Income Tax Severed Letters - 2002-07-05

Ruling

2002 Ruling 2002-0126853 - PATRONAGE DIVIDENDS

Unedited CRA Tags
135

Principal Issues:
1. Whether a corporation is entitled to claim a deduction for patronage dividends under subsection 135(1).
2. Will the corporation be considered to have made payment when the patronage dividends are set-off against the customers' advance accounts?

Position:
1. Yes, subject to the limitation in subsection 135(2) and provided the requirements of section 135 are otherwise met.
2. Yes, the customers have authorized in writing the set-off.

Reasons:
1. Based on the information provided.
2. See definition of "payment" in subsection 135(4) and paragraph 10(b) of IT-362R.

2002 Ruling 2002-0127663 - TAXATION OF INDIAN TRUST

Unedited CRA Tags
149(1)(c) 75(2)

Principal Issues:
(1) Whether the Band is a public body performing a function of government; (2) Whether the receipt of the Settlement Funds is taxable; (3) Whether subsection 75(2) will apply to the Trusts' income; (4) Whether subsection 105(1) or subsection 107(4.1) will apply to certain distributions made by the Trust to the Band's members; (5) Whether paragraph (a) of the definition of "cost amount" in subsection 108(1) would apply to determine the adjusted cost base of the capital interest disposed of on such distribution; (6) Whether subsection 107(2) will apply to any distribution of property by the Trust to the Band; (7) Whether amounts held in trust for minors will be deemed payable in the year by virtue of subsection 104(18) of the Act.

Position:
(1) Yes; (2) No; (3) Yes; (4) Subsection 105(1) will not apply; Subsection 107(4.1) will however apply; (5) Yes; (6) Yes, subject to subsections 107(2.001), (2.002) and (4) to (5); (7) Yes.

Reasons:
(1) The Band is involved in negotiating a treaty settlement with Canada and will continue to be involved in its implementation and administration. The Band is actively involved in the community and provides extensive services and programs; (2) Compensation paid to the Band is in respect of the loss of their interest in traditional lands. Could be considered as non-taxable damages or, arguably, Indian property pursuant to paragraph 90(1)(b) of Indian Act as it appears to be paid in lieu of treaty rights. Alternatively, may be considered income to the Band, which is exempt under par.149(1)(c); (3) The Band will be considered to constructively received the Settlement Funds and contributed them in the Trust. The property of the Trust may revert to the Band and may be distributed in accordance with the Bands direction on consent; (4) Where subsection 107(2) or (2.1) applies to a distribution, there is no benefit for the purposes of subsection 105(1). Subsection 107(4.1) applies in respect of the per capita distribution to all Members. The distribution will be in satisfaction of their capital interests in the Trust and all other conditions of 107(4.1) are met; (5) The reference in 107(1)(a)(ii)(A) to the cost amount immediately before the disposition of the capital interest refers to the amount determined under paragraph (a) of the definition of "cost amount" in subsection 108(1) as there has been a distribution of property by the trust; (6) The trust is a personal trust and the distributions are made to beneficiaries of the Trust; (7) All of the requirements of subsection 104(18) have been met.

2002 Ruling 2002-0132903 - Split-up Butterfly

Unedited CRA Tags
55(3)(b)

Principal Issues: Split up butterfly

Position: Standard butterfly

Reasons: N/A

2002 Ruling 2002-0138643 F - MODIFICATIONS OPTION D'ACHAT D'ACTIONS

Unedited CRA Tags
7(1) 110(1)(d)

Principales Questions:
1. Est-ce que la modification à une convention d'achat d'actions pour faire en sorte que la durée de l'option soit reportée est une disposition des options et aura pour effet d'inclure un montant dans le revenu des employés selon l'article 5, 6 ou 7?
2. Est-ce que l'employé qui n'a pas de lien de dépendance avec la société a droit à une déduction prévue à l'alinéa 110(1)d)?

2002 Ruling 2001-0112123 - EMPLOYEE PROFIT SHARING PLAN

Unedited CRA Tags
144

Principal Issues: Does the proposed arrangement qualify as an employee profit sharing plan?

Position: Yes, provided a valid election is made and provided the contributions are reasonable.

Reasons: The plan is correctly structured as an EPSP.

2002 Ruling 2002-0141763 - GIFT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS

Unedited CRA Tags
118.1 15(1) 110.1

Principal Issues:
1. Whether a donation constitutes a gift for income tax purposes when the donation is subject to various conditions.
2. Where six corporations, their controlling shareholder and a public foundation enter into an agreement with respect to a donation, will subsection 15(1) apply to include the amount of the donation made by any of the corporations in the shareholder's income?

Position:
1. Factual determination. In this case, based on the facts, the donation would constitute a gift for income tax purposes.
2. No. The terms of the agreement provide that any of the corporations may make the gift.

Reasons:
1. In previous files, we concluded that the fact that there are conditions attached to a gift, does not, it itself, negate the gift. Generally, a donation would qualify as a gift if the donor is freely parting with the funds or property, receives no benefit, other than recognition, in return and the funds or property can never revert to the donor or any related person.
2. The corporations, the shareholder and the public foundation are all parties to the agreement.

2002 Ruling 2001-0112583 - UNFUNDED SUPPLEMENTAL PENSION PLAN

Unedited CRA Tags
248(1) 56(1)(a) 6(1)

Principal Issues:
Is the Supplementary Retirement Arrangement (unfunded pension plan) an SDA or an RCA?

Position: No

Reasons:
It is an unfunded arrangement to provide pension benefits that are supplementary to the benefits provided under an RPP. There is no trust set up.

2002 Ruling 2001-0115973 F - Butterfly

Unedited CRA Tags
55

Principal Issues: Split-up butterfly reorganization.

Position: Favourable rulings given.

Reasons: Complies with the rules in section 55.

Ministerial Correspondence

25 July 2002 Ministerial Correspondence 2002-0149644 - Section 86.1 - Specific Spin-Off 86.1

Principal Issues: Can the CCRA provide information as to why a specific foreign spin-off did not qualify for section 86.1?

Position: No.

Reasons: Taxpayer information, including a foreign corporation, cannot be released without taxpayer consent.

19 July 2002 Ministerial Correspondence 2002-0125144 F - CREDITS-FRAIS DE SCOLARITE ET ETUDES

Unedited CRA Tags
118.61

Principales Questions:
Désavantage de ne pouvoir reporter les crédits d'impôt pour frais de scolarité et pour études lorsque ceux-ci diminuent l'impôt à payer d'une année avant de pouvoir utiliser le crédit d'impôt pour frais médicaux qui ne peut être reporté aux années subséquentes.

Position Adoptée:
Une modification à la Loi serait nécessaire pour changer cette situation.

9 July 2002 Ministerial Correspondence 2002-0144904 - EMPLOYMENT INCOME GUIDE

Unedited CRA Tags
81(1)(a)

Principal Issues: Indian Act Exemption - Guidelines

Position: General Comments

Reasons: General Comments

9 July 2002 Ministerial Correspondence 2002-0142774 - EDUCATION ASSISTANCE

Unedited CRA Tags
81(1)(a)

Principal Issues: Educational Funding - Indian

Position: General Comments

Reasons: General Comments

28 June 2002 Ministerial Correspondence 2002-0142394 - EMPLOYMENT INCOME GUIDE

Unedited CRA Tags
81(1)(a)

Principal Issues: Indian Act Exemption - Guidelines

Position: General Comments

Reasons: General Comments

Technical Interpretation - External

31 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0153135 F - FRAIS JUDICIAIRES

Unedited CRA Tags
60(o.1)
amounts incurred by retiree association in suing pension fund not deductible under s. 60(o.1) unless incurred as agent for retirees

Principales Questions:
Est-ce que les contributions des membres à une association sont déductibles?

Position Adoptée: Aucune

30 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0121435 F - categorie 16 - remorquage

Unedited CRA Tags
20(1)(a)
towing of heavy vehicles and buses constitutes hauling freight
Words and Phrases
hauling freight

Principales Questions:
Est-ce que des camions ou tracteurs utilisés pour remorquer des véhicules lourds et des autobus font partie de la catégorie 16 de l'Annexe II du Règlement de l'impôt sur le revenu?

Position Adoptée:
Aucune réponse définitive. La catégorie 16 vise uniquement le camion ou le tracteur. Toute remorque attachée au camion ou au tracteur ne fait pas partie de la catégorie 16. Définition de " poids nominal brut du véhicule ". Le remorquage de véhicules lourds et d'autobus constitue du transport de marchandises.

29 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0140205 - MEANING OF AIR PURIFIER

Unedited CRA Tags
118.2(2)(M) R.5700(C) R.5700(C.1)

Principal Issues: Whether the fact that a device or equipment acts as an air exchanger, in addition to its function as an air purifier, would preclude it from qualifying as an air purifier for purposes of paragraph 5700(c.1) of the Income Tax Regulations.

Position: Generally no.

Reasons: Based on the ordinary meaning of "air purifier." However, if an air exchanger and an air purifier are separate units such that each may be purchased separately, i.e., the functions of purifying and exchanging the air are not engineered to work together inextricably as one unit, it is our view that only the cost of the air purifier may qualify under paragraph 5700(c.1).

29 July 2002 External T.I. 2001-007075A F - DEPLACEMENT - TRAVAILLEUR FORESTIER

Unedited CRA Tags
8(1)(H.1) 8(1)(H)
travel between home and forestry camp, but not between forestry camp and cutting sites, generally was personal

Principales Questions:
Est-ce que les frais de véhicule à moteur engagés par les travailleurs forestiers dans différentes situations sont déductibles?

Position Adoptée:
Dans certaines situations, les frais pourraient être déductibles selon les critères énoncés dans la lettre ce qui représente un changement de position par rapport à ce qui était inscrit dans la Circulaire d'information 74-6R2 et dans le guide T4044 concernant les dépenses d'emploi d'un travailleur forestier.

26 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0143665 - NPO OR CHARITY Q of F

Unedited CRA Tags
149(1)(l)

Principal Issues:
Will a non-profit trust qualify under paragraph 149(1)(l) of the Act?

Position: Question of fact.

Reasons:
Insufficient information. File referred to charities to determine if the trust is a charity.

24 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0133155 - CEE and Flow Through Shares

Unedited CRA Tags
66.1(b)

Principal Issues: Whether the expenses to be incurred in respect of a proposed mineral resource exploration program would qualify as Canadian exploration expenses under paragraph (f) or (g) of its definition in subsection 66.1(6) of the Act? 66.1(6)

Position: No.

Reasons: The mine came into production in reasonable commercial quantities in XXXXXXXXXX , at which time the production rate reached well above 60% of the mill capacity and was maintained above that level for the next XXXXXXXXXX months. The mine closed in XXXXXXXXXX when the mine ran out of ore, and at that time the mine complex was put on care and maintenance. The mine was not abandoned with no hope of finding more ore. The mine did not lose its character as a mine. The existing surface facilities and buildings, such as the concentrator, the mining camp, the fresh air fan for underground ventilation, the compressors, the man dry, surface shop buildings and tailings pond will be used if mining resumes.
It is our view that the expenses which the taxpayer will be incurring with respect to the proposed exploration program would be considered to be related to a mine that has come into production in reasonable commercial quantities or to be related to a potential or actual extension thereof. As a result, these expenses would not qualify as Canadian exploration expenses under paragraph (f) or (g) of its definition in subsection 66.1(6) of the Act. NRCan visited the site on XXXXXXXXXX . A technical opinion of July 19, 2002 was subsequently received from NRCan confirming the above-noted views.

24 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0151135 - RELOCATION ASSISTANCE MINE CLOSING

Unedited CRA Tags
6(1)(a)

Principal Issues:
Whether travel and relocation assistance to be paid to residents of a small mining community as a result of the closing of the town's mine, XXXXXXXXXX , is taxable. The relocation assistance is to be paid by the Province of XXXXXXXXXX and the former employer.

Position: No.

Reasons:
There is no provision in the Income Tax Act to tax the amount paid by the Province, while the amount paid by the former employer would not be taxable by virtue of the position in paragraph 37 of IT-470R.

23 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0143115 - RENT CHARGED TO CORPORATION

Unedited CRA Tags
9(1)

Principal Issues: Where a taxpayer rents space in his home to his company, can he charge rent based on the utilities and telephone bill.

Position: Yes, as long as the expenses claimed against this income are reasonable and incurred to earn income.

Reasons: As per the guide T4036, Rental Income.

22 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0128555 - NPO COOPERATIVE CORPORATION

Unedited CRA Tags
149(1)(e) 149(1)(l)

Principal Issues: Is the cooperative exempt from tax pursuant to 149(1)(e) or (l)

Position: None. General comments provided only.

Reasons:
Insufficient information provided. However, this determination can only be made after the end of the particular taxation year, having regard to all the facts and as such falls within the purview of the TSO.

22 July 2002 External T.I. 2001-0099665 - NPO EXCESS INCOME REASONABLENESS

Unedited CRA Tags
149(1)(l)

Principal Issues: Accumulated surplus and cash reserves - effect on non-profit organization's tax-exempt status under paragraph 149(1)(l)

Position: General Comments.

Reasons: A determination of whether an organization is "operated" exclusively for non-profit purposes is a question of fact that can only be determined by reviewing all the facts of a particular case at the end of a particular year.

22 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0135265 - NPO SOCIETY

Unedited CRA Tags
149(1)(l)

Principal Issues:
Whether a certain society was organized for non-profit purposes and therefore exempt from income tax

Position: Likely yes

Reasons:
The society was organized for purposes of pleasure or recreation as outlined in its Constitution and By-Laws.

22 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0148045 - Similar Properties - Minerals

Unedited CRA Tags
111(5)(a)

Principal Issues: Whether nickel or other base metals and various industrial minerals are considered to be similar properties for purposes of subparagraph 111(5)(a)(ii) of the Act. You also asked for our views on whether a mineral that is characterized as an industrial mineral only because it does not meet the specific test in paragraph (d) of the definition of mineral resource in subsection 248(1) of the Act, would be considered a similar property to mineral resources such as nickel or other base metals.

Position: Question of fact

Reasons: The term 'similar properties' is broad enough such that base metals and industrial minerals are not precluded from being similar properties, if the facts of the situation support that finding. As well, an industrial mineral that does not meet the test in paragraph (d) of the definition of 'mineral resource' in subsection 248(1) is not precluded from being considered to be a similar property to a mineral resource such as nickel or other base metals if the facts support that conclusion.

19 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0133535 F - PERTE APPARENTE CALCUL DU PBR

Unedited CRA Tags
40(2)(g) 54 53(1)(f)
numerical illustration where series of partial dispositions, and acquisitions, of identical shares

Principales Questions:
Comment établir le prix de base rajusté des actions lorsqu'un contribuable réalise une perte apparente.

Position Adoptée: Question de fait.

19 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0146675 - FINAL DRAFT OF IT-320R3

Unedited CRA Tags
146(1) REG 4900

Principal Issues:
1. Would we consider revising draft IT-320R3 to allow a registered plan to purchase a put option as a qualified investment?
2. Would we consider revising draft IT-320R3 to allow a registered plan to write a call option as long as it is "covered" by either actual ownership of the underlying security or possession of a call option thereon?

Position:
1. No.
2. No.

Reasons:
1. It would require a change in legislation, thus it is a tax policy matter.
2. Our position on writing covered call options applies only where the plan has actual ownership of the underlying property.

19 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0140725 - FORM TL11A

Unedited CRA Tags
118.6(2)

Principal Issues:
U.S. University wants to know what is meant by the term "amount paid" as used in form TL11A, Tuition Fees Certificate - University Outside Canada.

Position: General Comments given

Reasons: Based on Interpretation Bulletins

14 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0142635 - QUALIFYING EDUCATION PROGRAM

Unedited CRA Tags
118.6(1)

Principal Issues:
Whether program offered by the School is a "qualifying educational program" or "specified educational program".

Position: Question of Fact

Reasons: Based on prior positions.

12 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0127585 F - Legal Expenses, Compensation for Defamation

Unedited CRA Tags
8(1)(b)
damages received by employee for defamation were tax free if their character not misrepresented
damages received by employee for defamation were not employment income if not deliberately mislabeled
legal fees incurred for employee to receive damages only for defamation were not deductible

Principal Issues: 1. Whether legal expenses are deductible?
2. Whether compensation for defamation is taxable?

Position: 1. No
2. No if description in agreement is not a sham.

Reasons: 1. 8(1)(b)
2. IT-365R2, 2000-0052925.

9 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0122195 - TUITION FEES

Unedited CRA Tags
118.5(1)(b) 118.94 118.9

Principal Issues:
Can a resident parent claim the tuition fee transfer for a student resident of a foreign country?

4 July 2002 External T.I. 2002-0130675 F - Sec. 159 - Payments on Behalf of Others

Unedited CRA Tags
159(2) 159(3) 248(1)
purchaser’s lawyer not a legal representative of the vendor notwithstanding payment directions received from vendor

Principal Issues: 1) Whether, in two given fact situations involving the disposition by a taxpayer of assets in favour of an arm's length purchaser, a lawyer (which would not be designated by the parties under section 1773 of the Civil Code of Québec) would be required under subsection 159(2) of the Act to apply for and obtain a certificate from the Minister.
2) Whether a person designated under section 1773 of the Civil Code of Québec to distribute the sale price to creditors in the course of the sale of an enterprise would be required under subsection 159(2) of the Act to apply for and obtain a certificate from the Minister.

Position: 1) No. 2) None.

Reasons: 1) In the two given fact situations, the lawyer should not be considered to be a "legal representative" of the seller as those terms are defined in subsection 248(1) of the Act.
2) Considering that the provisions of the Civil Code of Québec with respect to the sale of an enterprise have been repealed as of June 13, 2002, we consider that it is not necessary or pertinent to address this issue.

19 June 2002 External T.I. 2002-0120035 F - Non Arm's Length Corporations

Unedited CRA Tags
251(1) 251(2)(c)(ii) 251(2)(a) 251(6)

Principal Issues:
Whether two corporations (Corp J and Corp P) are not dealing at arm's length, pursuant to 251(1), in a situation where each corporation is controlled by a different individual and these individuals are brothers?

Position: Yes

Reasons:
Corp J and Corp P are deemed not to deal with each other at arm's length pursuant to 251(1)(a) since they are "related persons" pursuant to 251(2)(c)(ii) as each corporation is controlled by a different individual and these individuals are related to one another pursuant to 251(2)(a).

19 June 2002 External T.I. 2000-0020525 F - Article 19 Canada - France Tax Treaty

Unedited CRA Tags
110(1)(f)
question of whether French payer was a governmental instrumentality referred to group which could engage in competent authority matters

Principal Issues: In a situation involving a Canadian resident, with Canadian and French citizenships, that has received a salary from a french employer, whether Canada considers the french employer as an "instrumentality" of France or one of its "local authorities" for the purpose of paragraph 1 of Article 19 of the Canada-France Income Tax Treaty (Treaty) ?

Position: None taken.

Reasons: Referred for resolution to the International Legislative Affairs group (ILA) in the Legislative Policy Division of the Policy and Legislation Branch. ILA group is responsible for determining the meaning of "instrumentality" in situations where Canada may not agree with the foreign government's position and for resolving such interpretative base disagreements, if any, as a member of the competent authority through Mutual Agreement Procedures in Income Tax Conventions.

14 June 2002 External T.I. 2001-0103755 F - Cumulative Eligible Capital on Amalgamation

Unedited CRA Tags
14(5) 87(2)(f)
Amalco should not have 2 CEC adjustment times

Principal Issues: What is the tax treatment of its cumulative eligible capital for a new corporation created on the amalgamation of 2 corporations?

Position: The new corporation is a continuation of the 2 predecessor corporations for the purpose of the calculation of the cumulative eligible capital of the new corporation.

Reasons: Interaction of 87(2)(f), and the definitions of "adjustment time" and "cumulative eligible capital" under 14(5).

10 September 1997 External T.I. 9704715 F - RÉCOMPENSE - PRIX D'EXCELLENCE EN XXXXXXXXXX

Unedited CRA Tags
56(1)n) 5 6
prize excluded because received in respect of employment

Principales Questions

Une récompense reçue en vertu du Prix d'excellence en XXXXXXXXXX, est-elle une récompense réglementaire en vertu de l'article 7700 du Règlement?

Position Adoptée:

Non.

Technical Interpretation - Internal

25 July 2002 Internal T.I. 2002-0139877 F - ASSURANCE INVALIDITE-PARITE

Unedited CRA Tags
6(1)f)
contributions in years 2 and 3 could be deducted from subsequent parity adjustment to contribution made in year 1

Principale Question:

Est-ce qu'un contribuable peut déduire des cotisations versées à un régime d'assurance invalidité entre 1989 et 2001 à l'encontre d'un rajustement paritaire reçu en 2001 qui est lié à des prestations d'assurance invalidité dont le contribuable avait bénéficié en 1988 ?

Position Adoptée: Oui.

19 July 2002 Internal T.I. 2002-0129737 - EMPLOYEE PROFIT SHARING PLAN - SR & ED

Unedited CRA Tags
37(1)(a)(i) 248(1) 2900(9)

Principal Issues: Where employee profit sharing plans constitutes the only form of remuneration, are the allocations "salary or wages" for SR&ED purposes.

Position: Yes, except for prescribed proxy amount.

Reasons: Pursuant to definition of salary and wages in 248(1), it includes amounts under 6(1)(d), but see Reg 2900(4) and (9) for the proxy amount.

18 July 2002 Internal T.I. 2002-0135177 F - TRANSPORT DE MARCHANDISES

Unedited CRA Tags
8(1)(g)
goods include property not intended for sale, such as mail, but do not include securities
Words and Phrases
goods

Principales Questions:
Est-ce que le terme " marchandises " utilisé dans l'expression " transport de marchandises " à l'alinéa 8(1)g) de la Loi désigne des biens destinés à la vente?

Position Adoptée:
L'expression " transport de marchandises " ne vise pas uniquement le transport de biens qui sont destinés à la vente. Cependant, le transport d'argent ou de valeurs n'est pas un transport de marchandises.

18 July 2002 Internal T.I. 2002-0149987 - DEALER OF FARM EQUIPMENT

Unedited CRA Tags
127(9)

Principal Issues: Whether a dealer in farm equipment is entitled to investment tax credits on farm equipment that it leases to customer but then transfers, along with the lease, to the manufacturer.

Position: No.

Reasons: Based on the particular facts, the particular farm equipment is never held as depreciable property.

28 June 2002 Internal T.I. 2002-0132427 F - RDTOH

Unedited CRA Tags
129(1) 129(3)
RDTOH reduced by dividend refund even if time limit for claiming the dividend refund has passed

Principal Issues: Whether the RDTOH should be reduced by the amount equal to the lesser of the amounts in 129(1)(a)(i) and (ii), where a dividend was paid by a corporation but no refund was received pursuant to 129(1) because the corporation's return was not filed within the 3 year prescribed period.

Position: Yes.

Reasons: The application of the law to the specific facts.

19 June 2002 Internal T.I. 2002-0142127 - 89(1)(c) & (c.1) Capital Dividend Account

Unedited CRA Tags
89(1) "CDA" 14(1) 14(5) "CEG"

Principal Issues: Computation of a corporation's capital dividend account ("CDA") in a given fact situation.

Position: No amount would be included in the corporation's CDA under paragraph (c) of the definition of CDA in subsection 89(1) of the Act. However, an amount would be included in the corporation's CDA under paragraph (c.1) of the definition of CDA at the end of the corporation's taxation year ended March 31, 2000. Such amount could be paid out as a "capital dividend" only in a taxation year subsequent to the taxation year of the disposition of the goodwill (i.e. on April 1, 2000 or after).

Reasons: Wording of the Act and current positions.

10 June 2002 Internal T.I. 2002-0140577 - TRANSFER RPP SURPLUS TO AN RCA

Unedited CRA Tags
56(2) 207.5

Principal Issues:
1. Will subsection 56(2) apply to the payments in question?
2. Will the payments be employer contributions to an RCA

Position:
1. No.
2. No.

Reasons:
1. The payments do not satisfy the criteria established for 56(2) to apply.
2. 56(2) does not cause the amounts to be employer contributions. There is no use of the funds as security and the employer has no rights to use the amounts as security.

14 May 2002 Internal T.I. 2002-0124487 - MEDICAL TAX CREDIT - CHILD

Unedited CRA Tags
118.2(2)(e)

Principal Issues: The issue is whether the fees paid to XXXXXXXXXX qualify as medical expenses under paragraph 118.2(2)(e) of the Act.

Position: No to both XXXXXXXXXX

Reasons: 1) XXXXXXXXXX - at the time the patient attended XXXXXXXXXX the psychological evaluation diagnoses the patient as having a mild form of ADHD. There is no evidence that the patient is suffering from a mental handicap. Also, not clear that school provides the specialized equipment, facilities or personnel for the care, or care and training, of individuals with the particular condition suffered by the Patient.