Sophie Chatel
- Family
- Mother of two twin boys. Husband teaches global history at the University of Ottawa.
- Education
- Bachelor of Laws from the Université de Montréal in 1994; Master of Taxation from the Université de Sherbrooke in 1997.
- Career
- Tax advisor in the private sector for six years. Senior Officer and later a Senior Advisor at the Canada Revenue Agency from 2002 to 2008. Worked at the federal Department of Finance starting in 2008 as Associate Chief, Tax Treaties and International Tax. Head of the Tax Treaty Unit in the OECD's Centre for Tax Policy and Administration in 2017.
- Political Experience
- Elected to represent the riding of Pontiac in the House of Commons of Canada in the 2021 Canadian federal election.
- Notable
- First woman to represent the riding of Pontiac. Member of the Standing Committee on Finance in December 2021. Publicly called for a secret ballot on Justin Trudeau's leadership of the Liberal Party in October 2024. Endorsed Mark Carney in the 2025 Liberal Party of Canada leadership election.
Based on publicly available information — may contain inaccuracies
Business & Financial Interests
Before entering politics, Sophie Chatel had a long career as a public servant and expert in international tax policy. She worked for more than twenty years in this field, holding senior positions. Her roles included serving as an advisor for the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). Chatel also worked internationally for the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in Paris. At the OECD, she was the Head of the Tax Treaty Unit, where she was involved in developing international tax standards to address tax avoidance by multinational corporations.
Where Sophie falls on key policy spectrums
Your Money
People & Society
How We're Governed
Land & Community
Sophie Chatel won with 32,088 votes (54.6%)
Total votes cast: 58,773
How does Sophie Chatel's voting record line up with your values?
I agree with my colleague. There was, in fact, some urgency, and that's why the committee decided to send a letter. I would also like to thank all the committee members, because we did very good work, given the urgency, since discussions were supposed to take place this summer. It's just that we Liberals would prefer to have a longer timeline and be able to present our recommendations in the
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
It's the same thing.
I do not think it is appropriate today, when the meeting is about food security, to ask questions relating to the Alto project, which are still under discussion.
I just want to say that it shouldn't be a deadline. If the parties want to submit their recommendations by June 26, they are welcome to do so. However, there should be no deadline for submitting them. That means that, if they are submitted later, even into September, there will be no problem and the recommendations will be included in the first version of the report.
Since a lot of things are going to happen this summer, the recommendations will be important in the fall. Therefore, I think it's worth waiting. That doesn't prevent you from writing the report and extracting certain recommendations made by witnesses, as you usually do. As for our recommendations specifically, I propose that we wait until the fall.
I just have a question about the deadline we have for submitting our recommendations for the study on business risk management. June 26 is a bit quick. Could we continue in the fall, so in September, and have a longer deadline to submit our recommendations?
We already voted on that motion, but now people want to come back to it. We had voted on adjourning debate and resuming—
I will move a motion then.
I propose September 30 as a deadline for submitting recommendations.
I have been patient, but we are still in the middle of the food safety study. We have a plan. Right now, we are talking about matters that have not even been referred to the committee and are not even being discussed. I think there is a problem with—
I would just like to mention that, as we have already discussed at a committee meeting this week, we will be resuming a study on the Alto project this fall, as soon as we receive the information from Alto. The routes have not yet been finalized.
On a point of order, Mr. Chair.
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
On a point of order, Mr. Chair.
Minister of Transport Again, we invited the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, not the. This is not relevant to the discussion we're having on food sovereignty and the food sovereignty strategy.
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.