Once again I will wax long. There's a reason.
While I agree with your point overall, I'm going to disagree with your analogy, because a fairly large number of countries actually do automatic filing for many taxpayers precisely because they do have all the requisite information already. And it is a proposal - a relatively serious one - to do so in each of Canada and the USA, so serious a one that some sub-sectors of industry (tax preparation firms) devote a not-insubstantial amount of lobbying effort to preventing this from happening, although there's pretty much no doubt that for 80% plus of tax filers (esp the less wealthy), it would save them time and money and enable faster tax refunds and other benefits.
Perhaps CBSA/IRCC will eventually get to this as well, but it will surely be at least a few years away (given the gaps in data from before they beefed up the systems). "Few" in govt terms likely to mean "at least a decade."
What you describe, as it regards Canada, may be true in the realm of what some, or many, or even a great many may believe and be saying or advocating about what the rules and process
should be.
Those figuring out how to navigate their way, whether in relation to immigration or filing tax returns, tend to fare better oriented to how things actually work.
Make no mistake, in Canada (and in the U.S.), there is no doubt, none at all, that taxpayers have the obligation to properly, completely, and accurately report income and related information, including all the information that sources of income have provided the respective taxing authorities. Make no mistake, the failure to do so is very likely to get messy, meaning at least getting bogged down in additional and typically rather inconvenient interactions with the respective taxing authority, with a potential for punitive consequences looming large, including possibly rather severe financial penalties.
Make no mistake, as well, the extent to which respective government bodies in Canada are capturing, collecting, and maintaining such information, and this is about international travel records for immigration related purposes as well as taxing-related information, is indeed expected to reduce/save processing times and costs for
BOTH the respective bureaucracies and individuals. And it most likely does. Verification capability is not merely about preventing fraud or error, but very much about implementing more efficient accounting and reporting methods, again for BOTH the bureaucracies and the individual.
Seems fairly likely the latter might be the primary objective, the prophylactic benefits (reducing error and fraud) secondary. Processing costs are a big deal.
Apart from those of us for whom things tend to get complex and complicated (such as the self-employed, let alone those like me engaged in business exporting abroad, a high percentage of whom, like me, are also among the "
less wealthy") . . . for most Canadian taxpayers and filers, those for whom their tax-related accounting and reporting is largely covered in their T-4s and T-3s and so on, information the CRA already has, the digital/electronic functionality already supports populating a large amount of the tax return with minimal manual input, and CRA now supports electronic tax filing which not only obviates much of the need for tax-prep services but also does not require using one of the commercial tax-prep computer programs. Not sure, but my guess is that the tax-prep industry has been clipped by more than a little in the last decade or so.
But the main thing, again, is that this facilitates more efficient processing at both ends, saving time and money at both ends. And this is almost certainly an objective and anticipated outcome of investments in the technology, infrastructure, and human resources used to capture and maintain cross-border travel records.
It was just four or six years ago that much of the conversation around both RO enforcement and proof of meeting the citizenship residency/presence requirement was about the sort of "
supplemental documentation" referenced above by
@Ponga, proof of presence in Canada based on things like detailed employment records, residential leases, banking and credit card activity, medical and dental appointments, and more. Citizenship applicants subjected to RQ reported submitting many hundreds of documents, and some reported sending boxes containing thousands of pages of documents (noting, however, a huge document-dump was often, perhaps usually, not a wise tactical move for anyone who actually met the requirements).
That's not in play much these days. For PR card applications and citizenship applications, when the information submitted is at least close to being complete and accurate, the PR's address, work, and travel history, as provided by the PR, is readily assessed on its face . . . and if the travel history reported by the PR is corroborated (reported entries verified) by CBSA entry records, it should be fairly straight-forward if not easy to separate those requiring additional screening and processing, which should be few and probably is but a small percentage. Even if there appears to be a significantly larger percentage among forum participants.
While I am not sure, I believe that less than an hour, or at least not much more, is allocated for opening a PR card application file, assessing it, and making a decision . . . either to approve or to put in a non-routine processing stream. Even in the processing of citizenship applications, most applications should not and probably do not involve any lengthy evaluation of the physical presence requirement. This is in large part facilitated by the extent to which IRCC can readily verify the dates a PR entered Canada in CBSA records.
I cannot predict the future and generally, but for the more obvious (yeah, big sigh, looks like climate change is going to get more problematic), do not try. I cannot forecast if, let alone when, CRA will populate tax filing information on behalf of individuals, or IRCC will rely on CBSA records and not require travel history reporting from PRs.
The overriding aspect of this warranting emphasis is that for now, and for the near future, in Canada things seem firmly headed in the direction of continuing reporting obligations for individuals, subject to the employment of enhanced verification tools by bureaucracies. For PR RO enforcement, in particular, the PR's obligation to provide address, work, and international travel history is not at all onerous, and doing so will not only make things go faster, and reduce government costs, and reduce the incidence of fraud, it will eliminate (mostly) a need for bogging things down with "
supplemental documentation," which tends to get messy while typically not providing evidence that is all that strong (leases do not directly document actual presence, and banking records similarly, at best constituting contextual information supporting an inference of presence not direct evidence of presence).
Generally there is no need for PR card applications or their processing to be complicated. Sure, there are PRs who have not yet fully settled in Canada permanently who nonetheless comply with the RO, more or less
cutting-it-close, and are fully entitled to all the privileges and benefits of PR status (even if they never settle permanently in Canada, as long as they comply with the RO). And for these PRs things can get complicated.
For most PRs who have settled and are living in Canada, it is not complicated and does not need to be complicated. Keep a travel record. Not complicated. Not onerous. Do that and accurately report address and work history, and but for the
damn stuff-happens gremlins, a PR card application should be no problem at all.
In Or Outside Canada:
The above discussion aside, to my view the more important element in the implementation of the revised application forms, first the 06-2022 version, now the 08-2022 version, is what appears to be an obvious effort by IRCC to block or at least dramatically reduce PR card applications from abroad. As I have discussed before, there is nothing in the statutes or regulations which actually authorizes IRCC to deny eligibility for a PR card application based on whether the PR is in or outside Canada, either when the application is made, or while the application is pending.
There is no doubt that the PR's location is relevant information. So IRCC can undoubtedly require PRs to disclose this in an application. But it also appears that this information can (and often does) influence the nature and scope of IRCC inquiry regarding RO compliance. The latter suggests that it is "
material" information.
It will be some time before we see how this unfolds but it sure looks like IRCC has laid the foundation for prosecuting misrepresentation if a PR abroad reports being in Canada in the PR card application. As I have previously noted, while IRCC may not have legal authority to deny a PR card application on the basis it was made by a PR abroad (as some Federal Court decisions have stated), it has clear authority to at least deny an application on the basis of misrepresentation. Whether this is aimed at more effectively discouraging PRs from applying while abroad, or will actually be used to prosecute misrepresentation, including in proceedings to terminate PR status, remains to be seen.
