description of use of exchangeable unit structure by REIT
146
Principal Issues: 1. Will the proposed amendments to the Declaration of Trust result in a disposition by Fund of its XXXXXXXXXX? 2. Will the proposed amendments to the Declaration of Trust to provide for the Right of Redemption result in a disposition by the existing Unitholders of their Units? 3. Will Fund qualify as an open-end unit trust after the amendment to the Declaration of Trust? 4. Will the Proposed Transactions affect the qualification of Fund as a mutual fund trust?
Position: 1. No. 2. No. 3. Yes. 4. No.
Reasons: 1. This is similar to several previous rulings. There is no resettlement under provincial law and there is not a fundamental change in the terms of the trust. There are no actual dispositions of XXXXXXXXXX by the Fund. 2. The amendments to the DOT will not cause any person to become a beneficiary, nor will any person cease to be a beneficiary. There will be no resulting redemption or cancellation of units, and no material change to the rights of unitholders. 3. Fund will meet the requirements of paragraph 108(2)(a). 4. The Proposed Transactions will not cause subsection 132(7) to apply and will not impact on whether the Fund continues to meet paragraphs 132(6)(a), (b) and (c).
Principal Issues: Would renting the common areas of a housing co-op to third parties (e.g., filming companies) indicate a profit purpose that would jeopardize a housing co-operative’s status as a tax-exempt NPO under paragraph 149(1)(l) of the Act?
Position: Yes.
Reasons: A tax-exempt NPO can earn profits, but the profits should be incidental. That is, the profits are not significant and arise from activities that are directly connected to the organization's not-for-profit objectives.
Submitted by narmstrong on Fri, 07/26/2024 - 04:01
guaranteed salary payments received by a US-resident member of a Canadian team while not in Canada were not taxable in Canada
A resident of the US, who had entered into a 6-year employment contract (covering years 20X1 to 20X6) with a Canadian team, suffered a serious...
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: 1. Whether payments made to a non-resident athlete employed by a Canadian team while the athlete was injured and outside of Canada are income from performing duties of office or employment in Canada? 2. Whether payments made to a non-resident athlete that is released by a Canadian team for the remainder of the term of his contract and while the athlete does not perform any services for that team are income from performing duties of office or employment in Canada?
Position: Such payments are not income from performing duties of office or employment in Canada, hence are not taxable income earned in Canada.
Reasons: Such payments are not attributable to duties of employment performed in Canada.
