至於美國銀行是否“not well treated in Canada”,那完全是另一個問題。我也搞不懂是不是“not well treated in Canada”?加拿大是法制國家。如果美國銀行受到歧視,可以告政府,也可以通過美加墨協議仲裁機構。我前面提到的Tangerine銀行,還有HSBC銀行,都是外國銀行,都在加拿大運行得好好的,怎麼沒聽說他們覺得“not well treated in Canada”?退到最後一步,即使存在不公平的待遇,那也應該通過申訴仲裁等程序,而不是訴諸25%關稅!
加拿大銀行法律可能更嚴格一點,比美國自己的銀行更嚴格,但你不用美國自己的標準去要求加拿大。關鍵是,美國銀行在加拿大是不是跟其它銀行受到同等的法律約束?只要是一視同仁,就不存在是否“not well treated in Canada”的問題!
本來數年前是有一些美國企業在加拿大油氣行業經營的,但是由於小土豆強行加碳稅,並且越加越高,終於大多數美國公司與兩三年前被迫撤出加拿大!你可以說加拿大一視同人啊,可是美國是外來企業,經營成本肯定稍高,加上美國還沒有徵收碳稅,撤出加拿大肯定是明智之舉。你說這算不算not well treated,算不算變相歧視?
Most US banks operating in Canada have chosen the “branch” option that does not subject them to the requirements of a subsidiary. However, there is a different restriction on branches: they are not allowed to accept deposits lower than $150,000 CAD.
That, of course, means they can’t conduct retail operations for average Canadian citizens – but they can engage in various profitable activities, for companies and wealthy individuals, that are less visible to the general public.