Date: 20010316
Docket: 98-2968-IT-G
BETWEEN:
ROBERT NORMAN GRANGER,
Appellant,
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
Reasons for Judgment
Bell, J.T.C.C.
ISSUES:
[1]1. Whether the
Appellant suffered a capital loss of $180,000 in 1989 which would
be available in computing the taxable capital gain arising from a
sale of shares in his 1995 taxation year.
2.
Whether the Appellant is subject to the restricted farm loss
provided for in subsection 31(1) in the Income Tax Act for
his 1994 and 1995 taxation years.
FACTS:
[2]
The Appellant, a lawyer with a Toronto law firm, left that firm
in 1994 to work with a mining corporation. He served as temporary
president of, and then became Chairman of, that new company. The
Appellant testified that 17 days after he left the law firm, the
directors of the new company fired him. He testified that he is
now a farmer and holds himself out also as a consultant in the
mining industry.
[3]
He said that his grandparents owned a farm near Sturgeon Lake and
that he spent all his summers there, his grandfather having been
a sheep farmer and having grown grains and hay. He stated that he
had always wanted to farm.
[4]
He bought land in 1974 in Prince Edward County in Ontario. The
purchase price of that land, being $63,500, was paid in four or
five years. The land was used for "cash cropping". The
Appellant said that he did not want to raise animals, but simply
to cash crop. He continued renting it to the person who had
rented it before his purchase. The land came together with a
house which has been restored. The Appellant testified that there
were no horse stables, no country club membership, no tennis
courts, no swimming pool extant in connection with the land. He
said that they had put lots of effort and money into the
house.
[5]
In April, 1975 he bought another 36 acre parcel of land intending
to cash crop it and he, in fact, rented it out for cash crops. He
stated that in the mid-90s it was seeded to alfalfa and hay for
his cattle. In 1983 another purchase of 180 acres was made for
the purchase price of $83,000. In 1985 he bought an additional
160 acres for $73,000. That sale was financed by a bank loan,
none of which has been paid. It is rented out for cash crop. In
1987 he bought another piece of land for $26,000, bringing his
total land holdings to approximately 550 acres. He stated that it
is a larger farm holding than most other farms in the area, a
number of which consist of approximately 100 acres.
[6]
The Appellant testified that he demolished some buildings but put
two buildings into good shape, ending up with approximately
11,000 square feet at approximately $115,000.
[7]
He stated that no usable equipment came with the farm and that he
had acquired all equipment presently on the farm. He testified
that he learned how to plow and cultivate and won a local plowing
contest. He said that all equipment was bought second-hand and
that all equipment except large machinery was repaired by him and
his son who lived on the farm.
[8] A
list of farm acquisitions subject to capital cost allowance was
produced as an exhibit. It showed the acquisition of items in
each of the 1985 to 1998 years, the total cost being
$180,525.
[9]
Appellant testified that the spring work to prepare for seeding
included fertilizing, spraying, cultivating, picking stones, et
cetera. He said that he performed a lot of the work himself but
that he hired different people for specific jobs such as spraying
herbicides and pesticides, having stated that one must retain the
services of professionals for that. He said that he operated his
own seed drills and other machinery. He further said that he was
the farm manager. He stated that the cash crop operations were
conducted from the beginning of the farm operation until 1994 at
which time they were no longer justified, the price of these
commodities having reduced substantially. His research persuaded
him to "go up the protein chain". He planted more hay
and alfalfa. He testified that the cash crop prices increased
after he stopped that aspect of his business and stated that
during that subsequent period he likely would have been
profitable.
[10] The
Appellant testified that he commenced a cattle operation in 1994.
He intended to start with hereford cattle and then cross-breed.
He stated that he had good water, gas and fences which he
personally had repaired and installed. He also testified that he
did nearly all the planting and harvesting of crops such as
grain, corn and hay for the cattle. He stated that there were not
many options respecting a farm which was bought for one business
purpose that went sour and that the cattle operation seemed
appropriate.
[11] The
Appellant testified that he was continuously thinking of other
ventures and that he learned that the clay soil with limestone
base and limestone chips is ideal for growing wine grapes. He
stated that different people had bought land and planted grapes,
there being no more space for grapes in the Niagara Peninsula. He
testified that his daughter, who lives on the farm, had planted
grapes in spring of 1999 and was doing well in that business. He
testified that the Farm Credit Corporation application was being
processed and that the site would be inspected the week following
the hearing. He testified that the conduct of cattle and grape
operations are compatible, the limestone soil being good for
grapes and cattle waste being a natural fertilizer.
[12] The
Appellant has sold none of the land purchased by him and
testified that he has no plan at present to sell any land.
[13]
Appellant's counsel filed a schedule showing farming income
and other income. It is reproduced as follows:
FARMING INCOME VS. OTHER INCOME
Taxation Year
|
Gross Revenue (Law)
|
Net Revenue (Law)
|
Gross Revenue (Farming)
|
Net Income/ Loss (Farming)
|
Other Income
|
1989
|
474,196
|
445,025
|
29,170
|
(24,079)
|
5,272
|
1990
|
332,290
|
306,680
|
19,532
|
(38,839)
|
1,200
|
1991
|
232,135
|
210,835
|
17,768
|
(52,411)
|
813
|
1992
|
268,625
|
242,243
|
20,802
|
(30,181)
|
432
|
1993
|
350,125
|
320,447
|
19,050
|
(39,025)
|
288
|
1994
|
351,115
|
327,364
|
31,565
|
(47,776)
|
225
|
1995
|
382,644
|
351,396
|
14,713
|
(50,839)
|
23,228
|
1996
|
-
|
-
|
15,583
|
(32,795)
|
108,318
|
1997
|
-
|
-
|
15,220
|
(43,782)
|
167,261
|
1998
|
-
|
-
|
10,140
|
(32,735)
|
163,626
|
[14] He
explained that the law revenue for 1995 was for the fiscal period
ended January 31, 1995, most of that having been earned in
the eleven months of 1994. He explained that the $108,318 for
1996 was from a new company, the sum of $167,261 for 1997 was
from mining financing and the sum of $163,626 in 1998 was from
mining and financial consulting.
[15] Although
Appellant's counsel also filed an exhibit showing farm
expenses for the years 1989 through 1998 they are reproduced here
from 1994 to 1998 only.
FARM EXPENSES
|
1994
|
1995
|
1996
|
1997
|
1998
|
1
|
Salaries
|
|
|
|
3,203
|
2,200
|
2
|
Interest - Real estate mortgage
|
10,148
|
12,186
|
8,834
|
8,051
|
9,963
|
3
|
Interest - other
|
|
4
|
Property Tax
|
4,111
|
4,290
|
2,888
|
4,359
|
|
5
|
Machinery (gas etc.)
|
2,137
|
2,105
|
1,445
|
1,635
|
2,972
|
6
|
Machinery (repairs etc.)
|
1,357
|
972
|
629
|
1,667
|
795
|
7
|
Motor Vehicle Expenses
|
585
|
479
|
630
|
1,149
|
960
|
8
|
Fertilizers and lime
|
5,700
|
1,416
|
245
|
|
|
9
|
Pesticides
|
5,651
|
3,272
|
409
|
2,443
|
|
10
|
Seeds and Plants
|
6,807
|
2,419
|
1,610
|
5,636
|
1,041
|
11
|
Livestock
|
10,000
|
10,425
|
10,265
|
690
|
|
12
|
Feed etc.
|
|
1,885
|
2,094
|
4,300
|
2,546
|
13
|
Veterinary etc.
|
|
303
|
1,773
|
2,040
|
304
|
14
|
Repairs (buildings and fences)
|
4,233
|
3,591
|
1,340
|
2,004
|
1,231
|
15
|
Containers etc.
|
|
|
115
|
|
|
16
|
Small Tools
|
|
450
|
460
|
1,171
|
1,409
|
17
|
Insurance (including crops)
|
2,223
|
1,166
|
813
|
910
|
900
|
18
|
Accounting etc.
|
|
|
|
380
|
133
|
19
|
Telephone
|
|
393
|
350
|
|
604
|
20
|
Electricity
|
707
|
1,605
|
1,557
|
2,024
|
2,949
|
21
|
Heating Fuel
|
|
|
|
536
|
634
|
22
|
Custom Work etc.
|
11,711
|
4,191
|
283
|
1,209
|
2,539
|
23
|
Freight and Trucking
|
|
|
|
|
|
24
|
Clearing Land etc.
|
|
325
|
393
|
1,125
|
1,900
|
25
|
Drainage etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
26
|
Memberships
|
150
|
250
|
257
|
279
|
150
|
27
|
Miscellaneous
|
591
|
966
|
1,000
|
5,091
|
|
28
|
CCA
|
12,962
|
12,856
|
10,913
|
11,536
|
9,637
|
[16] The
following, supplementing the Appellant's viva voce
evidence, became part of the evidence at the hearing, having been
included in the JOINT BOOK OF DOCUMENTS as:
BIOGRAPHICAL MATERIAL
After the war of 1812-14, an ancestor of mine, Sarah
Granger, applied to the authorities in Kingston, Ontario for a
loyalist land grant because her husband, John, had fought and
died for the English during the war. In the hundred years that
followed, our family farmed in a number of places in Eastern
Ontario: near Bath and Adolphustown and especially near Napanee
and Belleville. Years ago, my grandfather and I took a tour of
these and other locations where members of our family had lived
and farmed in Eastern Ontario and where they were buried.
When I was growing up I used to go to my grandfather's
farm each summer and I think it was as a result of that early
exposure that I came by my love of the land. My father worked for
The Bell Telephone Company and could never afford a farm or I am
sure he would have had one.
Shortly after I became a lawyer and as soon as I could afford
a down payment, I started looking for a farm in Eastern Ontario
which was my area of interest both for the historical reasons
just referred to and because the cost of land there was much
lower. In 1971 and 1972, my wife and I began looking in earnest
and in the fall of 1972, we thought we had purchased a 200 acre
property with wonderful bottom land near Thomasburg (north of
Belleville) but the deal fell through.
It was on such a farm hunting visit to Hillier Township in
Prince Edward County early in 1973 that we saw what is now our
Home Farm and purchased it. It had a large barn, drive shed and
house, all of which were at least 100 years old. With the stream
in spring flood, it looked like water supply would never be a
problem - and it hasn't. With its rolling fields, I
thought the ground would be early and by and large it is. I have
not been disappointed by the selection we made. It was good
quality farm land at a price we could afford. There was no
speculative value in the land then nor is there any now. It is
farm land plain and simple.
ORIGINAL BUSINESS PLAN
and
CHANGE IN PLANS
Because all the properties around the Home Farm were farms
themselves, I thought the location was ideal to permit me to add
to the size of the farm. I felt this was important because, to my
knowledge, very few successful farms operate today on less than
500 acres.
Accordingly, my plans had as the number one priority the
need to assemble a larger land package. I planned to rent the
land out to the farmer who had been working it (in cash crops)
when I bought the Home Farm and then, when I had a sensible
holding, to move into the cash crop business on my own
behalf.
Like everyone else in farming, I knew I would need serviceable
buildings in order to operate - so my second priority
was to spend what was necessary to put our buildings back in good
condition. Accordingly, after I got started in cash cropping,
I began the repair of our barns and drive shed.
While I had been preparing the way for a year or two before I
got going, I really entered the cash crop business in earnest in
1985 when I acquired the adjoining farm to the east of the Home
Farm (the "Veenstra North Farm"). This farm has three
large fields which had been worked in cash crops by the prior
owner.
During the years in which I was in cash crops, I became
increasingly convinced that going into the cattle business as an
addition to my cash crop business was the thing to do. Many
Ontario cash crop operators also operated cattle farms. This was
because it is widely believed that "going up the protein
chain" is the right course to follow in order to overcome
the depressed prices paid for cash crops. When grain prices
soared in 1995, many of these operators sold their cattle
(thereby depressing prices) so that they could retain their grain
for sale in the grain markets.
In the period between 1990 and 1994, I came to feel that if
prices were going to stay low (as they were) I had to do
something different. Moving into cattle was where I was headed
- but as an adjunct of my cash crop business. When I lost
my job in February 1995, the cash demands for me to stay in both
the cash-crop business and the cattle business were too
great and I decided to drop out of the cash-crop business.
As it turned out, if I had stayed in the business, I would be
making money now that soya beans trading at $8.00 to $8.50 U.S.
per bushel and wheat and corn both selling at much higher prices
than I ever received. Clearly, I would have made money in 1995
and 1996.
A most important point to observe is that most farmers
inherit their farms in fully-equipped and operational form from
their families. I didn't do this. Everything I did I had to
do for myself, from scratch. I had to start modestly because I
had to learn as I went and because I had to pay for
everything.
LAND HOLDINGS
The land I now own in Hillier Township, Prince Edward County
is as follows:-
1.
Home
Farm
+/-150 acres
Cost
$60,000
Large
Barn
1973
Drive Shed
Farm House
This property was purchased in March, 1973 and for a number of
years was rented to the local farmer who was growing cash crops
on it when I purchased it under an arrangement with the previous
owner.
Subsequently, in association with another local farmer, I
cash cropped most of this farm (and our other lands) until
February, 1995 when I went out of the cash crop business.
In 1994, 1 took a crop of hay off two fields on this farm as
feed for the cattle I planned to buy later on that year.
In 1995, we took hay off this property as well as mixed grain
to feed our cattle through the winter of 1995-96.
In 1996, we moved part of our hereford herd to this property
where they wintered and calved out.
We are currently working this farm. Four fields on this
property have been seeded down for pasture (about 25 acres), 3
other fields (about 50 acres) have been seeded in hay and two
fields (about 20 acres) have been seeded in mixed spring gains.
All this work has been done by my son and myself.
2.
Panting South Farm+/- 40
acres
Cost $7,000
Vacant Farm Land
1976
This property was purchased in 1976. Since that time, it has
been treated as part of the Main Farm and operated in the same
way. In 1995, this acreage was planted in spring grain and
undersown in alfalfa and has been operated for hay since that
time. The hay crop is exclusively for our beef herd.
3.
Veenstra South Farm+/- 90
acres
Cost $35,000
2 Old
Barns
1983
Old Drive Shed
This property was purchased in 1983. Shortly after its
purchase, it has been operated as a cash crop property along with
our other properties. In 1994, we started into the cattle
business with 4 hereford cows which we housed in this barn and
fed with hay off our properties.
The whole of this property has now been converted to the
cattle business.
4.
Veenstra North Farm+/- 150
acres
Cost $70,000
Vacant Farm Land
1985
This property was purchased in 1985 for the cash crop business
and operated as such until I withdrew from that business in
February, 1995. Since then, the land has been rented out and is
being cash cropped. I will continue to rent this property out
until I am ready to make the next step in our cattle business
when we will be feeding a much larger number of cattle (from100
to 300) and will require a large quantity of green silage in
order to do so. It would be this property that we would most
readily use for this purpose.
5.
Chase Side Road+/- 115
acres
Cost $26,000
Vacant Farm
Land
1989
This property was purchased in 1989 and was operated by me in
the cash crop business through the 1994 crop year. In 1995 and
1996 we rented this land to a local cash crop farmer.
Part of this farm is an old pasture - about 40 acres. We
asked our tenant to break this ground in 1995 - he agreed
to do so but did not do so in either 1995 or 1996. We have once
again told him we want this ground broken in 1997. If he does so
we will agree to let him farm it for the next several years,
otherwise we will attempt to plant the entire farm in hay this
spring.
These farms are all on close proximity to each other.
With over 550 acres we have sufficient land to house and feed
a beef operation of 300 cattle. It is our near term objective to
do so.
EQUIPMENT
Over the years, I have purchased the field equipment which the
operations I have been engaged in have needed. Following the
purchase of the Home Farm in 1973, I started out by purchasing
the equipment needed to keep our lanes and fields free from weeds
and underbrush.
To this end, I acquired several tractors, trailers, wagons,
chain saws, power saws and a trimmer (Bush Hog), sprayers,
pruners, etc. Also needed was equipment to build and maintain
fences. To assist in this, I eventually purchased a Case back hoe
for use in cleaning out fence bottoms, to ditch and drain our
fields, to dig several farm ponds and to perform a vast number of
other farm chores.
In order to grow grain and hay, I acquired a haybind, a baler,
a rake, a buncher, wagons, hay elevator, grain auger, grain bins,
etc. In order to plant these crops, I have acquired several
plows, two spring tooth cultivators, two disc cultivators, a seed
drill, drags and rollers.
Our move into cattle required us to outfit our barns with year
round water which necessitated the installation of electricity in
one barn and the installation of a heated water supply system in
both. With the back-hoe we were able to dig all the lines
ourselves. The move into cattle has required us to construct a
great deal of new fencing as well as new corrals at the
barns.
By and large we have used materials drawn from other fence
bottoms for this purpose and hauled by us to the needed
locations. We also had to construct calving pens, bull pens, etc.
and to acquire heavy duty metal gates, cattle feeders and water
troughs. My son and I (plus some help from time to time from
other family members) have done all the work involved
ourselves.
In order to move the refuse, I acquired a loader for our 35
Massey in order to clean out under our barns. I acquired a manure
spreader to return the manure to our fields and most recently I
have acquired a 65 h.p. 4WD Universal tractor capable of keeping
up with our current herd of 43 animals which we expect to grow to
about 70 head after calving next year, to about 120 head in two
years' time and to about 175 after calving in the year 2000.
This is set out below under the heading "Cattle Operation to
Date and Three Year Business Plan".
At this time, we have barns capable of holding over 15,000
bales of hay. Over the winter just finishing, our herd has
consumed about 6,000 bales of hay.
Given our business plan which follows, I believe we have
adequate hay storage for our growing herd for at least the next
two years before we have to adopt an alternative strategy. We
have already decided that we will go to round bales like our
competition and will not build storage for additional square
bales.
All of the equipment I have purchased has been used. I have
invariably acquired it at very good prices after study of what is
available in the market and at what price.
CATTLE OPERATION TO DATE
AND
THREE YEAR BUSINESS PLAN
I estimate I have invested between $70,000 and $75,000 in
equipment to this date. I estimate that if I was to auction it
off, I would recover in the aggregate approximately the same
amount for it.
1994
In anticipation of moving into the cattle business, early in
1994 my son and I planted the Panting South Farm in mixed grain
and undersowed it with alfalfa, etc. also in the spring of 1994,
we began building a barn yard at the small barn on the Veenstra
South Farm and a paddock next to it. In the summer we cut, baled
and stored hay for winter feed for the cattle we planned to buy
later in the year. Also during the summer we took off the grain.
Later in the year, we had Ontario Hydro bring power into the
barn. We then wired the barn and installed a heated water supply.
Finally, late in the year, we took delivery of our first four
cows for a cost of $10,000: -
(1) GOR
30C $2,500
(2) GOR
3Z $2,500
(3) GOR
5Y $2,500
(4) JJ2
20B $2,500
These cows were acquired from George McNeely (c.o.b. as Golden
Oak Herefords), Hillier, Ontario.
1995
In 1995, we had two heifer calves RNG 1E and RNG 2E and one
bull calf RNG 2E from the above cows and we rebred them.
In 1995, we purchased the following cattle:-
(1) Les 6E (heifer calf) $850
from Harvest Hill Farm
Newbourg, Ontario
(2) AGH 424E (heifer calf) $750
from Quinte Quality
Hereford Sale
Belleville, Ontario
(3) GWR AZD (bred yearling)
$1,200
from Quinte Quality Hereford Sale
Belleville, Ontario
(4) GOR 3E (heifer calf)
$7,500 from Quinte
Quality Hereford Sale
Belleville, Ontario
Total
Cost
$10,350
We subsequently sold a half interest in GOR 3E for $3,750 plus
other non-cash consideration.
1996
In 1996, following spring calving (and before any 1996
purchases) our herd consisted of:-
(a) 5 cows
(b) 5 yearling heifers
(c) 1 yearling bull - RNG 2E - Sonic
(d) 2 heifer calves
(e) 3 bull calves
Total 16 head
We bred the 10 females [(a) plus (b)] and subsequently lost 1
heifer calf due to illness.
In 1996, we bought the following hereford cattle:
(1) AOIZ 5D (cow with heifer
calf at
side)
$925
from R & D Cotton Farm
Belleville, Ontario
(2) AOIZ 10D (cow with bull calf
at
side)
$1075
from R & D Cotton Farm
Belleville, Ontario
(3) KOO 5B
(cow)
$550
from Tom Harrison Hereford Sale
Newbourg, Ontario
(4) KOO 8A
(cow)
$575
from Tom Harrison Hereford Sale
Newbourg, Ontario
(5) unregistered (heifer
calf)
$200
from Tom Harrison Hereford Sale
Newbourg, Ontario
(6)unregistered (bred
heifer)
$570
from Tom Harrison Hereford Sale
Newbourg, Ontario
(7) unregistered (bred
heifer)
$570
from Tom Harrison Hereford Assn
Newbourg, Ontario
(8) GOR 2C
(cow)
$1450
Quinte Quality Hereford Sale
Belleville, Ontario
(9) NFDJ 7E (bred
heifer)
$2700
Quinte Quality Hereford Sale
Belleville, Ontario
(10) HBH 5F (heifer
calf)
$900
Quinte Quality Hereford Sale
Belleville, Ontario
(11) WWDW 116F (heifer calf)
$750
Quinte Quality Hereford Sale
Belleville, Ontario
Total
Cost
$11,265
1997
Following calving this spring and the purchase of one cow with
calf and one heifer calf for a total of $2,225 our herd consisted
of:-
(a) 19* cows
(b) 6 yearling heifers
(c) 2** yearling bulls
(d) 1 steer
(e) 1 Herd Sire - RNG 2E - Sonic
(f) 9 1997 heifer calves
(g) 8 1997 bull calves
(* Two of our yearling heifers aborted late in the fall of
1996 so we only had 16 calves.)
(**To be sold)
Current Total Herd 46 Head
1997 breeding 23 females
In the balance of 1997, I expect to purchase 1 additional cow
and 4 yearling heifers.
Projected Total Herd Fall 1997 49 Head
1998
Projected Herd Inventory
Post-calving 1998
(a) 30 cows
(b) 9 yearling heifers
(c) 1 Herd Sire (RNG 2E - Sonic)
(d) 7* yearling bulls
(e) 15 heifer calves
(f) 15 bull calves
(*To be sold)
Total Herd 77 Head (prior to any 1998 acquisitions or
sales)
1998 breeding 39 females (prior to any 1998 acquisitions)
In 1998, we expect to purchase 6 yearling heifers and sell 7
yearling bulls.
Projected Total Herd Fall 1998 77 Head
1999
Projected Herd Inventory
Post-calving 1999
(a) 45 cows
(b) 15 yearling heifers
(c) 1 Herd Sire (RNG 2E - Sonic)
(d) 15* yearling bulls
(e) 23 heifer calves
(f) 22 bull calves
(* To be sold)
Total Herd 121 Head (prior to any 1999 acquisitions or
sales)
1999 Breeding 60 females
In 1999, I expect to buy 7 yearling heifers and to sell 15
yearling bulls.
Projected Total Herd Fall 1999 113 Head
2000
Projected Herd Inventory
Post-calving 2000
(a) 67 cows
(b) 23 yearling heifers
(c) 1 Herd Sire (RNG 2E - Sonic)
(d) 22* yearling bulls/steers
(e) 34 heifer calves
(f) 33 bull calves
Total Herd 176 Head (prior to any year 200 acquisitions
or sales)
2000 Breeding 90 females
(*To be sold)
I think I am going about building this herd and getting a
viable cattle business going in an aggressive yet sensible
manner. I am doing this with a view to sustainable profit in as
short a period as is prudent given the resources available to
me.
My actual and projected calvings over 5 years is as
follows:-
Year
Live
Calves
% Increase
1995
3
1996
5
66% actual
1997
16
220%actual
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1998
30
87%
projected
1999
45
50%
projected
2000
67
49%
projected
Over the full five years, this is a 94% annual rate of
growth in the most vital aspect of any cow-calf
operation.
During this early stage of my cow-calf business, it will
have to be financed (by me) until it reaches at least a
cash-flow break even point. I believe that it will be at
that point after two more calving seasons.
It is important that the reader understand where we are going
with this business and how one can make money out of it. There
are two distinct aspects to our business plan as
follows:-
(1)
Polled Hereford Cow-Calf Business
To begin with what I am currently developing is a purebred,
registered, polled hereford cow-calf herd. Currently, I
have two areas in which to generate revenue:-
(a) the sale of bull calves either (1) in purebred
hereford sales or (2) as bull calves to the feedlot business or
(3) as fattened steers either to a finisher or directly to the
stockyard. I am currently following the #(3) alternative because
we can provide feed at low cost and because The Grange is not yet
sufficiently established as a hereford producer. We are working
at it.
(b) the sale of heifer calves, bred heifers or cows at
Hereford sales. The problem with this is that this works directly
against the growth of your herd when you sell off your breeding
stock. On the other hand, you have to get quality product on the
market and develop a reputation as a quality producer if you want
to become successful in this market. I will probably sell one or
perhaps two animals this year for just this reason. It is my plan
to be a substantial player in this very lucrative market by the
time our herd meets critical mass.
(2)
Feed Lot Business
As I have shown above, in 1999 and 2000 we will begin to
produce larger numbers of cattle to be fattened for market. At
this point I propose to purchase weaned grade bull calves to
supplement our numbers. We can do this because we have more than
adequate acreage to produce the silage needed to feed them at
competitive cost. This aspect of our business will experience the
greatest growth after the year 2000. 1 propose to keep the
purebred herd at between 100 and 150 breeding females for the
foreseeable future.
Revenue Projections
In Appendix 1, 1 have laid out my business plan for this and
the next three years. If I am not at cash break-even in
1999, 1 certainly will be in 2000. 1 anticipate and intend that
net income from farming will become my principal source of
income.
CAPITAL COMMITTED AND VALUE
Land
Our farmlands currently total over 550 acres. Viewed simply as
agricultural lands, this package would, at $1,000 an acre, have a
value of $550,000 for its land value alone - counting
nothing for barns, houses, etc. or for fencing and general
condition.
If the land is valued at $1,500 an acre, it has a value of
$825,000. Because of the recent dramatic increase in prices for
corn, wheat, barley and soya beans, agricultural land values have
shot up in our area to between $1,500 and $2,000 per workable
acre.
Our cost price for all of our properties since 1973 totals
about $200,000.
Buildings
It is almost impossible to separate the value of our buildings
from the overall value of our land. But the truth is that the
land without the buildings on them would have cost almost the
same to purchase. I think this is because the principal buyers
are established farmers who really only want the land since they
already have establishments elsewhere.
After I acquired the Veenstra North Farm in 1985, 1 turned my
attention to our outbuildings since you have to have them if you
are in the farming business. The buildings on our properties,
while old and very much in need of repairs, could either be
repaired or replaced.
I clearly could not have acquired replacement buildings which
would come close to these for the money I have spent to repair
these buildings. Not only do they provide shelter for the herd
(they also serve for breeding and calving purposes as well as a
lock-up for our bulls) but they store our hay crop and much
of our equipment when it is not being used. In addition, the main
barn contains a workshop and stores a great deal of farm
materials.
Main Barn - Home Farm. The main barn on the Home
Farm contains about 6,000 square feet of floor space on two
floors. This consists of (1) 3,000 square feet of hay lofts which
can easily store 10,000 bales of hay and/or straw; (2) 1,200
square feet of box stalls for calving and for bull pens; and (3)
1,800 square feet used for a welding shop, wood working shop and
timber and general storage. This building also has about a 350
square foot lean-to off it for cattle shelter.
Small Barn - Veenstra South Farm. The Small Barn
on the Veenstra South Farm contains about 3,000 square feet of
floor space on two and one half floors. This consists of a cattle
floor of about 1,000 square feet, hay loft for about 4,000 bales
and straw lofts for over 2,000 bales. There is also a bull pen, a
calving pen and a grain bin with a 6" reinforced cement
floor.
Drive Shed - Home Farm. We also have a large
drive shed on the Home Farm on the ground floor of which we keep
four tractors and a farm truck under cover. We operate a modest
vehicle repair shop in this building where we can keep the
expensive tools needed for this work under lock and key. On the
second floor, we have dry storage for seed and many other
items.
Each floor of the drive shed is about 1,200 square feet so
that the building has 2,400 square feet inside plus about another
150 square feet under the lean-to we constructed off the
back.
The following itemizes the work done on each
building:-
The work done on the Main Barn consisted of-
I .
Removal of all old pine siding;
2.
Repairs to foundations;
3.
Replacement of a number of beams and timbers;
4.
Removal of all old flooring (approximately 4,000 square feet)
with new 2" flooring;
5.
Removal of old broken cement floor in cattle barn and
replacement with 5" cement floor;
6.
Construction of new calving and bull pens;
7.
New siding throughout;
8.
New wiring throughout;
9.
New roofs and steel roofing; and
10.
Construction of a lean-to off the back of the barn,
12'x 35'
with 5" cement floor.
The work done on the Small Barn consisted of.
1.
Replacement of a number of beams and timbers;
2.
Repairs to siding;
3.
Repairs to flooring;
4.
Repairs to foundation and stone walls;
5.
Repairs to roof and roofing;
6.
Removal of old broken cement floor at front of barn and
replacement with 6" cement floor;
7.
Construction of new calving and bull pens;
8.
New wiring throughout; and
9.
Construction of new grain bin.
The work done on the Drive Shed consisted of-
I .
Removal of all old pine siding
2.
Repairs to footings;
3.
Replacement of a number of beams and timbers;
4.
Removal of all old wooden flooring (approximately 1,200
square feet) with new 2" flooring);
5.
Removal of old post and beam plank flooring on ground
floor and replacement with 5" cement floor;
6.
New pine siding throughout;
7.
New wiring throughout;
8.
New roof - asphalt shingles; and
9.
Construction of a 7'x 20' lean-to off the back of
the drive
shed.
In total, I expended about $114,000 in the work described
above, most of which took place in 1986, 1987, 1988 and 1989. I
have always felt I got good value for the money I spent. We now
have over 11,000 square feet of first class useable space -
which will last for another hundred years without much additional
cost.
Cattle
As shown above, to December 31, 1996 I had invested $30,565
in cattle and have a herd of 43 registered polled herefords to
show for it. At an average price of $2,000 per mature animal,
by the end of this year our herd will be worth about $85,000.
Recently I have purchased a cow and calf for $1,550 (the cow
is bred back to a great bull) and a bred heifer calf for $725.
This brings my investment right up to date to $32,840 and brings
my herd up to 46 at the time I write. While I remain a small
operator in an overall sense, I am already one of the largest
cow/calf operators in the Bay of Quinte area.
Equipment
To date, I have invested approximately $70,000 in
equipment.
CAPITAL COMMITTED TO DATE
In summary, I have made the following investments in the farm
up to this date:-
Land
$200,000
Buildings
114,000
Cattle
35,000
Equipment
70,000
*Miscellaneous
40,000
Total
$459,000
*Includes items such as: fencing, water supplies, ponds,
ditching, etc.)
The amount I have expended on my farming operation -
while significant - is not large. Most of the successful
farmers we are in competition with have investments two or three
times as large and in some cases ten times as large.
I envisage having to spend more money to put my operation in a
state where it can sustain itself. I will have to spend a modest
amount more to bring the herd up to the size I want in the next
two or three years. I will also have to spend somewhat more money
on larger forage equipment once the herd has 100 breeding
females. I will also have to spend something between $10,000 and
$20,000 to build an open loafing barn in which to operate our
feeder business once we have 50 animals in that side of our
business. Finally, I will have to pay off the farm debt and
replace it with equity.
With the exception of the last item, I believe I have the
resources to meet these capital requirements. The last one will
have to wait until I win my lawsuit against the firm that fired
me.
PERSONAL TIME AND LABOUR
Even an operation as modest as my farm is nevertheless
requires the commitment of a great deal of time and effort. This
has never been a problem for me - it has always been like a
tonic to work on the farm compared to life as a solicitor.
Moreover, the farm has always been the focus of my life and I
dare say of my wife's as well since we bought the Home Farm
in 1973.
We are now in our 25th year of farming - and propose to
keep at it for the rest of our lives.
In my early years of owning it - from 1973 to about 1984
- before I became the "senior" partner of my law
firm at the time - I had to devote more time to my legal
practice. In 1985, and certainly in 1986, when I went into the
cash crop business in earnest (and by the way - turned 50
years of age) I began to reduce the amount of time I spent in
Toronto at the law firm and increased the time I spent at the
farm.
In the years 1985 to 1990, I was at the farm about 3 days a
week plus holidays or about 170 days a year. As we went deeper
into the nineties, the time I spent increased so that by 1995 and
1996, 1 have been at the farm over 200 days a year. The details
are as follows:
Year
Days at the
Farm
% of Year
1993
170
47%
1994
185
51%
1995
230
63%
1996
210
58%
I expect the division of my time between the farm and
elsewhere will continue much as it has in the last two years
during the period outlined in the attached business plan. By the
end of that period, I expect I will be devoting over 75% of my
time to the farm.
APPENDIX "I"
Projected Financial Statements
Year
Revenue
Expense
1997
Purebred sales $
4,500 input costs (seed, feed,
etc.)
$ 5,000
Beef
sales
4,000
Taxes,
etc.
4,000
Rent
7,500
Utilities,
etc.
1,000
Misc.
3,000
Machinery
expenses
4,000
Cattle
purchases
4,500
Repairs
1,000
Sub-total
19,500
Amortization
9,000
*
Bank
interest
8,000
Total
$19,000
Total
36,500
Loss
($17,500)
Year
Revenue
Expense
1998
Purebred sales $
7,000 Input costs (seed, feed,
etc.)
$ 6,000
Beef
sales
10,000
Taxes,
etc.
4,000
Rent
7,500
Utilities,
etc.
1,000
Misc.
3,000
Machinery
expenses
4,000
Cattle
purchases
4,000
Repairs
2,000
Sub-total
21,000
Amortization
6,000
*
Bank
interest
8,000
Total
$27,500
Total
35,000
Loss
($7,500)
Year
Revenue
Expense
1999
Purebred sales $10,000
Input costs (seed, feed,
etc.)
$ 9,000
Beef
sales
39,000
Taxes,
etc.
5,000
Rent
7,500
Utilities,
etc.
1,500
Misc.
3,000
Machinery
expenses
6,000
Cattle
purchases
15,250
Repairs
3,000
Sub-total
39,750
Amortization
5,500
*
Bank
interest
8,000
Total
$59,500
Total
53,250
Profit
$ 6,250
Year Revenue
Expense
2000
Purebred sales $15,000
Input costs (seed, feed,
etc.)
$ 8,500
Beef
sales
60,000
Taxes,
etc.
5,000
Rent
2,500
Utilities,
etc.
2,000
Misc.
5,000
Cattle
purchases
22,500
Repairs
3,000
Transportation
2,000
Sub-total
43,000
Amortization
7,500
Bank
interest
8,000
Total
$82,500
Total
58,500
Profit
$24,000
*The bank debt is owed to The Bank of Nova Scotia and will be
repaid a.s.a.p. Accordingly, this item may not exist in certain
years depending upon my ability to repay the debt.
[17] The
Appellant testified that he had prepared this around 1997. He
also said that matters didn't turn out as projected because
of events in his life including the fact that "the tax
matter hangs over his head", an obvious reference to the
assessments from which appeals have been taken.
[18] On
cross-examination the Appellant said that he and his wife were
going to sell the house in Toronto and that she would lend him
the money to pay off farm loans.
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION:
[19] In
Moldowan v. Her Majesty the Queen, 77 DTC 5213 Dickson,
J., at page 5216, said:
In my opinion, the Income Tax Act as a whole envisages three
classes of farmers:
(1) a taxpayer, for whom farming may reasonably be expected to
provide the bulk of income or the centre of work routine. Such a
taxpayer, who looks to farming for his livelihood, is free of the
limitation of s. 13(1) in those years in which he sustains a
farming loss.
(2) the taxpayer who does not look to farming, or to farming
and some subordinate source of income, for his livelihood but
carried on farming as a sideline business. Such a taxpayer is
entitled to the deductions spelled out in s. 13(1) in respect of
farming losses.
(3) the taxpayer who does not look to farming, or to farming
and some subordinate source of income, for his livelihood and who
carried on some farming activities as a hobby. The losses
sustained by such a taxpayer on his non-business farming are not
deductible in any amount.
The reference in s. 13(1) to a taxpayer whose source of income
is a combination of farming and some other source of income is a
reference to class (1). It contemplates a man whose major
preoccupation is farming, but it recognizes that such a man may
have other pecuniary interests as well, such as income from
investments, or income from a sideline employment or business.
The section provides that these subsidiary interests will not
place the taxpayer in class (2) and thereby limit the
deductibility of any loss which may be suffered to $5,000. While
a quantum measurement of farming income is relevant, it is not
alone decisive. The test is again both relative and objective,
and one may employ the criteria indicative of "chief
source" to distinguish whether or not the interest is
auxiliary, A man who has farmed all of his life does not become
disentitled to class (1) classification simply because he comes
into an inheritance. On the other hand, a man who changes
occupational direction and commits his energies and capital to
farming as a main expectation of income is not disentitled to
deduct the full impact of start-up costs.
[20] In
Nelson Paquette v. Her Majesty the Queen, [2000] 3 C.T.C.
2714 Bowman, J. of this Court referred to his decision in
Martin v. Her Majesty the Queen, 96 DTC 1915 and Miller
v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2000 DTC 1502. In reference to the
Martin case Bowman, J. said:
Mr. Martin's mode of life, commitment of time, commitment
of capital, and dedication to farming all point inexorably to the
conclusion that Mr. Martin is a full time farmer within Class 1
of the Moldowan categories. Yet the Crown would deny him
that on the basis of one factor, the lack of profitability. There
are two reasons why this factor cannot determine the result in
this case. In the first place although pleaded as a separate
allegation, the so-called "no reasonable expectation or
profit" point was not pressed by the Crown and no evidence
was advanced to substantiate it. I must therefore assume, as Mr.
Martin undoubtedly did, that there was a reasonable expectation
of profit.
Even more importantly, to permit this factor to prevail
against all of the other factors would be to ignore the
principles laid down by the Federal Court of Appeal in such cases
as Morrissey, Poirier, and Connell, which require that no single
factor can be determinative.
[21] The
Appellant is entirely credible. I accept all of his evidence. He
left his law practice and turned to his love, farming. He
acquired farm lands over a substantial period of time and strove
earnestly to make his operations productive. It is unfortunate
that his cash crop program was halted because of inadequate
monetary return on the brink of commodity prices increasing. He
then turned to a cattle operation and, according to his evidence,
it is progressing well. He also turned to the seeding and
production of grapes for which the soil on his farm was
satisfactory. The Appellant has learned, and appears willing to
learn, the facets of the various operations conducted and to be
conducted by him on the farm. He has spent an enormous number of
hours in preparing land for the various operations, fencing
fields, et cetera. He is still available, according to his
evidence, for mining financing consultation but his devotion of
energy and interest is to his farm.
[22] Bowman,
J. also referred to the Federal Court of Appeal's decision in
R. v. Donnelly [1998] 1 F.C. 513 and said:
It puts section 31 in its proper perspective. It involved a
wealthy doctor who took up raising racehorses, and lost large
amounts of money. One needs only to state those facts to realize
why he lost. He was, one of those persons who, as Robertson, J.A.
said:
earned their income in the city and lost it in the
country.
This cannot be said of Mr. Miller whose situation is not even
comparable. Dr. Donnelly was a doctor who dabbled in raising
racehorses. Mr. Miller is a full time farmer who works at
Safeway.
[23] It is
significant to note that the Respondent did not pursue the
pleading in the amended Reply to the Notice of Appeal,
namely:
... the Appellant did not have a reasonable expectation of
profit from the cattle farming operation in the 1995 taxation
year.
[24] The
Appellant was so involved, in time, money and effort in his
farming operations that farming was not a sideline for him. That
rules out Class (2) above. It is clear that the taxpayer was not
carrying on some farming activities as a hobby. That rules out
Class (3) above. It is equally clear that farming may reasonably
be expected to provide the centre of work routine with the
potential of providing the bulk of income. The Appellant is,
therefore, free of the limitation of section 13(1) in the years
under question.
[25]
Accordingly, the appeal respecting the farming operation for the
1994 and 1995 taxation years will succeed.
[26] As noted
above, the Appellant, by concession of the Respondent, will be
entitled to a capital loss of $180,000 in 1989 which is available
to him in computing his taxable capital gain in 1995.
[27] The
Appellant will be entitled to costs.
Signed at Ottawa, Canada this 16th day of March,
2001.
"R.D. Bell"
J.T.C.C.