Administrative monetary penalties

In 2019 the CFIA expanded the application of AMPs across the entire food sector to strengthen regulatory compliance.

The CFIA's Compliance and Enforcement Policy outlines how the agency conducts enforcement activities in a fair and transparent manner, including the application of AMPs. Operational guidance and procedures are publicly available to help CFIA staff and industry understand regulatory requirements. This clarity fosters a uniform approach to compliance and enforcement nationwide, enhancing predictability and transparency.

CFIA has the flexibility and authority to select the appropriate enforcement actions based on risk and the nature of the non-compliance. Gravity of non-compliance is determined by considering the potential or actual harm associated with the non-compliance, the compliance history of the regulated party, and the negligence or intent associated with the non-compliance.

These factors also help determine whether an AMP is issued as a Notice of Violation with warning or with financial penalty.

Violations are classified as either minor, serious, or very serious and are listed in Schedule I of the Agriculture and Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations. It should be noted that the level of seriousness indicated on the Notice of Violation is based on the regulatory provision that was allegedly violated. The amount of the monetary penalty varies, depending on whether the violation was committed by someone in the course of business, or for financial gain, or by an individual for personal reasons.

AMPs can be issued to an individual or to a company. They can be issued as a Notice of Violation with warning or with financial penalty.

Violations committed in the course of business or in order to obtain a financial benefit can result in financial penalties ranging from $1,300 for minor violations to $10,000 for very serious violations.

Penalties for serious or very serious violations can be increased by up to 50% of the original penalty based upon the gravity of the violation, the compliance history of the violator, and the negligence or intent up to a maximum of $15,000.

AMPs with financial penalty to individuals for personal reasons can range from $500 to $1,300.

The total gravity value is established in consideration of the following:

• Prior violations or offences of the person or company that committed the violation under any agri-food act in the five years before the day on which the current violation was committed
• Degree of intent or negligence on the part of the person or company
• Harm caused or that could have been caused by the violation

Gravity values are assigned for each of these three factors, and the total number of gravity value points determines whether the penalty is adjusted.

The CFIA may issue AMPs as an enforcement measure for non-compliance of the Health of Animals Act, the Plant Protection Act, the Safe Food for Canadians Act and their associated regulations. The CFIA publishes a quarterly report for AMPs issued across Canada to encourage compliance.

A Notice of Violation is a document issued to a person or company that has allegedly violated the Health of Animals Act, the Plant Protection Act, or the Safe Food for Canadians Act and their associated regulations.

The Notice of Violation identifies the following:

• Recipient of the Notice of Violation
• Type of Notice of Violation, warning or monetary penalty
• Alleged violation
• Amount of any penalty
• Options available to the recipient to respond to the notice
• Name of the designated CFIA authority who issued the Notice of Violation

A Certificate of Service is a form accompanying the Notice of Violation indicating that the document has been presented or delivered.

The Certificate of Service identifies the following:

• Person or company being served
• Document being served (Notice of Violation)
• Method of service (delivery)
• Name of the server
• Date that the document is issued
• Deemed date of service for the Notice of Violation

An Annex is also provided along with the Notice of Violation and the Certificate of Service that specifies the 15 and 30-day deadlines for response.

A regulated party that has been issued a Notice of Violation with warning have the choice of one of the following options:

Description of image: Notice of Violation with warning

Upon receipt of a notice of violation with warning, you can choose one of the following options:

1. Acceptance: Accept the warning. No response is necessary. This Notice of Violation with Warning remains part of compliance history.
2. Review by Minister: Submit a written request for a review of the facts of the violation by a CFIA Minister's delegate within 30 days after the deemed date of service stated in the Certificate of Service.
3. Review by Tribunal (Canada Agricultural Review Tribunal): Submit a written request for a review of the facts of the violation by the Canada Agricultural Review Tribunal within 30 days after the deemed date of service stated in the Certificate of Service.

Regulated parties issued a Notice of Violation with penalty have the choice of one of the following options:

Description of image: Notice of Violation with penalty

Upon receipt of a notice of violation with penalty, you can choose one of the following options:

1. Payment within 15 days: The amount of the monetary penalty is reduced by 50% if paid within 15 days after the deemed date of service stated in the Certificate of Service.
2. Payment after 15 days: Payment of the full amount of the monetary penalty within 30 days after the deemed date of service stated in the Certificate of Service.
3. Compliance Agreement: If the monetary penalty is $2,000 or more, submit a written request to enter into a compliance agreement within 30 days after the deemed date of service stated in the Certificate of Service. A detailed proposal must be submitted. The request may or may not be granted.

   A compliance agreement offers the opportunity to address the non-compliance by investing in a solution that would resolve the non-compliance and prevent recurrence. For every $2 invested, the monetary penalty could be reduced by $1, with a maximum reduction to $0.

4. Review by Minister: Submit a written request for a review of the facts of the violation by a CFIA official within 30 days after the deemed date of service stated in the Certificate of Service.
5. Review by Tribunal (Canada Agricultural Review Tribunal): Submit a written request for a review of the facts of the violation by the Canada Agricultural Review Tribunal within 30 days after the deemed date of service stated in the Certificate of Service.

If the monetary penalty is $2,000 or more, a written request to enter into a compliance agreement may be made within 30 days after the deemed date of service stated in the Certificate of Service.

A compliance agreement offers the opportunity to address the non-compliance by investing in a solution that would resolve the non-compliance and prevent recurrence. For every $2 invested, the monetary penalty could be reduced by $1, with a maximum reduction of the penalty to $0.

For example, a company could invest into setting up processes or purchasing equipment that prevents non-compliance in the future.

The requester must submit a detailed proposal to be evaluated by CFIA. If both parties agree to the proposed approach and implementation date, the compliance agreement is drawn up and signed by both parties, which becomes a legal and binding agreement under the Agriculture and Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties Act.

If the proposal is accepted, the person or company is deemed to have committed the violation.

The detailed proposal for the compliance agreement must include the following:

• The requester acknowledges the violation
• The proposal must be applicable to compliance and/or correcting the violation specified in the Notice of Violation, now, and into the future
• The indicators of compliance with the agreement must be stated and measurable
• The deadlines for corrective actions must be stated
• The estimated expenditure must be clearly itemized and recorded on a separate page
• The proposal cannot alter any requirements of federal food, plant and/or animal regulations
• The estimated expenditure for penalty reduction requires all of the following conditions be met
  • It must not include government funding
  • It must not include CFIA fees, for example, licensing or other permissions, as part of the calculation
  • It must be reasonably sound

If the request is not acceptable, the applicant will be notified and will have 30 days to either pay the full amount of the original monetary penalty, or request a review by the Canada Agricultural Review Tribunal.

CFIA conducts a follow-up inspection to determine if the conditions of the compliance agreement have been met by the implementation date. If so, the penalty is reduced by the amount of the investment (outlined in the agreement). Non-compliance with the agreement results in double the initial monetary penalty or forfeiture of any security provided as a condition of the agreement.

It is important to note that the reduction of the penalty amount resulting from a compliance agreement, even if the penalty amount is reduced to zero, does not erase the violation from the regulated party's compliance history. The violation stays on record, which is used when reviewing the compliance history of a regulated party for a period of five years.

The Review by Minister, completed by a delegated CFIA official, provides an opportunity to review the facts of the case and is conducted only on the basis of written submissions. The review may involve determining whether the recipient cited in the Notice of Violation committed a violation. Where monetary penalties were imposed, the review may also determine if the monetary penalty was assessed and established in accordance with the regulations. The person may pay the penalty within 30 days of being served the Minister's decision.

If the recipient of the Notice of Violation is not satisfied with the review result, they may also request a review of the Minister's decision by the Tribunal within 30 days of being served the Minister's decision.

The Canada Agricultural Review Tribunal (CART) is an independent quasi-judicial administrative tribunal that makes impartial decisions to determine the validity of administrative monetary penalties and warnings imposed for alleged violations of Federal agriculture and agri-food legislation and regulations.

The CART provides an opportunity to review the facts of the case and to determine whether the person or company named in the notice of violation committed a violation. Please note that this is a review of the facts relating to this violation only. Where monetary penalties were imposed, the CART determines if the penalty was assessed and established in accordance with the regulations.

A review of the Minister's decision by the CART differs from the review of the facts by the CART (described above). An alleged violator may appeal a Minister's decision to the CART. The request is to be made within 30 days after the day on which the decision from the Review by the Minister is served (for example, 30 days from the deemed date of service stated on the Certificate of Service issued with the decision of the Review by the Minister). The CART would conduct a review of the Minister's decision, after which they may confirm, vary or set aside the decision.

For more information on reviews by tribunal, please contact the Canada Agricultural Review Tribunal.

Following any of these reviews, if there is still disagreement with the results, another option is applying for judicial review under the Federal Courts Act.

A person or company is deemed to have committed the violation when any of the following occurs:

• Accepting a Notice of Violation with Warning
• Failing to respond to a Notice of Violation with Penalty within 30 days after the deemed date of service
• Paying the monetary penalty
• Entering into a compliance agreement
• Requesting a Review by the Minister and the violation is confirmed by the review; or
• Requesting a Review by the Tribunal, and the violation or the Minister's Decision is confirmed by the review

Once this occurs, the violation becomes part of compliance history that could increase future penalty amounts should a subsequent violation be committed.