DioGuardi Privacy Concerns

DioGuardi Privacy Concerns - 5.0 out of 5 based on 53 votes
 

( 53 Votes )

Philippe DioGuardi

 

Keep your tax problems private.
Talk to DioGuardi

Click to Call DioGuardi

 

Verisign SecureNow that you are here
YOU'RE SAFE!

Click here to explore our website in private.

 

And before you go...

Bookmark this site and
never google tax again!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Join the Conversation below:

 

Eric Schmidt EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN, GOOGLE responds to challenges about the privacy of Google and search engines.
 

During an interview which aired on December 3, 2009, on the CNBC documentary "Inside the Mind of Google", Schmidt was asked, "People are treating Google like their most trusted friend. Should they be?" His reply was: "I think judgment matters. If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place, but if you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines including Google do retain this information for some time…and it’s important, for example, that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act. It is possible that, that information could be made available to the authorities." [50][51]. At the Techonomy conference on August 4, 2010, Schmidt expressed that technology is good, but he said that the only way to manage the challenges is "much greater transparency and no anonymity." Schmidt also stated that in an era of asymmetric threats, "true anonymity is too dangerous." [52] According to PCWorld, Schmidt also expressed the following sentiment: "if you don’t have anything to hide, you have nothing to fear".[53]
 

Read entire article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Schmidt

 

More on search engine exposure
Follow DioGuardi on DioTax

 

And from the Income Tax Act:

231.2

Requirement to provide documents or information

(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the Minister may, subject to subsection (2), for any purpose related to the administration or enforcement of this Act (including the collection of any amount payable under this Act by any person), of a comprehensive tax information exchange agreement between Canada and another country or jurisdiction that is in force and has effect or, for greater certainty, of a tax treaty with another country, by notice served personally or by registered or certified mail, require that any person provide, within such reasonable time as stipulated in the notice,

    • (a) any information or additional information, including a return of income or a supplementary return; or

    • (b) any document.

Unnamed persons

(2) The Minister shall not impose on any person (in this section referred to as a "third party") a requirement under subsection 231.2(1) to provide information or any document relating to one or more unnamed persons unless the Minister first obtains the authorization of a judge under subsection 231.2(3).

Judicial authorization

(3) On ex parte application by the Minister, a judge may, subject to such conditions as the judge considers appropriate, authorize the Minister to impose on a third party a requirement under subsection 231.2(1) relating to an unnamed person or more than one unnamed person (in this section referred to as the "group") where the judge is satisfied by information on oath that

    • (a) the person or group is ascertainable; and

    • (b) the requirement is made to verify compliance by the person or persons in the group with any duty or obligation under this Act.

    • (c) and (d) [Repealed, 1996, c. 21, s. 58(1)]

Note: The CRA can now bypass 231.2(2) by demanding information uner s. 231,1 instead in the course of an audit, “to verify the compliance of the taxpayer being audited”…1

1 Practioner’s Income Tax Act 2012, 41st Edition, David M. Sheman, Ed., pp 1464.

 


Bradley Turcotte   11.03.2013 14:32
You should be ashamed

Using scare tactics to gain business is appalling. I am sharing my disgust about this radio campaign with my friends and family. Referencing the Patriot Act to frighten Canadians into calling vs searching online when any rational person knows that the large amount of bureaucracy involved in pursuing this avenue makes it very unlikely the CRA would ever utilize (even if technically legal). Has the CRA ever utilized this tactic Mr. DioGuardi? For Shame!

 
 
       
 
Philippe DioGuardi   15.03.2013 16:38
Thank you to this poster for proving our point.

It took only two clicks to find your IP address and thus the name of the law firm who employs you, and the lawyer who coached your comment. Shame on you both.

 
 
       
 
D. MacGuigan   15.03.2013 12:41
I wouldn't be so sure

Have you checked out Goggle's Transparency report? Gov't requests for personal info are incresing at an alarming rate.
http://www.infoworld.com/t/cringely/google-provides-smorgasbord-of-your-data-the-governments-snooping-eyes-211512 I think we're deluding ourselfs

 
 
       
 
Trevor Umando   27.02.2013 09:34
Interesting and scary

I heard this ad on the radio and at first I didn't believe the ad. so I came to this site and now after reading the above articles, I now feel it is true. thank you Phillippe and your company for pointing out this to me and my fellow canadians. It's important. so thank you

 
 
       
 

  1000 Characters left

Antispam Refresh image Case insensitive

 
> Read > Watch > Follow

 

>


ABOUT SSL CERTIFICATES