Alberta kiboshes plan for single Canadian securities regulator

So much for mobile, accessible capital for growing Canadian businesses…

Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach poured cold water yesterday on federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty’s push for a nationwide securities regulator, saying he has no interest in moving beyond an alternative system provinces have set up.

He said he’s content to stick with the “passport system” – arranged by all provinces except Ontario – that synchronizes securities approvals but allows 13 separate securities commissions to remain.

That’s right – thirteen separate securities commissions for Canada, each one a fiefdom unto itself in terms of enforcing securities legislation. Restricting the flow of capital through a country quickly falling behind its core G8 competitors.

Alberta’s support is considered crucial to forming a single securities regulator because companies headquartered in the province have the second-biggest market capitalization of any jurisdiction in Canada.

Ontario is the largest in terms of market cap, but Alberta is growing quickly on the strength of oil sands development.

According to Canada’s Department of Finance:

In December 2003 the Wise Persons’ Committee presented its report recommending that the federal and provincial governments collaborate to establish a single securities regulator in Canada. The federal government continues to work with the provinces towards the development of a single securities regulator to promote greater efficiency in Canada’s capital markets.

C’mon guys, they don’t call them wise persons for nothing!

What do you think? Is there any hope for a single regulator in Canada to rival the SEC in the US and the FSA in the UK?

Facebook vs. LinkedIn for accounting professionals

Which nascent social network does it better for work-related connections?

Facebook is a social utility that connects people with friends and others who work, study and live around them.

LinkedIn is an online network of experienced professionals from around the world, representing 130 industries.

By their own definitions, these two utilities target slightly different types of users. Facebook of course began at Harvard and then expanded to other universities and colleges, and then opened itself up to everyone else. LinkedIn is open to everyone, but is tightly focused on where you work or have worked, not where you live or went to school.

Because of LinkedIn’s focus, it’s easy to connect with current and former colleagues. You fill in your details and LinkedIn does the rest, providing a list of people registered on the site who have the same employer(s) listed.

On Facebook, where you live, where you went to school, and where you work are called “networks”. I’m in the Toronto and Brock University networks. But the problem with Facebook is that it is limited in terms of workplace networks.

Right now, my firm isn’t on Facebook, so I can’t join that particular network since it doesn’t exist. Facebook does provide a way to suggest new networks, but so far the suggestion I’ve made to add my firm has gone ignored.

The problem for me (and no doubt others) with LinkedIn is that there just isn’t as many people I know on it as Facebook. I have over a hundred friends on Facebook, and I have 3 “connections” on LinkedIn. Clearly for me Facebook is the better tool.

And there are ways to network using Facebook even if your employer isn’t available. Anyone can start a group on Facebook for any reason (no matter how spurious), and there are many related to jobs. For instance:

As well, there are groups aimed at the profession:

I think what’s interesting about these groups is they’re started and populated by the young people in those firms. As they progress within their firms and take on more responsibility for things like hiring, Facebook may become even more important for job seekers.

Both networks provide value to their users, that much is clear. I wish I had more contacts on LinkedIn, so that the value of the site to me was higher, but that will just take time. As more of my colleagues learn about LinkedIn, it will grow.

As far as features go, LinkedIn trumps Facebook. But for pure numbers and flexibility, Facebook wins out.

What do you think?

Spring has sprung for Canadian accountants

May 1 is a special day for Canadians of all types (since it’s the day after taxes are due here), but it’s very special for accountants who’ve spent the past few months first up to their necks in audits (there are many businesses that operate on a calendar year end) and followed that up with busy personal tax season.

But as of today, we’ve reached the other side of the bottleneck. The suns shines brighter today, the beer tastes better, and summer is not far away! I know this blog has been dim for a few weeks, with none of my usual thought-provoking industry commentary, but consider this post the signal of its rebirth!

Bizarre taxes to put our situation into perspective

We like to complain (and for good reason) about the litany of taxes imposed on us by various levels of government, but this post on Neatorama details some bizarre taxes through history that make current ones seem tame.

Peter the Great, czar of Russia, imposed a tax on souls in 1718…meaning everybody had to pay it (it’s similar to a head tax or a poll tax). Peter was antireligious (he was an avid fan of Voltaire and other secular humanist philosophers), but agreeing with him didn’t excuse anyone from paying the tax—if you didn’t believe humans had a soul, you still had to pay a “religious dissenters” tax. Peter also taxed beards, beehives, horse collars, hats, boots, basements, chimneys, food, clothing, all males, as well as birth, marriage, and even burial.

I have to admit current taxes seem much more logical, taxing income, consumption, property values, estates, gas, etc.

I, like Krupo, have very nearly said goodbye to preparing personal taxes for another year. I start a new four-week audit this week, which will keep me away from the office unless we get called in. The past couple weeks I’ve been mainly doing personal returns for our clients.

I don’t dislike preparing taxes, and I do corporate tax returns year round, which gives me a good break from audit work. But for the same reason I don’t think I’m interested in specializing in tax, even though you make more money. Tax is good, but only as a break from other stuff.

Are recruiters really using the internet?

A long time ago, before I bought this domain and set up this blog, I Googled myself to see what came up. What came up, was Neil McIntyre Photography, at neilmcintyre.com. It’s taken about a year, but I’m now the #1 result when you Google me. Great success!

On a related note, I keep reading that recruiters and hiring managers are increasingly using the internet to search about their candidates. Most articles focus on these inquisitive people finding embarrassing pictures which result in the candidate not getting the job (which I guess makes for a juicier story from a readership standpoint), but this post on Web Worker Daily focuses on improving your online “brand” and using it positively to get jobs.

So why is it that of the many recruiters I’ve talked to since passing the UFE, precisely none of them have mentioned that they’ve seen my blog? As noted in the first paragraph, it’s easily found. The whole thing is very puzzling.

Update: Here’s another interesting take on the recruiting industry: “I’ve been increasingly annoyed by the spammy, mail-merged, sugar-laced drivel that passes for “personalized” contact these days.” Read the rest, it’s gold!