Date:
20020910
Docket:
2002-844-IT-I
BETWEEN:
TIMO
PUHAKKA,
Appellant,
and
HER MAJESTY
THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
Reasons
for Judgment
Little,
J.
A.
FACTS
[1]
The Appellant has had experience working in the tool and dye
industry.
[2]
In the 1997 and 1998 taxation years the Appellant maintains that
he was operating a business under the name "Timo
Enterprises" ("Enterprises").
[3]
The Appellant's spouse owned and operated a physiotherapy
clinic under the name "East Scarborough Physiotherapy"
(the "Clinic").
[4]
During the 1997 and 1998 taxation years the Appellant worked for
the Clinic performing front desk and other duties for the
Clinic.
[5]
In the 1997 and 1998 taxation years the Clinic issued T-4A forms
for the Appellant as follows:
|
Income
|
1997
|
$7,800.00
|
1998
|
14,560.00
|
The Appellant reported the above amounts as employment income in
determining his income for the 1997 and 1998 taxation
years.
[6]
In the 1997 and 1998 taxation years the Appellant also received
the following amounts from the Clinic:
|
Additional Income
|
1997
|
$16,250.00
|
1998
|
$20,900.00
|
[7]
The Appellant maintains that the additional income was the income
of Enterprises. The Appellant also deducted expenses in
determining the income of Enterprises. Enterprises reported
income as follows:
|
1997
|
1998
|
Income
|
$16,250.00
|
$20,900.00
|
Expenses
|
12,653.57
|
14,046.73
|
Net
Income
|
$3,596.43
|
$6,853.27
|
[8]
The Minister of National Revenue (the "Minister")
issued Notices of Assessment for the Appellant's 1997 and
1998 taxation years and the income of Timo Enterprises was
accepted as filed.
[9]
Subsequent to the issuance of the assessments the Appellant
requested that the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency allow Timo
Enterprises additional expenses as follows:
|
1997
|
1998
|
Additional Expenses
|
$914.25
|
$2,688.24
|
[10] On the 15th
day of April, 2001 the Minister issued Notices of Reassessment
for the Appellant's 1997 and 1998 taxation years. In the
reassessments the Minister disallowed the expenses of $12,653.57
and $14,046.73 originally claimed by the Appellant for the 1997
and 1998 years respectively. In the said reassessments the
Minister also denied the additional expenses in the amount of
$914.25 and $2,688.24 that were claimed by the
Appellant.
B.
ISSUES
(1)
Did the Appellant operate a business under the name of "Timo
Enterprises" in the 1997 and 1998 taxation years?
(2)
If Timo Enterprises was carrying on a business in the 1997 and
1998 taxation years, is Timo Enterprises allowed to deduct the
expenses that were claimed?
C.
ANALYSIS
[11] I have
considered the testimony of the Appellant and I have concluded
that in the 1997 and 1998 taxation years he was operating a
business under the name of "Timo Enterprises". It
therefore follows that the amounts of $16,250.00 and $20,900.00
received in the 1997 and 1998 taxation years respectively
constituted business income. In reaching this conclusion I have
noted the pieces of equipment manufactured by Timo Enterprises
for the Clinic. (See Exhibit A-8.) I have also heard the
Appellant's testimony that he attempted to develop new
business for Timo Enterprises by advertising and by personal
contact with other Physiotherapists. (Note: to determine whether
a taxpayer is carrying on a business in a taxation year we must
examine the relevant facts in that particular taxation
year.)
[12] We must now
determine the expenses that may be deducted by
"Timo Enterprises".
[13] I have
concluded that the following expenses are deductible in
determining the business income of Timo Enterprises:
1997
Taxation Year
Claimed
Allowed
Home
Insurance
50% - $
280.06
25% - $ 140.03
Property
Tax
50% -
1,168.80
25% - 584.40
Mortgage
Interest
50% -
5,048.36
25% - 2,524.18
Utilities
50% -
1,071.32
25% - 535.66
Telephone
15% -
115.93
15% - 115.93
Supplies
100% -
460.17
100% - 460.17
Office
100% -
28.75
100% - 28.75
Capital Cost
Allowance
732.76
50% - 366.38
Amount to be allowed for
1997
$9,204.53
$4,755.50
(See Exhibit
A-6.)
1998
Taxation Year
Claimed
Allowed
Property
Tax
25% -
$1,010.73
25% -$1,010.73
Mortgage
Interest
25% -
2,520.43
25% - 2,520.43
Utilities
25% -
675.70
25% - 675.70
Telephone
15% -
63.32
15% - 63.32
Supplies
100% -
237.71
100% - 237.71
Capital Cost
Allowance
968.55
50% - 484.27
Amount to be
allowed for
1998
$5,668.87
$4,992.16
(See Exhibit
A-7.)
[14] The appeals
for the 1997 and 1998 taxation years will be allowed to permit
the Appellant to deduct the expenses as outlined in paragraph
[13] above.
Signed at
Vancouver, British Columbia, this 10th day of September,
2002.
J.T.C.C.COURT
FILE
NO.:
2002-844(IT)I
STYLE OF
CAUSE:
Timo Puhakka and
Her Majesty the Queen
PLACE OF
HEARING:
Toronto, Ontario
DATE OF
HEARING:
July 23, 2002
REASONS FOR
JUDGMENT BY: The Honourable Judge L.M.
Little
DATE OF
JUDGMENT:
September 10, 2002
APPEARANCES:
For the
Appellant:
The Appellant himself
Counsel
for the
Respondent:
Xenia Proestos (Student-at law)
COUNSEL OF
RECORD:
For the
Appellant:
Name:
Firm:
For the
Respondent:
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, Canada
2002-844(IT)I
BETWEEN:
TIMO
PUHAKKA,
Appellant,
and
HER MAJESTY
THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
Appeals
heard on July 23, 2002 at Toronto, Ontario, by
the
Honourable Judge L.M. Little
Appearances
For the
Appellant:
The Appellant himself
Agent for
the
Respondent:
Xenia Proestos (Student-at-law)
Judgment
The appeals from the
assessments made under the Income Tax Act for the 1997 and
1998 taxation years are allowed, without costs, and the
assessments are referred back to the Minister of National Revenue
for reconsideration and reassessment in accordance with the
attached Reasons for Judgment.
Signed at
Vancouver, British Columbia, this 10th day of September
2002.
J.T.C.C.