Finance questions after long wait in Kanesatake
MCK chief John Canatonquin, the lead on the finance portfolio, said the number that stuck out to him most was the amount of deferred revenue, which climbed from about $12.5 million to nearly $16.7 million. This goes in the liabilities column, meaning it is factored into the balance sheet as debt, for a total debt of $7.8 million, compared to $6.9 million last year.
Deferred revenue is money received by the MCK that it did not spend, the lion's share of which comes from ISC funding.
'For me, it's not a debt. We have the money. It's just we didn't spend it,' said Canatonquin.
'Remove the deferred revenue and it's not a debt. We don't have any debt,' he said.
Why so much was not spent is not clear, according to Canatonquin.
'Most of it was caused because of the COVID,' he said. 'The people didn't spend the money.'
Now it will be necessary to meet with each department to untangle the situation, he said.
'We have to talk to each department to make sure they spend the money, so everything will be good by next year,' he said. However, since this is only being reviewed now, he said, the departmental ambiguities are not expected to be remediated in the audited financial statements for 2024-2025, which are due July 29.
'When we go through to each department and have the money spent accordingly to each department, we should be perfect. We should be good. If it's a deficit, we should be small or a small surplus,' he said.
'For me, what's bothering me now is the deferred revenue, and also the way they were doing it in finance where they go with the global amount instead of going per department. Now they are supposed to switch to follow by department. That way we'll have no problem after that,' he said.
It's possible the housing and infrastructure department is in deficit, he said. 'They maybe overspent. I noticed in finance, they see the global amount, okay they have so much money in the global, but they don't go per department. That's the problem.
'You don't have the money, you don't spend it. If you need more money, you go and get it. Get the money and then you spend it. Simple,' he said.
Some notable figures in the statements include a $537,570 deficit, compared to a surplus of more than $1 million the year before, and nearly $500,000 in legal fees, more than $200,000 compared to the year before. The Infrastructure Public Works program expenses more than doubled to $870,624, while Crime Prevention went up to $968,494 from $210,160.
One outstanding question is the source of an $800,000 cancellation in government funding as compared to $0 the year before, for which Canatonquin did not have an answer readily available.
Missing reports
In addition to the publicly available financial statements, The Eastern Door has obtained a 'Notification of Reporting Requirements Report' from December 2024, which shows at that time a total of 25 overdue reports across at least eight departments, 24 of those more than six months overdue. The majority of these are attributable to Community Infrastructure, with 13 reports 'deemed unobtainable.'
The result? $388,288 of funding at risk, according to the documents.
Indigenous Services Canada (ISC) would not confirm with The Eastern Door how many reports are outstanding or how much money is at risk, but did provide some clarity on the department's policies.
'All funding agreements include reporting requirements, which are outlined in the terms and conditions of each agreement,' said Jennifer Cooper, spokesperson for ISC.
'The term 'unobtainable' is used to describe the status of any report that is not received by the department within 180 calendar days of its due date. Despite this status, the terms and conditions of the agreement must still be met. When reporting is overdue, ISC may hold back some portion of program funding to recipients until the report is received.
'Each month, written notice is sent to recipients if they have outstanding reports. Held-back funding is released to the recipient after the report is received,' she said.
Timelines
The First Nations Financial Transparency Act requires a First Nation's financial statements to be submitted to Indigenous Services Canada (ISC) within 120 days of the fiscal year, which ends March 31, for a July 29 deadline, but 2019 is the last time the statements were on track.
This year, the statements were posted on March 24, 2025, nearly a year after the end of the 2023-2024 fiscal period. In comparison, Kahnawake's financial statements for the same period were posted by ISC on September 4, 2024. There is a delay between ISC's receipt of the documents and their appearance online, however.
Along with the audited financial statements, the schedule of remuneration and expenses for MCK chiefs was also published. Canatonquin, Amy Beauvais, Valerie Bonspille, Denise David, Brant Etienne, and Serge Otsi Simon were all paid a salary of $67,649 in the 2023-2024 fiscal year, with Victor Bonspille receiving $75,439 in remuneration as grand chief.
Beauvais incurred the highest expenses in that period, with $5,737, and Etienne the least – $354. Victor Bonspille's expenses totalled $3,502, according to the document.
marcus@easterndoor.com
Marcus Bankuti, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
27 minutes ago
- USA Today
In-N-Out owner places order to go − out of California
California's progressive policies have pushed out major employers like Tesla, Chevron and Hewlett Packard. Now, the owner of In-N-Out says she and her family are leaving her home state. One of the simple joys my kids and I experienced when we moved to Texas was finally living near an In-N-Out. We've savored the classic California brand's West Coast vibe, Double-Doubles and Animal Style Fries. Plus, I can feed the five of us for less than $50. Not a bad deal, in this economy. I'm not the only one thinking about the economics of In-N-Out. The burger chain's owner, Lynsi Snyder, has announced she is evacuating from deep blue California for the friendlier environs of red state Tennessee, where the company her grandparents founded in 1948 is building a second corporate headquarters. Snyder said she's leaving the West Coast for the Mid-South for the sake of her family and her business. 'There's a lot of great things about California, but raising a family is not easy here," Snyder told podcaster Allie Beth Stuckey on July 18. "Doing business is not easy here." Opinion: What if I told you conservative women, not liberals, embrace true feminism? I can't blame Snyder for giving up on California. She'll join business leaders like Elon Musk, companies like Chevron and Tesla, and hundreds of thousands of regular people who've fled California for better lives and better business opportunities in other states. California is a bastion of liberalism that's pushed tax rates and the cost of living to ridiculous extremes even as residents' quality of life has declined. In-N-Out owner checks out of her home state The fact Snyder is leaving the state where her family made its fortune nearly 80 years ago is yet another indicator of California's decline. Snyder said state policies, including draconian restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic, have made it difficult for businesses to operate. People and companies are not just fleeing California − in many cases, they are relocating to red states with a drastically different approach to politics and policy. My home state of Texas in recent years has become the new home of choice of many former California enterprises such as Hewlett Packard, McAfee, Charles Schwab and Ordinary Californians are leaving en masse too. From July 1, 2023, to July 1, 2024, California lost a net of about 240,000 residents to other states, many to Texas. The state's overall population rose in 2024, after several years of decline, because of immigration from other countries. California, of course, still has extraordinary natural resources, including hundreds of miles of beautiful coastline, majestic mountains, redwood forests, and world-class farmland and vineyards. What it doesn't have are political leaders with economic sense − or common sense. According to Chief Executive magazine's rankings for the best and worst states for business, California landed in last place. A 2021 Cato Institute study of the best and worst states for entrepreneurs found California placed 48th. Gavin Newsom is no moderate. California's progressive failures are on him. | Opinion But California lawmakers still don't understand the assignment. On Jan. 1, the state's minimum wage increased to a whopping $16.50 an hour for all businesses, and fast-food workers are now paid a minimum of $20 an hour. That means business owners either take a pay cut, charge their customers more or eliminate jobs. Or they relocate out of state. The owner of California's iconic burger chain will soon trade the Golden State's beaches for Tennessee's foothills. And if she ever wants to sample the world's best barbecue, she's welcome here in Texas. Nicole Russell is an opinion columnist with USA TODAY. She lives in Texas with her four kids. Sign up for her newsletter, The Right Track, and get it delivered to your inbox.
Los Angeles Times
10 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump's Fed battle is not like his other political tussles
President Trump is once again floating the idea of firing Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, ostensibly in objection to excessively high interest rates. But this debate is not about monetary policy. It's a power play aimed at subordinating America's central bank to the fiscal needs of the executive branch and Congress. In other words, we have a textbook case of 'fiscal dominance' on our hands — and that always ends poorly. I'm no cheerleader for Powell. During the COVID-19 pandemic, he enthusiastically backed every stimulus package, regardless of size or purpose, as if these involved no trade-offs. Where were the calls for 'Fed independence' then? And where were the calls for fiscal restraint after the emergency was over? Powell failed to anticipate the worst inflation in four decades and repeated for far too long the absurd claim that it was 'transitory' even as mounting evidence showed otherwise. He blamed supply-side disruptions long after ports had reopened and goods were moving. And as inflation was taking a stubborn hold, Powell delayed raising interest rates — possibly to shield the Biden administration from the fiscal fallout of the debt it was piling on — well past the point when monetary tightening was needed. If this weren't the world of government, where failure can be rewarded — and if there had been a more obvious alternative — Powell wouldn't have been invited back for another term. But he was. And so Trump's pressure campaign to prematurely end Powell's tenure is dangerous. I get why with budget deficits exploding and debt-service costs surging, the president wants lower interest rates. That would make the cost of his own fiscal agenda appear more tolerable. Trump likely believes he's justified because he believes that his tax cuts and deregulation are about to spur huge economic growth. To be sure, some growth will result, though the effects of deregulation will take a while to arrive. But gains could be swamped by the negative consequences of Trump's tariffs and erratic tariff threats. No matter what, the new growth won't lead to enough new tax revenue to escape the need for the government to borrow more. And the more the government borrows, the more intense the pressure on interest rates. One thing is for sure: The pressure Trump and his people are exerting on the Fed is a push for fiscal dominance. The executive branch wants to use the central bank as a tool to accommodate the government's frenzy of reckless borrowing. Such political control of a central bank is a hallmark of failed monetary systems in weak institutional settings. History shows where that always leads: to inflation, economic stagnation and financial instability. So far, Powell is resisting cutting rates, hence the barrage of insults and threat of firing. But now is not the right time to play with fire. Bond yields surged last year as investors reckoned with the scale of U.S. borrowing. They crossed the 5% threshold again recently. Moody's even stripped the government of its prized AAA credit rating. Lower interest rates from the Fed — especially if seen as the result of raw political pressure — could further diminish the allure of U.S. Treasuries. While the Fed can temporally influence interest rates, especially in the short run, it cannot override long-term fears of inflation, economic sluggishness and political manipulation of monetary policy driven by unsustainable fiscal policy. That's where confidence matters, and confidence is eroding. This is why markets are demanding a premium for funds loaned to a government that is now $36 trillion in debt and shows no intention of slowing down. But it could get worse. If the average interest rate on U.S. debt climbs from 3.3% to 5%, interest payments alone could soar from $900 billion to $2 trillion annually. That would make debt service by far the single largest item in the federal budget — more than Medicare, Social Security, the military or any other program readers care about. And because much of this debt rolls over quickly, higher rates hit fast. At the end of the day, the bigger problem isn't Powell's monetary policy. It's the federal government's spending addiction. Trump's call to replace Powell with someone who will cut rates ignores the real math. Lower short-term interest rates will do only so much if looser monetary policy is perceived as a means of masking reckless budget deficits. That would make higher inflation a certainty, not merely a possibility. It might not arrive before the next election, but it will inevitably arrive. There is still time to avoid this cliff. Trump is right to worry about surging debt costs, but he's targeting a symptom. The solution isn't to fire Powell — it's to cure the underlying disease, which is excessive government spending. Veronique de Rugy is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. This article was produced in collaboration with Creators Syndicate.
USA Today
11 hours ago
- USA Today
Tariffs have worried parents starting back-to-school shopping early
Back-to-school shoppers are worried about the economy and tariffs and starting their shopping early, according to The National Retail Federation. Shoppers are also pulling back on some purchases for back to school. "One of the ways that we know consumers respond to economic stress and uncertainty is that they move up their shopping around key events," whether that is the holidays or the all-important back to school season, said NRF Vice President of Industry and Consumer Insights Katherine Cullen during a media call on Wednesday. That happened in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic, when shoppers were uncertain whether schools would be back to in-person learning. It also happened in June of 2021 with supply chain concerns and again in 2022 with amid worries about inflation. "The reasons consumers start earlier are pretty consistent,'' Cullen said. "They do this because they want to avoid stress. They want to make sure they get items in time, particularly if they're worried about things being in short stock." Consumers are under economic stress Consumer sentiment remains at historical low levels, but consumer finances and net worth remain at near record highs, said Mark Mathews, chief economist and executive director of research at the NRF. There has been discretionary income growth, and wages continue to outpace inflation while unemployment remains historically low, said Mathews. There has also been reasonable job creation, though that is muted in the last few months and gives a cause for concern about where those numbers are headed, he said. Debt also remains incredibly high, said Mathews, but "it remains manageable from a servicing standpoint and lower-income households are a lot more challenged with debt, but overall economy wide, we don't see it. A challenge for consumers is that unlike two to three years ago, households no longer have a significant savings buffer, he said. The bottom 80% of U.S. households have been actively "dis-saving", or spending more than their discretionary income, since 2022, he said. "Consumers just don't have that buffer anymore to be able to deal with higher prices. So if we see incomes become a bit more challenged in the face of price rises, it's going to be problematic for consumers because they just don't have those savings to fall back on," Mathews said. Full effect of tariffs is still to come The full effects of tariffs have not yet hit, said Mathews. There are some price increases in some categories, but not all, he said. "We know retailers are trying their hardest to keep those back-to-school items in particular as low as possible," he said. Mathews also said historically, it takes a long time for tariff price hikes to work their way to the consumer. "One of the reasons for that is a lot of retailers' shelves remain stocked with pre-tariff imports. We know retailers increased imports dramatically at the start of the year," Mathews said. Additionally, some retailers may be "eating some more of those tariffs than expected," he added. But Mathews said that worries him because as businesses absorb tariff costs instead of passing them on to the consumer, that can lead to wage and job cuts, which then affects the economy. Back-to-school shopping has already begun Early-bird back-to-school shopping has already begun and has increased in July. This year, 26% of back-to-school and college shoppers had already started browsing and buying items by early June, according to a study by the NRF with Prosper Insights & Analytics of back-to-school consumer attitudes and expectations. That was up from 22% last year and 17% in 2019. Shoppers often say they like buying early to spread out their budget and to get early deals and promotions. A big change came in July, Cullen said, when 57% of families shopping for grade-school and college-students said they had begun their shopping. That's up from 55% last year. A big concern, shoppers say, are tariffs. Three-quarters or 74% of those surveyed said they are shopping earlier this year because they are worried tariffs will cause prices to go up later this season. "In June, people felt a little bit more worried about their finances and they decided, 'Hey, maybe I'll just buy what I need and then replenish later in the year,' " said Cullen. "That shifted in July when they felt 'No, I need to stock up and save because things might be much more expensive later in the season or later in the year.' " How much are shoppers expecting to spend on back to school items? According to the NRF, the average K-12 shopper is budgeting $858 this year on average per student, down from $875, while those buying for a college student this year are expected to spend $1,326, down from $1,365 last year. And although average spending is expected to be down, total spending is expected to go up as shoppers prioritize essential categories, said Cullen. Overall back-to-school spending is expected to reach $128 billion this year, up 2% from last year, she said. Still, there are categories shoppers will be pulling back on. The biggest is electronics, Cullen said. While they may spend on the core school items like laptops, tablets and even a smartphone, Cullen said some shoppers are holding off on accessories that may seem more discretionary like headphones or speakers or maybe even game consoles. They may be looking for hand-me-downs from family members, she said. Save money: Back-to-school shopping is tax-free in some states with specific dates. See the full 17-state list. How are back to school shoppers spending differently? Here's some other highlights from the NRF's call: Sales Tax Holidays help save money Shoppers may be able to save some money on their back-to-school shopping if their state has a sales-tax holiday. Seventeen states have designated times in July and August when certain items can be purchased tax-free. Betty Lin-Fisher is a consumer reporter for USA TODAY. Reach her at blinfisher@ or follow her on X, Facebook or Instagram @blinfisher and @ on Bluesky. Sign up for our free The Daily Money newsletter, which will include consumer news on Fridays, here.
