B1.
Sur une échelle de 0 à 10, quelle cote donnez-vous au rendement global de l’Agence du revenu du Canada (ARC)?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI B1≠99]
[OUVERTE]
Q#B2.
Pourquoi évaluez-vous le rendement de l’ARC en donnant une cote de (RÉPONSE À LA B1) sur 10?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (Veuillez préciser)
[POSER À TOUS]
[GRILLE À MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[ORDRE DES ÉNONCÉS : Aléatoire]
Q#B3.
Sur une échelle de 0 à 10, ou 0 signifie que vous êtes totalement en désaccord et 10 signifie que vous êtes totalement d’accord, selon vos impressions générales de l’ARC, quelle cote donneriez-vous aux énoncés suivants sur l’ARC :
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR :
[LISTE DE RÉPONSE (Échelle) :]
[LISTE D’ÉNONCÉS :]
Section C. Production de déclarations de revenus et planification (PME SEULEMENT)
[POSER AUX PMEs / Type 2]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#C1.
Lorsque vous produisez une déclaration de revenus des sociétés, votre entreprise :
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER AUX PMEs / Type 2]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#C2.
Qu’en est-il de la planification fiscale? Votre entreprise…
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
Section D. Expérience vécue auprès de l’ARC – Communications
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#D1.
Au cours des 12 derniers mois, avez-vous communiqué avec l’ARC pour les besoins de votre entreprise autres que l’envoi d’une déclaration de revenus des entreprises?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI D1=01]
[MENTIONS MULTIPLES : Max=5]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#D2.
Comment avez-vous communiqué avec l’ARC?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : Veuillez indiquer tout ce qui s’applique à vous.
[POSER S’IL Y A PLUS D’UNE RÉPONSE À LA QUESTION D2]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[NOTES AU PROGRAMMEUR : INDIQUEZ SEULEMENT LES RÉPONSES SÉLECTIONNÉES À LA QUESTION D2]
Q#D3.
En gardant à l’esprit votre plus récent contact, comment avez-vous communiqué avec l’ARC?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI D1=01 ET D2=01,02,04,05 ET D3=01,02,04,05]
[MENTIONS MULTIPLES : Max=6]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : Aléatoire]
Q#D4.
Quelle était la raison de votre dernière communication?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : Veuillez indiquer tout ce qui s’applique à vous.
[POSER SI D1=01 ET D2=01,02,04,05 ET D3=01,02,04,05]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#D5.
Sur une échelle de 0 à 10, quel est votre niveau de satisfaction sur la qualité globale du service reçu lorsque vous avez communiqué avec l’ARC (INSÉREZ LA RÉPONSE À PARTIR DE LA D3 OU DE LA D2 SI LA D3 N’A PAS ÉTÉ POSÉE) à ce moment-là?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI D3=01 or D2=01]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#D6.
Avez-vous obtenu ce que vous désiriez de l’ARC à cette occasion en particulier?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[GRILLE À MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[ORDRE DES ÉNONCÉS : Aléatoire]
Q#D7.
Selon votre expérience, comment compareriez-vous le niveau du service à la clientèle de l’ARC au service que vous pourriez recevoir …
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR :
[LISTE DE RÉPONSE (Échelle) :]
[LISTE D’ÉNONCÉS :]
Section E. Site Web de l’ARC
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : Sélectionner un item.]
Q#E1.
Avez-vous déjà visité le site Web de l’ARC pour chercher des renseignements sur des questions liées à l’impôt?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI E1=01]
[GRILLE À MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[ORDRE DES ÉNONCÉS : Aléatoire]
Q#E2.
Sur une échelle de 0 à 10, ou 0 signifie que vous êtes totalement en désaccord et 10 signifie que vous êtes totalement d’accord, selon vos impressions générales de l’ARC, quelle cote donneriez-vous aux énoncés suivants sur l’ARC :
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR :
[LISTE DE RÉPONSE (Échelle) :]
[LISTE D’ÉNONCÉS :]
Section F. Fardeau lié à l’observation
[POSER À TOUS]
[GRILLE À MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[ORDRE DES ÉNONCÉS : Aléatoire]
Q#F1.
La paperasse est définie comme étant tout fardeau inutile et excessif en matière de conformité par rapport au temps et aux ressources que les entreprises doivent consacrer au respect des lois fédérales. En vous basant sur votre expérience d’entreprise, veuillez indiquer dans quelle mesure vous êtes d’accord avec les énoncés suivants.
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR :
[LISTE DE RÉPONSE (Échelle) :]
[LISTE D’ÉNONCÉS :]
Section CM. Attitude générale à l’égard de l’observation
Les prochaines questions portent sur des enjeux liés à la fraude fiscale par les entreprises. Par fraude fiscale, nous voulons dire les entreprises qui choisissent délibérément de ne pas déclarer une partie de leurs revenus. Rien dans cette section ne concerne votre entreprise. Nous voulons plutôt connaître votre opinion à ce sujet.
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM1.
Sur une échelle de 0 à 10, où « 0 » signifie « Pas du tout courant » et « 10 » signifie « Très courant », selon vous, dans quelle mesure la fraude fiscale par les entreprises est-elle courante au Canada?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM2.
Au cours des dernières années, croyez-vous que la fraude fiscale par les entreprises a :
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM3.
Pensez-vous que l’Agence du revenu du Canada en fait trop, pas assez ou juste assez pour réduire la fraude fiscale par les entreprises?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM4.
Sur une échelle de 0 à 10, où « 0 » signifie « Très improbable » et « 10 » signifie « Très probable », selon vous, dans quelle mesure les entreprises canadiennes qui trichent dans leurs déclarations de revenus sont-elles susceptibles de se faire prendre?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM5A.
Pensez à une situation où une entreprise que vous connaissez pratique peut-être la fraude fiscale. Sur une échelle de 0 à 10, où « 0 » signifie « Pas du tout probable » et « 10 » signifie « Très probable », quelle est la probabilité que vous dénonciez cette entreprise si… vous soupçonniez qu’elle pratiquait la fraude fiscale?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM5B.
Pensez à une situation où une entreprise que vous connaissez pratique peut-être la fraude fiscale. Sur une échelle de 0 à 10, où « 0 » signifie « Pas du tout probable » et « 10 » signifie « Très probable », quelle est la probabilité que vous dénonciez cette entreprise si… vous saviez avec certitude qu’elle pratiquait la fraude fiscale?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#CM6.
Si vous comparez l’impôt payé par les entreprises canadiennes aux services offerts par les gouvernements, pensez-vous que les entreprises canadiennes paient beaucoup trop d’impôt, un peu trop d’impôt, juste assez d’impôt ou trop peu d’impôt?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[GRILLE À MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[ORDRE DES ÉNONCÉS : Aléatoire]
[NOTES AU PROGRAMMEUR : POSER À TOUS, à l’exception de l’énoncé I, qui doit être posé aux PMEs ou aux Type 2 seulement]
Q#CM7.
Veuillez indiquer si vous êtes d’accord ou en désaccord avec chacun des énoncés suivants. Pour chaque énoncé, veuillez utiliser une échelle de 0 à 10, où 0 signifie que vous êtes tout à fait en désaccord et 10 signifie que vous êtes tout à fait d’accord.
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR :
[LISTE DE RÉPONSE (Échelle) :]
[LISTE D’ÉNONCÉS :]
Section CM. Gravité des types de fraude
[POSER À TOUS]
[GRILLE À MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[ORDRE DES ÉNONCÉS : Aléatoire]
[NOTES AU PROGRAMMEUR : POSER À TOUS, à l’exception des énoncés D, E, G, H, J, K, qui doivent être posés aux PMEs ou aux INTERMÉDIAIRES seulement. Aussi, noté le changement de libellé du code selon le type de répondants]
Q#CM8.
Sur une échelle de 0 à 10, où « 0 » signifie « Pas du tout un cas de fraude fiscale » et « 10 » signifie « Grave cas de fraude fiscale », quelle cote accorderiez-vous aux comportements suivants?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR :
[LISTE DE RÉPONSE (Échelle) :]
[LISTE D’ÉNONCÉS :]
[POSER SI au moins un scénario à CM8 (a-m) ≤5]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[NOTES AU PROGRAMMEUR : Choisir un au hasard un scénario à QCM8 (a-m) qui est ≤5 et l’insérer dans la question.]
Veuillez créer un filtre afin que ce ne soit pas un choix complètement aléatoire d'un scénario QCM8. Ajoutez une variable de sélection pour équilibrer le choix entre les différents scénarios qui seront choisis pour QCM9.
Q#CM9A.
Vous avez noté [RÉPONSE À LA CM8] sur 10, le scénario [INSÉREZ LE SCÉNARIO ICI], donc comme n’étant pas un grave cas de fraude fiscale.
Veuillez considérer le scénario suivant et notez sur une échelle de 0 à 10, où « 0 » signifie « Pas du tout un cas de fraude fiscale » et « 10 » signifie « Grave cas de fraude fiscale ». Quelle note donneriez-vous au scénario suivant:
«[INSÉREZ LE SCÉNARIO ICI]» lorsque l’entreprise est en mesure d’éviter de payer 1 000 $ à titre d’impôt?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI CM9A ≤ 5]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[NOTES AU PROGRAMMEUR : Choisir un au hasard un scénario à QCM8 (a-m) qui est ≤5 et l’insérer dans la question.]
Q#CM9B.
Vous avez noté [RÉPONSE À LA CM8] sur 10, le scénario [INSÉREZ LE SCÉNARIO ICI], donc comme n’étant pas un grave cas de fraude fiscale.
Veuillez considérer le scénario suivant et notez sur une échelle de 0 à 10, où « 0 » signifie « Pas du tout un cas de fraude fiscale » et « 10 » signifie « Grave cas de fraude fiscale ». Quelle note donneriez-vous au scénario suivant:
«[INSÉREZ LE SCÉNARIO ICI]» lorsque l’entreprise est en mesure d’éviter de payer 10 000 $ à titre d’impôt?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER SI CM9B ≤ 5]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[NOTES AU PROGRAMMEUR : Choisir un au hasard un scénario à QCM8 (a-m) qui est ≤5 et l’insérer dans la question.]
Q#CM9C.
Vous avez noté [RÉPONSE À LA CM8] sur 10, le scénario [INSÉREZ LE SCÉNARIO ICI], donc comme n’étant pas un grave cas de fraude fiscale.
Veuillez considérer le scénario suivant et notez sur une échelle de 0 à 10, où « 0 » signifie « Pas du tout un cas de fraude fiscale » et « 10 » signifie « Grave cas de fraude fiscale ». Quelle note donneriez-vous au scénario suivant:
«[INSÉREZ LE SCÉNARIO ICI]» lorsque l’entreprise est en mesure d’éviter de payer 50 000 $ à titre d’impôt?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
Section CM. Programme des divulgations volontaires
[POSER À TOUS]
[LISTE OUVERTE]
[TYPE DE SYMBOLE : Aucun]
[EMPLACEMENT DU SYMBOLE : Aucun]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[NOTES AU PROGRAMMEUR : Ne pas montrer les codes 02 à 06]
Q#CM10A.
Supposons que vous découvrez une erreur (PME : dans la déclaration de revenus de votre entreprise produite il y a deux ans / INTERMÉDIAIRES : dans la déclaration de revenus d’un client produite il y a deux ans) et vous réalisez que vous devez toujours 1 000 $. Que feriez-vous?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (PLUSIEURS MENTIONS POSSIBLES.)
[POSER SI Q10A=01]
[LISTE OUVERTE]
[TYPE DE SYMBOLE : Aucun]
[EMPLACEMENT DU SYMBOLE : Aucun]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[NOTES AU PROGRAMMEUR : Ne pas montrer les codes 02 à 06]
Q#CM10B.
Si vous réalisez que (PME: votre entreprise doit / Intermédiaires: votre client doit) toujours 10 000 $, que feriez-vous?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (PLUSIEURS MENTIONS POSSIBLES.)
[POSER SI Q10B=01]
[LISTE OUVERTE]
[TYPE DE SYMBOLE : Aucun]
[EMPLACEMENT DU SYMBOLE : Aucun]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[NOTES AU PROGRAMMEUR : Ne pas montrer les codes 02 à 06]
Q#CM10C.
Si vous réalisez que (PME: votre entreprise doit / Intermédiaires: votre client doit) toujours 20 000 $, que feriez-vous?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (PLUSIEURS MENTIONS POSSIBLES.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[GRILLE À MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
[ORDRE DES ÉNONCÉS : Aléatoire]
Q#CM11.
Sur une échelle de 0 à 10, où 0 signifie « pas du tout important » et 10 signifie « très important », dans quelle mesure est-il important … ?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR :
[LISTE DE RÉPONSE (Échelle) :]
[LISTE D’ÉNONCÉS :]
Section H. Profil de l’entreprise
Ces dernières questions seront utilisées à des fins de statistique seulement. Soyez assuré que toutes vos réponses demeureront strictement confidentielles.
[POSER AUX PMEs / Type 2 seulement]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#H1.
Dans quelle industrie ou quel secteur exploitez-vous votre entreprise? Si vous êtes actif dans plus d’un secteur, veuillez déterminer le secteur d’activité principal.
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER AUX INTERMÉDIAIRES / Type 2 seulement]
[MENTIONS MULTIPLES : Max=Y]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#H2.
Quels types de tâches fiscales votre entreprise fait-elle pour le compte de vos clients qui sont des petites entreprises?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : Veuillez indiquer tout ce qui s’applique à vous.
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#H3.
Depuis combien de temps votre entreprise mène-t-elle ses activités?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
[POSER À TOUS]
[MENTION SIMPLE]
[ORDRE DE LA LISTE : En ordre]
Q#H4.
Dans quelle région votre entreprise se trouve-t-elle?
INSTRUCTION AU RÉPONDANT / INTERVIEWEUR : (UNE SEULE MENTION POSSIBLE.)
Merci d’avoir pris le temps de répondre au sondage. Votre opinion est importante pour nous.