Principales Questions: Le contribuable cherche à obtenir de l'information concernant la déduction pour amortissement accélérée de 100% disponible pour les ordinateurs acquis après le 27 janvier 2009 et avant février 2011.
Position Adoptée: Nous lui avons fourni des renseignements de type général.
Raisons: Loi de l'impôt sur le revenu; budget fédéral de 2009.
Principal Issues: Would provision of a motor vehicle to travel to and from a work site give rise to a taxable benefit?
Position: Yes, but the benefit may be excluded from income if the work site qualifies as a remote work location. A reasonable standby charge and operating expense benefit may apply to any other personal use if the vehicles qualify as automobiles.
Reasons: Travel between an employee's home and the employer's place of business where the employee reports regularly is personal in nature. This would include travel between a work site and a departure or arrival point on the way. The benefit derived from the use of an employer-provided vehicle in respect of such travel would give rise to a taxable benefit under section 6 of the Act, however, the benefit may be excluded from income pursuant to subparagraph 6(6)(b)(ii) if the conditions for a remote work location are met.
Principal Issues: If interest paid on unpaid equalization payment under a separation agreement is considered income of the person receiving the interest payments.
Position: Yes
Reasons: Interest income is generally taxable and included in income pursuant to paragraph 12(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.
Principal Issues: Is the business income earned by an Indian, where part of the duties are carried on off the reserve, exempt from tax? If not could the proration rule apply?
Position: Possibly
Reasons: It depends on the facts. Proration of business income is possible if specific income-earning activities can be directly connected to a reserve. A record of activities should be maintained to support a claim for proration of business income.
2009-031307
XXXXXXXXXX Lori Merrigan
(613) 957-8979
June 12, 2009
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 11/29/2015 - 02:18
Where a Canadian corporation redeems its shares for an amount in excess of paid-up capital, its liability under s. 116(5) will not be reduced by...
The text of this content is paywalled except for the first five days of each month. Subscribe or log in for unrestricted access.
Principal Issues: Assuming that the non-resident shareholder does not obtain a certificate issued under subsection 116(4) of the Act, what is the Canadian corporation's liability for withholding tax on the redemption under subsection 116(5) of the Act?
Position: If the vendor has not obtained a certificate under subsection 116(2) or 116(4) of the Act the amount of withholding is 25% of the purchaser's cost of the property. If the non-resident provides the purchaser with a section 116(2) certificate the purchaser is liable to withhold 25% of any amount by which the purchaser's cost exceeds the amount indicated in such certificate.
social security contributions do not qualify as income taxes – but French "contribution sociale généralisée" and "contribution pour le remboursement de la dette sociale" so qualify
Submitted by narmstrong on Sat, 11/21/2020 - 03:47
social security contributions do not qualify as income taxes – but French "contribution sociale généralisée" and "contribution pour le remboursement de la dette sociale" so qualify
Can the following deductions made by France from the salary of an individual who has been resident in Canada for less than 60 months qualify as a...
The text of this content is paywalled except for the first five days of each month. Subscribe or log in for unrestricted access.
list of pension plans recognized for French tax purposes re Art. XXIX(5) of French Treaty
423
Principales Questions: Certaines charges sociales et autres retenues faites par la France à même le salaire payé à un individu résidant au Canada sont-elles déductibles au titre de contributions à un fonds de pension et/ou admissibles comme un impôt sur le revenu ne provenant pas d'une entreprise aux fins de l'article 126 de la Loi de l'impôt sur le revenu ?
Principales Questions: 1. Les dispositions du paragraphe 105(1) du Règlement s'appliquent-elles aux sommes versées par le contribuable aux firmes non-résidentes afin qu'elles achètent le matériel requis XXXXXXXXXX ?
2. Advenant que les sommes versées aux firmes non-résidentes soient sujettes à l'application du paragraphe 105(1) du Règlement, une dérogation à cette application à plus de deux années consécutives est-elle possible?
Position Adoptée: 1. Question de fait. 2. Les demandes de réduction des retenues à la source doivent être faites auprès des BSF. Il faut utiliser le formulaire R105, Demande de dispense de l'application de l'article 105 du Règlement de l'impôt sur le revenu. Chaque demande est traitée selon ses faits particuliers..
Raisons: 1.En tenant compte des commentaires de la CCI dans l'affaire Weyerhaeuser, un remboursement de dépense à un non-résident qui n'a pas la qualité de revenu n'est pas sujet à l'application du paragraphe 105(1) du Règlement. 2. R105F (08) et CI-75-6R2, par. 53, 56 & 57. Si un non-résident qui a obtenu une dérogation dans une année antérieure n'a pas produit de déclaration pour cette année-là et que la période prévue à l'article 150 de la Loi est écoulée, le BSF tiendra compte de tous les renseignements avant d'accorder une dérogation pour une année ultérieure. Voir aussi sur le site de l'Agence certaines exceptions aux lignes directrices concernant les dérogations fondées sur des conventions fiscales.
Submitted by narmstrong on Sat, 11/21/2020 - 18:27
corporation must allocate contributed capital of redeemed shares proportionately to borrowed money and redemption notes, but can disproportionately allocate its accumulated profits
A corporation finances the purchase for cancellation (“redemption”) of shares in its capital for $1,000 with $500 borrowed from a financial...
The text of this content is paywalled except for the first five days of each month. Subscribe or log in for unrestricted access.
Principales Questions: Dans une situation où une proportion des actions d'une société serait rachetée avec de l'argent emprunté et l'émission de billets, est-ce que le Capital admissible des actions rachetées (capital contribué et bénéfices accumulés) est remplacé proportionnellement par l'argent emprunté et les billets?
wood waste fuelled heat production system and ground source heat pump likely could qualify
388
Principal Issues: Whether a wood waste fuelled heat production system and ground source heat pump could qualify for class 43.2 of schedule II of the Income Tax Regulations?
Position: Likely yes.
Reasons: Provided all the requirements of the Act and the Regulations are met.
Principal Issues: Eligible amount of the participation fee paid by a sponsor in a fundraising event.
Position: Determined in the same manner as it would be for a participant - fee less advantages
Reasons: Sponsor is entitled to the advantages as a consequence of paying the fee. It doesn't make a difference whether he/she enjoys them personally or they are given to a third party.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 11/29/2015 - 02:14
Escalating lease payments, which were deductible under GAAP on an average basis, would not give rise to a deduction for taxation purposes (to the...
The text of this content is paywalled except for the first five days of each month. Subscribe or log in for unrestricted access.
Principal Issues:
Whether the comments provided in Technical Interpretation 2008-0272771I7, with respect to the deductibility of average long term lease payments, would have varied if additional information pertaining to the taxpayer had been considered, including the effect of a subsection 97(2) transfer of certain assets.
transfer of a pension plan assets and liabilities to the asset purchaser with regulatory approval entailed a plan “modification” rendering actuarial surplus compensation taxable
Submitted by narmstrong on Sun, 11/22/2020 - 02:50
transfer of a pension plan assets and liabilities to the asset purchaser with regulatory approval entailed a plan “modification” rendering actuarial surplus compensation taxable
On the sale by the Vendor of one of its business divisions, the employees of that division were transferred to the purchaser, and the assets of...
The text of this content is paywalled except for the first five days of each month. Subscribe or log in for unrestricted access.
lump sum paid to asset vendor for actuarial surplus in transferred pension plan was s. 9 income under Ikea expense-adjustment principle
222
Principales Questions: Quel est le traitement fiscal d'une somme reçue à l'égard d'un surplus actuariel dans un régime de pension agréé au moment de la vente d'une division lorsque l'acheteur de la division verse le montant au vendeur?
Position Adoptée: Le montant est imposable en vertu de l'article 9 ou de l'alinéa 56(1)a).
Raisons: L'inclusion du montant dans le calcul du revenu d'entreprise est conforme aux principes établis dans l'affaire Canderel. C'est aussi une prestation de pension ou de retraite qui est imposable en vertu de l'alinéa 56(1)a).
