Income Tax Severed Letters - 2011-12-09

Technical Interpretation - External

Unedited CRA Tags: 
125(1), 125(2), 125(3), 125(7), 129(4), 129(6), 248(1)

Principal Issues: 1.Will rental income and management fees received by a corporation from an associated corporation be considered income of the corporation from an active business. 2. Whether the small business deduction must be shared by associated corporations.

Position: 1. Question of fact. 2. Yes

Reasons: 1 and 2 – The law

Unedited CRA Tags: 
125(5.1); 256(2); 181.5(7); 181.1(2); 181.1(4)

24 November 2011 External T.I. 2011-0424631E5 F - Subsection 256(2) -- attach -- Subsection 181.1(4)

s. 256(2) election causes Aco and Bco not be associated with Cco for s. 125(5.1), but not ss. 181.1(2) and (4), purposes

Aco and Bco are each associated with Cco (also, a CCPC), but would not be associated with each other in the absence of s. 256(2)(a). Cco annually...

The text of this content is paywalled except for the first five days of each month. Subscribe or log in for unrestricted access.

Locations of other summaries Wordcount
Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 256 - Subsection 256(2) - Paragraph 256(2)(b) - Subparagraph 256(2)(b)(ii) s. 256(2)(b)(ii) election inapplicable for ss. 181.1(2) and (4) purposes 30

24 November 2011 External T.I. 2011-0424631E5 F - Subsection 256(2) -- attach -- Subparagraph 256(2)(b)(ii)

s. 256(2)(b)(ii) election inapplicable for ss. 181.1(2) and (4) purposes

CRA confirmed 2003-0051701I7, that a s. 256(2) election causes Aco and Bco not be associated with Cco for s. 125(5.1) purposes, but does not apply...

The text of this content is paywalled except for the first five days of each month. Subscribe or log in for unrestricted access.

Locations of other summaries Wordcount
Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 181.1 - Subsection 181.1(4) s. 256(2) election causes Aco and Bco not be associated with Cco for s. 125(5.1), but not ss. 181.1(2) and (4), purposes 116

Principal Issues: a) Whether proposed amendment to ss 125(5.1) should be taken into account when calculating business limit reduction for taxation years starting after XXXXXXXXXX . b) Whether calculation of business limit is correct in the particular situation.

Position: a) Yes. b) Yes.

Reasons: a) Previous positions. b) Question of fact.

22 November 2011 External T.I. 2011-0404021E5 F - Revenu des entrepreneurs -- attach -- Timing

renovation, and sewage system work, does not qualify as "construction" eligible for completion method

CRA takes the position that renovation of buildings or work on water supply and sewage systems is not a "construction activity" under IT-92R2,...

The text of this content is paywalled except for the first five days of each month. Subscribe or log in for unrestricted access.

Words and Phrases:

Principales Questions: 1) Est-ce que la méthode d'achèvement des travaux telle qu'indiquée au paragraphe 12 du bulletin d'interprétation IT-92R2 peut s'appliquer aux contrats autres qu'aux contrats de construction?
2) Est-ce que les entrepreneurs peuvent utiliser la méthode d'achèvement des travaux pour tous les contrats de leur entreprise ou peuvent-ils l'utiliser seulement pour les contrats de construction visés par ce bulletin d'interprétation?
3) Est-ce que cette méthode peut s'appliquer aux contribuables effectuant des travaux d'aqueduc ou d'égout ou des travaux de rénovations d'immeubles?

Position Adoptée: 1) Non.
2) Les entrepreneurs ne peuvent utiliser la méthode d'achèvement des travaux que pour les contrats de construction.
3) Non.

Raisons: 1) et 2) Libellé du paragraphe 1 du IT-92R2.
3) Un contrat de rénovation n'est pas un contrat de construction aux fins du IT-92R2. Un aqueduc ou un égout n'est pas une structure similaire à un immeuble, une route, un barrage ou un pont.

Unedited CRA Tags: 
53(1)b), 89(1)

16 November 2011 External T.I. 2011-0423861E5 F - paragraph 53(1)b) -- attach -- Paragraph 53(1)(b)

example of application of s. 53(1)(b) on dirty s. 85 exchange of common shares with partial SIOH for high PUC/ACB prefs and low PUC/ACB common shares

Holdco, whose common shares of Opco have a nominal adjusted cost base ("ACB") and paid-up capital ("PUC"), a fair market value ("FMV") of $2...

The text of this content is paywalled except for the first five days of each month. Subscribe or log in for unrestricted access.

Locations of other summaries Wordcount
Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 89 - Subsection 89(1) - Capital Dividend Account - Paragraph (a) - Subparagraph (a)(i) - Clause (a)(i)(A) example of capital gain for CDA purposes being less than the s. 40 capital gain 511

16 November 2011 External T.I. 2011-0423861E5 F - paragraph 53(1)b) -- attach -- Clause (a)(i)A)

example of capital gain for CDA purposes being less than the s. 40 capital gain

Holdco, whose common shares of Opco have a nominal adjusted cost base ("ACB") and paid-up capital ("PUC"), a fair market value ("FMV") of $2...

The text of this content is paywalled except for the first five days of each month. Subscribe or log in for unrestricted access.

Locations of other summaries Wordcount
Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 53 - Subsection 53(1) - Paragraph 53(1)(b) example of application of s. 53(1)(b) on dirty s. 85 exchange of common shares with partial SIOH for high PUC/ACB prefs and low PUC/ACB common shares 295

Principal Issues: How do paragraph 53(1)b) and clause 89(1)a)(i)(A), proposed on July 16, 2010, apply in a situation where subsection 55(2) applies and in a situation where subsection 55(2) does not apply.

Position: It depends on the facts.

Reasons: Previous positions and wording of the proposed amendment.

Principal Issues: Is an amount deductible as "interest" on borrowings from an Islamic institution, pursuant to paragraph 20(1)(c) of the Act, where the lender charges the amount as "Rental payments" instead of interest

Position: Unable to determine in the context of an interpretation request

Reasons: Depends on the facts of the case- should be determined in the context of a ruling request

Technical Interpretation - Internal

Unedited CRA Tags: 
149(1)(l)

Principal Issues: Did the corporation qualify for the tax exemption provided by paragraph 149(1)(l) of the Act for the years under review?

Position: It likely did not qualify.

Reasons: The Corporation may be operating for a profit purpose. Not clear if income is available for the personal benefit of members.