Principales Questions: Dans le cas où un associé d'une société de personnes créé une société par actions par l'entremise de laquelle des services professionnels XXXXXXXXXX seront fournis à des XXXXXXXXXX , est-ce que cette société par actions serait admissible à la déduction accordée aux petites entreprises?
Position Adoptée: Question de faits. Généralement oui, si certaines conditions sont rencontrées.
Raisons: Selon la Loi de l'impôt sur le revenu actuelle. En accord avec les motifs résultant des décisions anticipées antérieures sur des questions similaires.
Principal Issues: Whether renovations to flood proof a home are eligible for the home renovation tax credit.
Position: Generally yes, provided other conditions are met.
Reasons: Expenditures for goods acquired and services received during the eligible period that are directly attributable to a qualifying renovation of an eligible dwelling and that are made or incurred by an individual will qualify for the HRTC.
expected use throughout expected useful life is considered
89
Principales Questions: Dans quatre situations données, les équipements et l'outillage constituent-ils des biens amortissables visés par règlement ("BAVR"), en vertu du paragraphe 2900(11) du Règlement de l'impôt sur le revenu, ou peuvent-ils être admissibles à titre de matériel à vocations multiples ("MVM") de première période selon la définition de cette expression au paragraphe 127(9) de la Loi de l'impôt sur le revenu et possiblement à titre de MVM de deuxième période dont l'expression est définie à ce dernier paragraphe?
Position Adoptée: Questions de fait. Les définitions de MVM de première période et de MVM de deuxième période excluent les BAVR. Dans un premier temps, si les tests d'intention prévus du paragraphe 2900(11) du Règlement sont par ailleurs respectés, les biens peuvent être des BAVR. Lorsqu'on détermine au moment de l'acquisition d'un bien si celui-ci est un BAVR, il faut tenir compte de l'utilisation prévue pendant l'année où la dépense a été engagée et pendant la totalité de sa durée de vie utile prévue. Dans un second temps, si les biens ne sont pas des BAVR et si les critères d'utilisation réelle principalement à des fins de recherche scientifique et de développement expérimental, ainsi que toutes les autres conditions énoncées aux définitions de MVM de première période et deuxième période sont respectés, les biens pourraient possiblement se qualifier à titre de MVM de première période et de MVM de deuxième période. La période visant à établir l'admissibilité du MVM au crédit d'impôt pour investissement débute lorsqu'il est acquis et est prêt à être mis en service, et se termine à la fin de l'année d'imposition au cours de laquelle la période de 12 ou 24 mois prend fin suivant l'acquisition du MVM.
Raisons: Application du paragraphe 127(9) de la Loi et du paragraphe 2900(11) du Règlement. Politique d'application 2005-01 claire.
Submitted by narmstrong on Sat, 08/15/2020 - 16:15
excess of overhead disability insurance received over overhead expense actually incurred was s. 9 income
The correspondent, who had purchased a disability insurance policy providing for the payment of the monthly overhead expenses incurred in the...
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: La différence entre une indemnisation totale en cas d'invalidité provenant d'une police d'assurance frais-généraux et les frais de bureau réellement engagés et afférents à l'exploitation d'une entreprise commerciale ou professionnelle est-elle imposable?
Position Adoptée: Oui.
Raisons: En vertu du paragraphe 9(1) et conformément au bulletin d'interprétation IT-223.
233.1(1); 233.1(2); 233.1(4); Article V (6) Canada-US Income Tax Convention; 220(2.1); 253
Principal Issues: 1. Whether USCO, a hypothetical non-resident corporation, meets the definition of a "reporting person" pursuant to section 233.1 of the Income Tax Act (the "Act") despite being exempt from tax in Canada on its business income under Article VII of the Canada-US Tax Treaty 2. Whether the transactions with ForeignCo, a resident of Japan who wholly owns USCO, would be subject to the filing requirements of section 233.1.
Position: 1. Yes 2. Yes
Reasons: USCO is considered a "reporting person" who has a "reportable transaction" per the definitions of subsection 233.1(1). USCO is therefore required, pursuant to 233.1(2), to file form T106 for transactions with each non-resident person with which USCO does not deal at arm's length, subject to the exception of subsection 233.1(4).
Principal Issues: Will a taxable benefit arise in respect of the provision of an employer owned or leased vehicle to an employee who is "on-call" and is required to take the vehicle home at the request of the employer in order to attend emergencies outside regular business hours?
Position: Yes, a taxable benefit will arise with respect to the personal use of the motor vehicle such as driving from work to home and back. However, where certain conditions are met, the benefit may be calculated at a reduced rate pursuant to the new CRA administrative position outlined in ITTN No. 40.
Reasons: Where the motor vehicle is an "automobile" as defined in subsection 248(1) of the Income Tax Act (the "Act"), a standby charge and operating benefit will arise under paragraphs 6(1)(e) and 6(1)(k) of the Act respectively with respect to the personal use. Where the motor vehicle is not an "automobile", a taxable benefit will arise under paragraph 6(1)(a) of the Act with respect to any personal use. In this case, the CRA generally accepts the rate prescribed under section 7306 of the Regulations for determining the employment benefit the personal use unless certain conditions are met, wherein the CRA will generally accept the rates prescribed in section 7305.1 of the Regulations in determining a reasonable motor vehicle benefit with respect to the personal use.
2010-035396
XXXXXXXXXX Renee Sigouin
(613) 957-2128
February 4, 2010
Principal Issues: Where a home renovation contract is entered into by a home owner just before the expiry of the eligible period and the work is completed by the contractor after the eligible period, will the expenditures incurred for goods acquired or services received by the individual qualify for the HRTC?
Position: Goods must be acquired and services must be received during the eligible period to qualify for the HRTC.
Principal Issues: 1. Who can claim a share of the eligible expenditures incurred for common areas where there is a change in ownership of the strata unit during the HRTC eligibility period - the previous owner or the current owner?
2. How will the eligible expenditures be allocated between the previous owner and the current owner of the unit, if a unit changes its owners during the HRTC eligibility period?
Position: 1. Both, the previous owner who sold the unit and the current owner who bought the unit, may claim their share of the qualifying expenditures, providing all of the HRTC requirements are met.
2. Generally, the qualifying expenditures incurred for common areas are allocated to strata unit owners based on the governing documents or special resolutions of the strata corporation. However, the total amount allocated to the different owners of a unit should not exceed the amount of qualifying expenditures that would otherwise be allocated had there been one owner.
Section 118.04 of the ITA; 2009 federal budget documents
Principal Issues: 1. Will members of housing co-operatives qualify to claim the HRTC?
2. Will the receipt of government assistance payments for capital projects impact what will qualify as eligible expenses?
3. Will an individual's share of the eligible common area expenses paid by the housing co-operative include the unit specific expenses paid by the housing co-operative?
4. Will improvements to the land surrounding the housing co-operative qualify as eligible expenses?
Position: 1. Yes
2. No
3. It depends on the housing co-operative's governing documents.
4. Yes
Reasons: 1. In accordance with subsection 118.04 (1) of the ITA, a share of the capital stock of a co-operative housing corporation acquired for the sole purpose of acquiring the right to inhabit a housing unit owned by that corporation will be an eligible dwelling of an individual where it is owned by the individual and the housing unit is ordinarily inhabited by the individual or a member of his or her family.
2. Section 118.04 of the ITA. Annex 5 of 2009 budget documents states that the HRTC will not be reduced by any other tax credits or grants to which a taxpayer is entitled under other government programs.
3. Legislation does not prescribe method of allocation or definition of common expense.
4. Paragraph 118.04(2)(a) of the ITA
Principal Issues: 1. Does re-shingling a condominium unit qualify for the HRTC?
2. How are costs allocated to unit owners?
3. What documentation is required by owners when they file their tax returns?
Position: 1. Re-shingling qualifies as an eligible expense.
2. Generally, the costs incurred for renovations to common areas are allocated to owners based on the governing documents of the condominium corporation.
3. The condominium corporation should provide owners with a letter which provides details of the renovation.
Principal Issues: Whether Crown priority prevails in the distribution of funds by an estate.
Position: Yes.
Reasons: An estate must first obtain a clearance certificate or provide security before distributing amounts, failing which the trustee is personally liable.
LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE: s. 159(1) to (3) and s. 248(1) ITA; s. 4.1 BIA;
HAA: No paper record.
Principal Issues: Can members of a co-operative housing corporation claim the HRTC for renovations to the housing unit they reside in for expenditures incurred either directly by the member or by the co-operative housing corporation?
Position: Yes. The HRTC can be claimed for qualifying expenditures incurred directly by a member to renovate the co-operative housing unit that is the individual's eligible dwelling. The HRTC may also be claimed for the member's share of the cost of qualifying expenditures incurred by the co-operative housing corporation.
Reasons: Subsection 118.04(1) - definition of eligible dwelling; Paragraph 118.04(2)(a) - application rules for co-operative housing corporation
Principal Issues: Can a homeowner claim his/her proportionate share of the costs incurred, for building a fence along a shared fence line?
Position: Yes, but only to the extent of costs incurred by the homeowner.
Reasons: Building of a fence on land that forms part of an eligible dwelling is a qualifying renovation. The outlay or expense must be made or incurred by the individual or a qualifying relation in respect of the individual.
Principal Issues: 1. Do used wood fired outdoor boilers qualify for the HRTC?
2. Do leased wood fired outdoor boilers qualify for the HRTC?
3. Do wood fired outdoor boilers acquired through a finance contract qualify for the HRTC?
Position: Depends
Reasons: Eligible expenditures for the home renovation tax credit include only expenditures that relate to a renovation or an alteration of an eligible dwelling (including land) that is enduring in nature and integral to the dwelling.
1. A used wood fired outdoor boiler installed on land that forms part of an eligible dwelling will qualify as a qualifying expenditure for the HRTC, except if the used wood fired outdoor boiler was previously used or leased by the individual now acquiring the wood fired outdoor boiler or by a qualifying relation in respect of the individual, for any purpose.
2. Leasing of a wood fired outdoor boiler would not qualify as the individual does not acquire ownership of the wood fired outdoor boiler.
3. A wood fired outdoor boiler acquired through a financing contract would qualify except the financing costs would not qualify.
XXXXXXXXXX 2009-033468
George A. Robertson, CMA
January 13, 2010
Principal Issues: Will the family trust which is to be established by a person who is not resident in Canada be deemed resident for Canadian tax purposes?
Position: There is insufficient information to provide a definitive response, however, overview of current and proposed NRT rules provided along with comments in respect to the limited facts provided.
Reasons: The information provided, in and of itself, would not result in the trust being deemed resident under either the current or the proposed NRT rules, however, given the limited facts provided with the submission, a definitive conclusion cannot be reached.
Section 118.04 of the ITA; January 27, 2009 Federal Budget - Annex 5
Principal Issues: If the proposed HRTC program continues for a second year, will expenditures exceeding the limit of $10,000 be allowed to be carried forward to the 2010 tax year?
Position: No.
Reasons: The legislation regarding the new HRTC has been enacted and is contained in section 118.04 of the Income Tax Act, and does not extend the HRTC for a second year. In addition, Mr. Flaherty has not announced any plans to extend the HRTC.
XXXXXXXXXX 2009-033784
A. Mahendran
January 11, 2010
Principal Issues: Who would qualify for the home renovation tax credit (HRTC) if expenditures are incurred for common areas of a condominium and are paid out from a condominium reserve fund?
Position: If renovations are made in the common area of a condominium and the unit is an eligible dwelling, the individual would be able to claim the HRTC on his or her share of the total cost of renovating common areas.
Reasons: 2009 Federal budget statements; Notice of Ways and Means Motion (September 14, 2009)
Principal Issues: Whether a gift by will may be claimed in a particular situation, where an individual died and the individual's will instructed that the residue of the estate be held in trust, with net income to be paid to registered charities.
Position: General comments.
Reasons: Reference is made to IT-226R. No amount will be allowed with respect to a gift by will, within the meaning of subsection 118.1(5), in circumstances where the value of the donation at the time it is made cannot reasonably be determined.
ITC potentially available to a non-resident corporation carrying on business in Canada
97
Principales Questions: 1. Est-ce qu'une société dont le siège social déménage à l'extérieur du Canada doit produire une T2?
2. Est-ce que la société a encore droit au crédit d'impôt à l'investissement à l'égard de la recherche faite au Canada?
Position Adoptée: 1. Il faut établir si la société est résidente ou réputée résidente du Canada ou si la société est résidente d'un autre pays ou réputée non-résidente du Canada. Quelle que soit la réponse, elle devra produire une T2. Si la société est résidente ou réputée résidente du Canada, elle inclura sur la T2 ses revenus et dépenses de toutes provenances. Si la société est non résidente, elle devra inclure, entre autres, son revenu d'entreprise exploitée au Canada à moins qu'une convention fiscale contienne des dispositions d'allègement.
2. Si la société est résidente du Canada ou réputée l'être, son impôt de la Partie I pourra être réduit du crédit d'impôt à l'investissement si elle respecte les conditions lui donnant droit à un tel crédit. Si la société est non-résidente du Canada ou réputée l'être, son impôt de la Partie I pourrait être réduit du crédit d'impôt à l'investissement si elle exploite une entreprise au Canada, que la recherche a rapport à cette entreprise et que les conditions lui donnant droit au crédit sont respectées.
Raisons: 1. Dispositions de la Loi. Voir guide T2.
2. Dispositions de la Loi. Voir IT-151R5.
Principales Questions: 1. Quelle est la nature du gain ou de la perte sur change réalisée lors du remboursement d'un emprunt ou des versements mensuels et comment calculer un tel gain ou perte? What it is the income tax status of foreign exchange gains or losses in the case of funds borrowed in a foreign currency and how is the gain or loss computed?
2. Comment calculer le gain ou la perte sur change réalisé lors de la disposition d'une immobilisation ou d'un bien en inventaire? How do you compute the gain or loss resulting from the disposition of a capital property or from the disposition of inventory?
Position Adoptée: 1. Pour déterminer la nature du gain ou de la perte sur change à l'égard de fonds empruntés en monnaie étrangère, il faut examiner l'utilisation des fonds. Si les fonds ont été utilisés pour acquérir une immobilisation, le gain ou la perte sera de nature capital et si les fonds ont été utilisés pour acquérir des biens en inventaire, le gain sera considéré comme un accroissement du revenu d'entreprise ou de bien et la perte comme une perte d'entreprise ou de bien. Pour déterminer le gain ou la perte sur change étranger, il faut mesurer le montant du remboursement en monnaie canadienne au taux de change en vigueur à la date du remboursement et mesurer cette partie de l'emprunt en monnaie canadienne au taux de change en vigueur à la date où l'emprunt a été contracté. La différence entre les deux montants constitue le gain ou la perte sur change étranger. The identification of the use of the funds borrowed in a foreign currency is required to determine the income tax status of foreign exchange gains or losses when the funds are repaid. If the funds were borrowed to acquire a capital property, the gain or loss will be on capital account. If the funds were used to acquire inventory, the gain will be considered to be income from business or property and the loss will be considered to be a loss from business or property. The foreign exchange gain or loss resulting from the repayment of the loan will be computed by converting the repayment amount to Canadian currency at the exchange rate in effect at the time of the repayment and by converting the part of the loan repaid to Canadian currency at the exchange rate in effect at the time the loan was made. The difference between the two amounts constitutes the foreign exchange gain or loss.
2. Il faut convertir le produit de disposition en monnaie canadienne au taux de change en vigueur au moment de la disposition et le prix de base rajusté ou le coût, selon le cas, en monnaie canadienne au taux de change en vigueur au moment de l'acquisition. Pour ce qui est de l'immobilisation, le paragraphe 39(2) de la Loi s'appliquera si et seulement si ce gain ou cette perte, telle que calculée à l'article 40 de la Loi est uniquement attribuable à la fluctuation de la valeur d'une monnaie étrangère par rapport à la monnaie canadienne. The foreign exchange gain or loss will be computed by converting the proceeds of disposition to Canadian currency at the exchange rate in effect at the time of disposition and by converting the adjusted cost base to Canadian currency at the exchange rate in effect at the time of acquisition. In the case of a capital property, subsection 39(2) of the Act will apply if, and only if, the gain or loss, as computed under section 40 of the Act, is solely attributable to the fluctuation in the value of a foreign currency relative to the Canadian currency.
Principales Questions: 1) Whether the filing of a tax election constitutes a transaction for the purposes of section 245. 2) If so, whether it could constitute an avoidance transaction as defined in subsection 245(3).
Position Adoptée: 1) Yes. 2) Depending on the facts and circumstances of a particular situation, yes
Raisons: Wording of the Act and previous positions.
Principales Questions: In technical interpretation no. 9525315, the following fact situation was considered: On July 1, 1995 at 5:00 pm, a corporation ("Aco") sells to another corporation ("Bco") all of the issued and outstanding shares of the capital stock of an operating corporation ("Opco"). The fiscal period and taxation year of Aco ends on December 31, 1995. The fiscal period and taxation year of Bco ends on January 31, 1996. Pursuant to paragraph 249(4)(a) and in the absence of an election under subsection 256(9), the taxation year of Opco is deemed to have ended on June 30, 1995. Opco chooses to have its next fiscal period end on December 31, 1995. One of the questions at issue was whether Aco would be associated with Opco for their taxation years ending December 31, 1995. The CRA (then Revenue Canada) answered negatively. In support of this answer, the CRA indicated, among other things, that it did not consider the application of paragraph 256(1.2)(c) as taking precedence over subsection 256(9). Whether this administrative position still represents CRA's position.
Position Adoptée: Yes.
Raisons: Wording of the Act and previous positions.
Principales Questions: (1) Whether the position in technical interpretation 2004-009256 is still CRA`s position? (2) If the answer to the first question is yes, how does CRA reconcile this position with the fact that in past advance income tax rulings on spin-off transactions the CRA recognized a disposition of the common shares when they were converted into a number of new common shares and preferred shares (for example 2003-0038863)?
Position Adoptée: (1) Yes. (2) See response below.
Principales Questions: Diverses questions concernant des précisions sur les lignes directrices pour les contribuable demandant des avantages prévus par le paragraphe 6 de l'Article XXIX-A de la Convention Canada - États-Unis.
Position Adoptée: Commentaires généraux émis par l'autorité compétente au sein de la Direction générale de la politique législative et des affaires réglementaires
Principales Questions: Est-ce que les allocations de repas, versées dans trois situations précises, doivent être incluses dans le revenu des employés qui les reçoivent?
Submitted by narmstrong on Sun, 08/16/2020 - 15:35
Dupuis not being followed
Regarding Dupuis (described in the CRA TSO question as finding “for the 2003 taxation year only, that the taxpayer's employment was of a...
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: (1) Doit-on appliquer le jugement dans l'affaire Ginaud Dupuis c. Sa Majesté la Reine 2009 CCI 220 à des années d'imposition du contribuable, autre que 2003, ainsi qu' à d'autres employés ayant le même employeur et des conditions de travail similaires?
(2) Si la réponse à la première question est positive, comment calculer la déduction pour les habitants des régions éloignées prévue à l'article 110.7 de la Loi de l'impôt sur le revenu?
Position Adoptée: (1) Non.
(2) Non applicable.
Raisons: La décision de la Cour canadienne de l'impôt, rendue en procédure informelle, ne s'applique que pour une année d'imposition pour un contribuable. Elle ne s'applique pas automatiquement à d'autres années d'imposition du contribuable ni à d'autres employés. L'analyse de l'ensemble des faits et des exigences du paragraphe 6(6) de la Loi doit être effectuée pour chaque contribuable pour chaque année d'imposition. L'admissibilité des déductions pour les habitants des régions éloignées et son calcul doit s'effectuer selon l'article 110.7, avec l'aide du formulaire T2222 et du Bulletin d'interprétation IT-91R4. Nous avons également consulté informellement le Bureau des litiges de l'Agence du revenu du Canada responsable du dossier.
Principal Issues: Deductibility for income tax purposes of GST reassessment under section 9 and paragraph 20(1)(p) of the ITA. Calculation of the GST adjustment under subsection 231(1) of the ETA.
Position: If the transactions that gave rise to the GST reassessment were made or incurred by the taxpayer for the purpose of gaining or producing income from a business, the GST and interest imposed on the transactions are also deductible for income tax purposes pursuant to subsection 9(1) of the ITA. If the supplier receives a GST reassessment and sets up a receivable to account for the GST they expect to recover from the recipient, if all or part of the receivable in respect of the supply becomes bad and the supplier writes-off the affected portion in their books of account, the supplier may claim a bad debt deduction under paragraph 20(1)(p) of the ITA for the amount of the uncollected receivable net of any GST adjustment under subsection 231(1) of the ETA.
Reasons: IC: 77-11, paragraph 20(1)(p) of the ITA and subsection 231(1) of the ETA.
Principal Issues: Do certain expenditures qualify as eligible expenditures for the home renovation tax credit (HRTC)?
Position: It is a question of fact whether the cost of renting a storage facility to store furniture to renovate a room of an eligible dwelling will qualify for the HRTC. Costs that are directly attributable to the re-shingling of a roof of an eligible dwelling, including the dump fees required to dispose of the old shingles, will qualify for the HRTC. The costs for professional services received after January 27, 2009, and before February 1, 2010, such as drafting blueprints for a qualifying renovation of an eligible dwelling will qualify for the HRTC, even if the qualifying renovation is not completed until after January 31, 2010. The cost of a deck package that is acquired before February 1, 2010, and installed after January 31, 2010 in an eligible dwelling, will qualify for the HRTC.
Reasons: Expenditures for goods acquired and services received during the eligible period that are directly attributable to a qualifying renovation of an eligible dwelling and that are made or incurred by an individual will qualify for the HRTC.
s. 160.1 ITA; s. 121(1) BIA; s. 6 Regulations Respecting Interest on Overdue Accounts and Administrative Charges for Dishonoured Instruments (SOR/96-188)
Principal Issues: Whether the cashing by a discharged bankrupt of an original cheque, in addition to the duplicate cheque issued to replace it, constitutes an excessive refund, and if so, whether the amount is considered as a provable claim.
Position: No.
Reasons: For s. 160.1 to apply, a taxpayer must have claimed a refund that exceeded the amount to which that person was entitled. As the cheque was cashed post bankruptcy, it is not a provable claim, there being no pre-bankruptcy liability for the amount of the cheque.
Principal Issues: Whether a shareholder assessed under subsection 15(1), could be also liable under subsection 160(1) under the same set of facts.
Position: Yes; but one is not dependent on the other.
Reasons: Subsections 15(1) and (2) are income inclusion provisions for taxation purposes, while an assessment under subsection 160(1) is a tool to collect the tax of another person.
Principal Issues: Whether a bankrupt corporation could deduct section 111 losses and the investment tax credit under s. 127(5).
Position: Yes, but only while it remains bankrupt.
Reasons: Paragraph 128(1)(g) provides that, as long as it remains bankrupt, a corporation may claim section 111 losses. Section 128 does not provide any impediment to the corporation claiming the investment tax credit under s. 127(5).
absence of any services rendered during travel indicates the travel was not in the course of employment
122
Principales Questions: Dans les situations décrites, les allocations reçues par les employés doivent-elles être incluses dans le calcul de leur revenu en vertu de l'alinéa 6(1)b)? Le cas échéant, une déduction en vertu de l'alinéa 8(1)h.1) est-elle disponible?
Position Adoptée: Les allocations sont imposables et aucune déduction n'est permise en vertu de l'alinéa 8(1)h.1).
Raisons: Dans les deux situations, les déplacements ne sont pas effectués dans l'accomplissement des fonctions d'une charge ou d'un emploi.
electronic filer must certify accuracy of filings before allowed access
103
Principales Questions: Comment l'ARC s'assure-t-elle de l'intégrité et de la véracité des informations soumises lors de la transmission électronique de déclarations de renseignements?
67.1(2)(f) exclusion can apply to meals provided at a golf club
232
Principales Questions: (1) L'alinéa 18(1)l) a-t-il préséance sur l'alinéa 67.1(2)f) dans une situation où l'événement est offert à tous les employés? (2) La nourriture offerte au club de golf après la partie de golf est-elle visée par l'exception prévue à l'alinéa 67.1(2)f)?
Position Adoptée: (1) Oui. (2) Oui, probablement.
Raisons: (1) Libellé de la Loi. (2) Libellé de la Loi et publications précédentes de l'ARC sur l'interprétation du terme "installation" au sous-alinéa 18(1)l)(i).
Principal Issues: Are payments made by an Employer to an Employee at termination a retiring allowance under the Income Tax Act (the "Act")?
Position: It is a question of fact.
Reasons: The determination of whether a lump-sum amount received by an employee upon or after termination of employment constitutes employment income or a retiring allowance can only be made after a through review of all of the details, including the employment contract and any other agreements giving rise to the payment.
Principal Issues: Deductibility of costs incurred by an individual on a missionary trip.
Position: Question of fact but amounts do not appear to be connected to any business or employment. General comments on the charitable tax credit rules.
floating fiscal year does not require CRA approval/retroactive change to previous year end to reduce s. 85(8) penalty not permitted
287
Principales Questions: (1) Les sociétés ayant un exercice flottant doivent-elles demander l'assentiment du ministre selon le paragraphe 249.1(7) pour être en mesure de fixer une date de fin d'exercice différente à chaque année? (2) Est-il possible de modifier rétroactivement l'exercice se terminant le 29 février 2008 pour qu'il débute le 28 février 2007 plutôt que le 1er mars 2007?
Position Adoptée: (1) Non. (2) Non.
Raisons: (1) Positions administratives précédentes. (2) Interprétation de la Loi et positions administratives précédentes.
