Date: 19980414
Docket: 97-2235-IT-I
BETWEEN:
SLOBODAN TRSIC,
Appellant,
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
Reasons for Judgment
P.R. Dussault J.T.C.C.
[1] The appellant is challenging an assessment, notice of
which was dated April 29, 1997, for tax on income from
Canada of non-resident persons (Part XIII) for the 1996
taxation year.
[2] The appellant also disagreed with the amounts claimed by
the Minister of National Revenue ("the Minister")
pursuant to a judgment of this Court on December 3, 1997
dismissing his appeals from assessments made for the 1991 to 1995
taxation years inclusive, in connection with the seizure by the
Minister of a total amount of $26,638.02 from a bank account on
May 23 and June 4, 1997.
[3] This second point is essentially one of collection of
money owed pursuant to a judgment, not an appeal from an
assessment. Section 12(1) of the Tax Court of Canada
Act gives this Court no jurisdiction to hear this type of
case unless the dispute arose from the making of a reassessment,
which is not the case here.
[4] For the benefit of the appellant, who appeared to be
disputing the validity of the interest claimed, I would simply
note that s. 227(8.3)(b) of the Income Tax Act
("the Act") provides that a person who fails to deduct
or withhold any amount as required by s. 215 of the Act in
paying money to a non-resident person shall pay to the Receiver
General interest calculated at the prescribed rate for the period
beginning on the day on which the amount was required to be
deducted or withheld and ending on the day of payment of the
amount to the Receiver General. Additionally, s. 227(8.1) of
the Act makes a non-resident person and the person who has failed
to deduct or withhold an amount as required under s. 215 of
the Act jointly and severally liable to pay any interest
calculated in accordance with s. 227(8.3)(b) of the
Act.
[5] On the appeal from the assessment for the 1996 taxation
year, the parties agreed on the fact that the appellant was a
resident of the U.S. As well, there was agreement on the fact
that the appellant received the following amounts in 1996:
ORGANIZATION NATURE OF AMOUNT AMOUNT
Government of Canada pension $ 4,764.42
Régie des Rentes du Québec survivor's
pension $ 6,345.24
Régie des Rentes du Québec pension $
1,019.76
Hydro-Québec pension $22,379.00
Royal Bank interest $ 170.13
Royal Bank interest $ 3,503.36
[6] No source deductions were made when these amounts were
paid to the appellant.
[7] The assessment totalling $6,756.55 was made on the basis
that the applicable rates and resulting tax were as follows, for
the various amounts received:
AMOUNT RATE TAX
Interest $ 3,673.49 10% $ 367.35
Hydro-Québec pension $22,379.00 15% $3,356.85
Government of Canada pension
and pensions from Régime des $12,129.42 25%
$3,032.35
Rentes du Québec
TOTAL $6,756.55
[8] The 10 percent rate on interest results from the
effect of Article XI of the 1980 Tax Convention between
Canada and the United States ("the Convention") as
applicable from January 1, 1996.
[9] The 15 percent rate on the pension received from
Hydro-Québec results from the effect of
paragraphs 2(a) and 3 of Article XVIII of the
Convention, as applicable from January 1, 1996, according to
the third Protocol to that agreement effective on
November 9, 1995.
[10] The 25 percent rate on benefits paid under social
security legislation (Government of Canada and Régime des
Rentes du Québec) results from the operation of
s. 212(1)(h) of the Act, as applicable from
January 1, 1996, and the exclusion set out in
paragraphs 3 and 5 of Article XVIII of the Convention,
as amended by the third Protocol.
[11] Counsel for the respondent admitted that the coming into
effect of the fourth Protocol to the Convention on
December 16, 1997 amended Article XVIII of the
Convention so that benefits under social security legislation
would only be taxed in the recipient's country of residence,
not in the country in which the source of the benefits was
located. As this amendment is applicable retroactively from
January 1, 1996, the 25 percent tax assessed on
pension payments received from the Government of Canada and under
the Régime des Rentes du Québec must be
quashed.
[12] The appeal is accordingly allowed and the assessment
reduced by $3,032.35, to $3,724.20.
Signed at Ottawa, Canada, April 14, 1998.
P.R. Dussault
J.T.C.C.
[OFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION]
Translation certified true on this 14th day of December
1998.
Kathryn Barnard, Revisor