Date: 20070705
Docket: T-795-04
Citation: 2007 FC 701
Ottawa, Ontario, the 5th day of July
2007
Present:
The Honourable Mr. Justice Martineau
BETWEEN:
CITY
OF MONTRÉAL
Applicant
and
MONTRÉAL
PORT AUTHORITY
Respondent
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Intervener
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] The
administrative decision whose lawfulness is challenged by the applicant was
made in March 2004 by a manager of the respondent, Sylvie Vachon (the
Tribunal). Except where otherwise indicated in these reasons, the amounts of
the adjustments made by the Tribunal to the applicant’s application for payment
in lieu of real property tax for the year 2004 are those found in a letter to
the applicant, dated March 19, 2004, with which a cheque issued by the respondent
in the amount of $1,326,497.53 was enclosed (the impugned decision).
[2] The
application for payment was submitted to the respondent in accordance with Part
I of the Crown Corporation Payments Regulations, SOR/81-1030, as amended
(the CCPR). The adjustments found in the impugned decision were made by the
Tribunal on behalf of the respondent under the supposed authority of the CCPR.
The Tribunal assessed the amount of the payment in lieu of real property tax
(PLRT) to be paid by the respondent for the 2004 taxation year at $1,326,497.53. This amount
includes $1,196,305.49 for the sector corresponding to the former city of Montréal (Montréal
sector) and $130,192.04 for the sector corresponding to the former city of Montréal-Est
(Montréal-Est sector).
[3] In its notice
of application filed in Court on April 21, 2004, the applicant submits that the
respondent arbitrarily and unlawfully subtracted the following amounts from the
payment involving the Montréal sector:
(a) the
amount of $737,889.67 to be paid at the real property tax rate usually
applicable to non-residential properties (the effective real property tax rate
issue);
(b) the
amount of $1,247,355.98 representing the additional amount to be paid at the
effective rate applicable to the piers and silos that were excluded from the
calculation (the exclusion of piers and silos issue).
[4] The relevant
statutory and regulatory provisions are reproduced in the annex to these
reasons.
1. Municipal
tax rules in the province of Quebec
[5] The applicant
is a legal person established in the public interest under the Charter of
Ville de Montréal, R.S.Q., c. C-11.4 (the Charter), which specifies
that the applicant is a municipality governed by the Cities and Towns Act,
R.S.Q., c. C-19 (the CTA).
[6] Under section 485 of
the CTA, a municipal council may, subject to the Act respecting municipal
taxation, R.S.Q. c. F-21 (the AMT), impose and levy annually on all taxable
immovables in the territory of the municipality a tax based on their value as
shown on the assessment roll.
[7] For these
purposes, under the AMT, all immovables situated in the territory of a local
municipality are entered on the property assessment roll, except for those
described in sections 63 to 68 of the AMT, which are not entered on the roll
(section 31 of the AMT). In practice, the tax base, that is, the basis for real
property taxation, is established by registering immovables on the roll. Any challenge
regarding an entry on the property assessment roll may be brought before the
Administrative Tribunal of Québec (ATQ) if the person applying for review has
not entered into an agreement with the assessor on an alteration to the roll
(sections 138.4 and 138.5 of the AMT).
[8] That being
said, wherever the law provides that only part of the value of an immovable is
taxable or that it is exempt from property taxes, the roll must state the
taxable value of the immovable or the fact that it is exempt, as the case may
be. Where applicable, the entry must be accompanied with a reference to its
legislative source (section 55 of the AMT). More specifically, the AMT provides
that immovables included in a unit of assessment
entered on the roll in the name of the Crown or of a Crown
corporation are exempt from all municipal or school property taxes (section
204, paragraphs 1 and 1.1 of the AMT). The provincial exemption
is consistent with section 125 of the Constitution Act, 1867 (U.K.), 30
& 31 Vict., c. 3, reproduced in R.S.C. 1985, App. II, No. 5, which provides
that no property or lands belonging to Canada or any province shall be liable
to taxation.
[9] When a
non-taxable immovable included in a unit of assessment
entered on the roll in the name of the Crown or of a Crown
corporation is occupied by a person other than the Crown or a Crown corporation,
the property taxes to which that immovable would be subject without that
exemption are levied on the lessee or, if there is no lessee, on the occupant,
and are payable by the lessee or the occupant. However, the rule does not apply
where, according to federal law, a payment in lieu of real property tax (PLRT)
is paid in respect of the immovable (section 208 of the AMT). (In this case,
the AMT uses the term “subsidy”, which until 2001 was used in federal
legislation).
[10] Finally, every
local municipality may, by by-law, impose a business tax on any person entered
on its roll of rental values carrying on, for pecuniary gain or not, an
economic or administrative activity in matters of finance, trade, industry or
services, a calling, an art, a profession or any other activity constituting a
means of profit, gain or livelihood, except an employment or charge. The tax is
imposed, according to the roll, on the occupant of each business establishment
on the basis of its rental value, at the rate fixed in the by-law (section 232
of the AMT). However, no business tax may be imposed by reason of any activity
carried on by the Crown or a Crown corporation (section 236 of the AMT).
[11] There is
nothing that would lead me to conclude that the assessment value of the silos
and piers appearing in the property assessment roll is erroneous. In fact, at
paragraph 33 of the respondent’s memorandum dated April 5, 2005, it is stated
that [translation] “in this case,
the ‘property value’ of the immovables in question is not contested”.
[12] Having said
this, I do not believe that an application for review of an entry on the
property assessment roll is the only way to contest the assessed value of an
immovable or of real property in the case of property belonging to the federal
Crown. In my opinion, where a dispute arises, the respondent may always refer
the issue of the “property value” to the advisory panel under section 11.1 of
the PLTA to obtain its advice (section 12.1 of the CCPR). Whether the
respondent decides to follow or to ignore the advice of the advisory panel,
nothing prevents the applicant from filing an application for judicial review
to have the legality of the decision made by the respondent reviewed, which is
exactly what the applicant did in the case at bar.
2. Federal
Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) Program
[13] As noted in
the preceding, section 125 of the Constitution Act, 1867 is intended to
prevent inroads, by way of taxation, upon the property of one level of
government, by another level of government. Thus, the immunity conferred by
this provision must override the express powers of taxation contained in
subsections 91(3) and 92(2) of the Constitution Act, 1867 (Re
Exported Natural Gas Tax, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 1004, at pages 10765 and 1067).
[14] Although it is
true that the Crown and its agents are exempted from paying any form of
property tax on their properties, they are nonetheless on equal footing with
other property owners insofar as access to vital municipal services are
concerned. Accordingly, in 1939, the Rowell-Sirois Royal Commission on
Dominion-Provincial Relations recommended that the federal government
voluntarily pay real property taxes on Crown property.
[15] However, it
was not until 1951 that Parliament enacted the Municipal Grants Act,
S.C. 1950-51, c. 54, which allowed the federal government to pay grants to
municipalities in lieu of real property taxes. This Act was amended several
times and became the Payments in Lieu of Taxes Act, R.S.C., 1985,
c. M-13, as amended (the PLTA). In 1967, the Federal Cabinet issued a directive
to the effect that all Crown corporations were also to make payments in lieu of
taxes, and in 1980 the PLTA was amended to include all entities now designated
as Crown corporations. These Crown corporations are listed in schedules III and
IV to the PLTA.
[16] The purpose of
the PLTA is to provide for the fair and equitable administration of payments in
lieu of taxes (PILT) to taxing authorities, including municipalities, on a
voluntary basis (sections 2.1 and 15 of the PLTA). It should be noted that this
legislative scheme is distinct from those which may exist in each province with
respect to the provincial Crown. For example, in Quebec, payments in lieu of taxes are also made by the provincial government
(sections 254 to 258 of the AMT).
[17] In the case at
bar, the applicant is a “taxing authority” within the meaning of the PLTA, and
the respondent’s name appears in Schedule III to the PLTA.
[18] For the
purposes of applying the PLTA and the CCPR, PILTs may be paid in respect of any
immovable and real property meeting:
(a) the
definition of “federal property”, in the case of a PILT made by the Minister of
Public Works and Government Services Canada (the Minister) (section 2 of the
PLTA); or
(b) the
definition of “corporation property”, in the case of a PILT made by a
corporation included in Schedule III or IV to the PLTA (section 2 of the CCPR).
[19] Incidentally,
I note that the applicant and the respondent do not agree on the application of
these two definitions, particularly with regard to the scope of the exemption
in paragraph 2(3)(b) of the PLTA, which excludes from the
definition of “federal property” any structure, work, machinery or equipment
that is included in Schedule II to the PLTA. I will come back to this
contentious issue later on when discussing the exclusion of the piers and
silos.
[20] The PLTA
refers to three types of PILTs:
(a) payments
in lieu of a real property tax (PLRT),
(b) payments
in lieu of a frontage or area tax (PLFAT), and
(c) payments
in lieu of a business occupancy tax (PLBOT).
[21] PLRTs and
PLFATs are made to taxing authorities by the Minister and by the corporations
listed in schedules III and IV to the PLTA (section 3 and paragraph 11(1)(a)
of the PLTA and section 6 of the CCPR). However, only the corporations included
in Schedule IV to the PLTA make PLBOTs to taxing authorities (paragraph 11(1)(b)
of the PLTA and section 15 of the CCPR).
[22] The conditions
for PLRTs and PLFATs made by the Minister are specified in the PLTA itself (see
sections 3 to 8 of the PLTA, which must be read together with the definitions
in section 2 of the PLTA).
[23] Needless to
say, the Canadian government is the biggest land owner in the country. In
practice, managers from the Department of Public Works and Government Services
Canada (PWGSC) administer the PILT Program for federal properties managed by
federal departments (department properties). In 2004, PWGSC paid approximately
$426 million to some 1,300 taxing authorities, which obviously excludes
payments made by Crown corporations not under the Minister’s responsibility.
[24] Accordingly,
the conditions governing PLRTs and PLFATs made by the corporations included in
schedules III and IV to the PLTA are specified in Part I of the CCPR (see
sections 5 to 13 of the CCPR, which must be read together with the definitions
in section 2 of the CCPR). However, the conditions governing PLBOTs made by
corporations included in Schedule IV of the PLTA are specified in Part II of
the CCPR (see sections 14 to 18 of the CCPR, which must also be read together
with the definitions in section 2 of the CCPR).
3. Time and
manner of payments in lieu of taxes
[25] As has already
been noted, in principle, the PLTA does not confer any right to a payment
(section 15 of the PLTA). However, in practice, the fact that an application
for payment has been made pursuant to the PLTA—and, where applicable, the CCPR—
creates a legitimate expectation on the part of the taxing authority to the
effect that its application will be dealt with in accordance with the law by
the Minister or the corporation included in Schedule III or IV of the PLTA, as
the case may be. Therefore, once the amount of the payment has been
calculated in accordance with the PLTA or the CCPR, the taxing authority may
expect to receive payment within the time limits specified in the PLTA or the
CCPR.
[26] There is no
doubt that in all municipalities in which the federal government or its agents
have a significant presence, the failure to make a PILT which these
municipalities reasonably expect to receive may have considerable negative
consequences.
[27] In 1995, the
Joint Technical Committee on Payments in Lieu of Taxes complained that the
federal government was not obliged at that time to comply with the
municipalities’ invoicing schedules for real property taxes and had not adopted
a payment timetable of its own to give municipalities some assurance as to
their cash flow. Several municipalities were running deficits because the due
dates for final payments were not being respected. They then had to make up for
these deficits by seeking provisional financing or by dipping into reserve
funds (Federation of Canadian Municipalities, Treasury Board Secretariat and
Public Works and Government Services Canada, Report of the Joint Technical
Committee on Payments in Lieu of Taxes, Ottawa, December 28, 1995, at pages 3 and 11. (Chairman: James
Knight)).
[28] I note that
paragraphs 10(b) and (c) of the PLTA provide that the Minister
may make regulations respecting the making of an interim payment in respect of
a payment under the PLTA and respecting the recovery of any overpayments made
to a taxing authority, including recovery by way of set-off against other
payments under the PLTA. These last two aspects are effectively governed by
sections
3 and 4 of the Interim Payments and Recovery of
Overpayments Regulations, SOR/81-226, as amended (IPROR), which
are not invoked by the respondent in this case. In the case of corporations
included in schedules III and IV to the PLTA, it is the Governor in Council and
not the Minister who has the authority under paragraphs 9(1)(f) and (g)
of the PLTA to make regulations respecting the payments to be made by these
corporations. This aspect is effectively governed by section 12 of the CCPR.
[29] Moreover, to
give municipal administrations greater stability in terms of budgeting and
taxation, the PLTA and the CCPR were respectively amended in 2000 and 2001 (An
Act to amend the Municipal Grants Act, S.C. 2000, c. 8 and Regulations
Amending Certain Regulations made under the Payments in Lieu of Taxes
Act and Schedules I to III to that Act, SOR/2001-494 (November 8, 2001)). For example,
paragraph 12(1)(b) of the CCPR specifies that a corporation must make a
payment in lieu of real property taxes (PLRT) or in lieu of frontage or area
tax (PLFAT) within 50 days after receipt of an application for the payment. In
addition, where a corporation is unable to make a final determination of the
amount of a payment, subsection 12(2) of the CCPR provides that the corporation
shall make, within that time, an interim payment that corresponds to the
estimated total payment to be made.
4. Calculation
of the amount of the payment in lieu of real property taxes (PLRT)
[30] Under
paragraph 11(1)(a) of the PLTA, corporations included in Schedule III or
IV of the PLTA shall, if they are exempt from real property taxes, comply with
any regulations made by the Governor in Council under paragraph 9(1)(f)
of the PLTA respecting any payment that they may make in lieu of a real
property tax (PLRT) or a frontage or area tax (PLFAT). In Part I of the CCPR,
which regulates these two types of PILT, the term “corporation” means every corporation
included in Schedule III or IV to the PLTA (section 5 of the CCPR).
[31] More
specifically, section 6 of the CCPR specifies that the PLRT made by a
corporation is made without any condition, in an amount that is not less than
the amount referred to in section 7 of the CCPR. Under subsection 7(1) of
the CCPR, the amount of the PLRT shall not be less than the product of the
following two factors:
(a) the
corporation effective rate in the taxation year applicable to the corporation
property in respect of which the payment may be made; and
(b) the
corporation property value in the taxation year of that corporation property.
[32] Section 2 of
the CCPR defines the expressions “corporation effective rate” and “corporation
property value” as follows:
(a) “Corporation
effective rate” is defined as “the rate of real property tax or of frontage or
area tax that a corporation would consider applicable to its corporation
property if that property were taxable property”; and
(b) “Corporation
property value” is defined as “the value that a corporation would consider to
be attributable by an assessment authority to its corporation property, without
regard to any mineral rights or any ornamental, decorative or non-functional
features thereof, as the basis for computing the amount of any real property
tax that would be applicable to that property if it were taxable property”.
[33] Where the real
property tax rate includes school taxes, a special rate calculated according to
paragraphs 7(2)(c) and (d) of the CCPR can be substituted for the
corporation effective rate in paragraph 7(1)(a) of the CCPR. In
addition, under section 9 of the CCPR, there may be deducted from the payment
described in section 7 of the CCPR an amount corresponding to certain special
services provided or financed by the corporation or an amount equal to
any cancellation, reduction or refund in respect of a real property tax that
would be applicable to its corporation property if it were taxable property.
[34] The
“assessment authority” to which section 2 of the CCPR refers means an authority that has power by or under an Act of Parliament or the
legislature of a province to establish the assessed dimension or assessed value
of real property or immovables (subsection 2(1) of the PLTA). In Quebec, the competent authority under provincial legislation is
the assessor appointed under the AMT. In the case at bar, there is no immediate
litigation between the parties concerning the property value of the properties
in question, including value indicated by the applicant regarding the piers and
silos.
[35] This being
said, the present dispute between the parties is based first and foremost on
the Tribunal’s decision to apply to all of the respondent’s properties which
were subject to a PLRT an effective real property tax rate different from the
one applicable to non-residential immovables under the applicant’s by-laws. It
must also be determined whether the piers and silos were legally excluded from
the calculation of the amount of the PLRT to be paid under sections 6 and 7 of
the CCPR.
[36] On this point,
I note that the PLTA was amended in 2000 to add section 11.1, which
provides for the appointment of an advisory panel tasked with giving advice to
the Minister in the event that a taxing authority disagrees with the
property value, property dimension or effective rate applicable to any federal
property. The advisory panel may also recommend to the Minister
that a payment be supplemented if it has been unreasonably delayed. In
addition, the CCPR were amended to specify that section 11.1 of the PLTA
applies to a corporation as if the reference to “the Minister” were a reference
to “a corporation” and any reference to “federal property” were a reference to
“corporation property” (section 12.1 CCPR). However, when the Tribunal
made the impugned decision, the advisory panel provided for in section 11.1 of
the PLTA had not yet been appointed by the Governor in Council. Normally, the
advisory panel would have been able to take charge of this case and advise the
Minister on the applicable effective rate, since there was at the time a
disagreement with the applicant as to the effective rate applicable to the
corporation properties.
[37] Before going
any further, let us review. Upon application by a taxing authority, a
corporation must first of all determine if this application actually does
concern property subject to a payment and then refer to the property value and
to the applicable effective rate. The product of these two amounts is the
amount of the payment which must be made by the corporation within 50 days
following receipt of the application (sections 2, 5, 6, 7 and 12 of the CCPR).
Finally, adjustments to the effective rate and the possible deductions from the
amount of the payment specified in subsection 7(2) and section 9 of the CCPR
are inapplicable in this case.
5. Properties
involved in this case
[38] The respondent
is a corporation incorporated by letters patent issued by the Minister of
Transport under the Canada Marine Act, S.C. 1998, c. 10, as amended (the
CMA). It is an agent of Her Majesty in right of Canada only for the purposes of
engaging in the port activities referred to in paragraph 28(2)(a) of the
CMA.
[39] The respondent
manages numerous immovables and real property belonging to Her Majesty
(sections 7, 12, 44 and 45 of the CMA). It must be presumed that the properties
belonging to Her Majesty are occupied and operated by the respondent
exclusively on behalf of Canada (City
of Halifax v. Halifax Harbour Commissioners, [1935] S.C.R. 215 ; Re the
City of Toronto and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, [1938] O.W.N.
507 (Ont. C.A.)).
[40] The immovables or
real property of the respondent are located in the following two sectors:
(1) Montréal
sector: these properties are located along the Saint Lawrence River and the
Lachine Canal in a vast area bounded by the Bonaventure Expressway, Mill
Street, Pierre-Dupuis Avenue and the Bickerdike Terminal, stretching into the
eastern part of Montréal (sections 24 to 93 and 111);
(2) Montréal-Est
sector: these properties are also located along the Saint Lawrence River and
are mainly occupied by refineries (sections 94 to 110 of the Port of Montréal).
The immovables or real
property that are the subject of the present dispute are located in the
Montréal sector and are not rented by the respondent.
[41] All these
immovables are entered on the property assessment roll as required by
provincial law (sections 31, 55 and 204 of the AMT). As one would expect, the
Tribunal uses the value entered on the roll as the basis for calculating the
real property tax which would otherwise be applicable to the properties in
question if they were taxable by law. It should be noted that the lessees of
the Port of Montréal pay real property tax directly to the applicant for the
land belonging to Her Majesty which they directly occupy (section 208 of the
AMT), while the PLRT made by the respondent strictly concerns the immovables
which are not rented. However, in the case of occupants with a lease of one
year or less, a PLRT is made by the respondent.
[42] In the case at
bar, on March 19, 2004, the respondent sent the applicant a cheque for
$1,326,497.53 representing, in the respondent’s opinion, 100% of the amounts
due to the applicant for a PLRT for the 2004 taxation year. The applicant
contests this. In effect, the applicant alleges that the respondent used an
incorrect effective rate and arbitrarily excluded the piers and silos from the
payment.
6. Tax
by-laws of the applicant
[43] In 2003, the
applicant made sweeping changes to its real property tax rates following the
municipal mergers that occurred on the island of Montréal.
[44] For all fiscal
years prior to 2003, the applicant used one general real property tax rate
applicable to all immovables and added a special additional real property tax
(surtax) on non-residential buildings. The applicant’s tax structure also
provided for business, water and services taxes levied directly on occupants of
non-residential immovables carrying out commercial or professional activities
on the premises.
[45] In the sector
corresponding to the former city of Montréal, the general real property tax rate in 2002 was 1.9702, and the tax rate
on non-residential immovables was 0.3348 per $100 of assessment. In 2002, the
business tax rate was 12.99%. For comparison purposes, in 2002, the business tax
generated revenues equivalent to a real property tax rate of 1.6360 per $100 of
assessment. Therefore, in that year, the combined rate for non-residential
immovables (general real property tax, non-residential immovables tax and
business tax equivalent) was 3.9410 per $100 of assessment (2003 budget, table
35, page 89).
[46] When it tabled
its 2003 budget, the applicant decided to harmonize the tax structure of the new city of Montréal, opting for a variable property tax rate
system. Among other things, this change in rates allowed the new city of
Montréal to do away with an outdated and inequitable method of taxation and
simplify the management of tax income (see the budget adopted by Montréal city
council on December 18, 2002, 2003 budget, at pages 31-32 and at pages 77 et
seq.).
[47] In practice,
this harmonization had the following effects.
[48] First of all,
the applicant abolished the business tax. In 2002, this tax on occupants of
non-residential immovables was levied by only 10 of the 28 former
municipalities. Its repeal in 2003 entailed an increase in the real property
tax applicable to non-residential immovables located in a sector corresponding
to one of the 10 municipalities in question. In the other 18, there was no
noticeable tax impact.
[49] Such was the
case with non-residential immovables in the Montréal-Est sector, where the
business tax had been abolished many years ago. In 2002, in the former city of Montréal‑Est, the general real property
tax rate was 1.4878 per $100 of assessment, while the tax on non-residential
immovables was 2.7875 per $100 of assessment. Therefore, the combined tax rate
for non-residential immovables was 4.2753 per $100 of assessment in 2002 (2003
budget, table 5 at page 89).
[50] Secondly, the
introduction of a variable property tax rate system means that, in 2003, the
revenues from the various real property taxes, such as the tax on
non-residential immovables and the surtax on serviced vacant lots, could no
longer be distinguished from each other. Therefore, in 2003, the new real
property tax for non-residential immovables in the Montréal sector was at a
rate of 4.1722 per $100 of assessment. In comparison, in the Montréal-Est sector,
this tax was at a rate of 4.2353 per $100 of assessment in 2003 (2003 budget,
table 35 at page 89).
[51] Thirdly, to
ensure an orderly transition, the applicant offered tax subsidy programs to
compensate for some of the shifts in the tax burden brought about by these
changes to the taxation system. To this end, by-laws granting subsidies or tax
credits based on the general property tax that came into force before January
1, 2003, and under which an amount of subsidy was paid after December 31, 2002,
must be read as granting a subsidy based on the basic rate of the variable-rate
general property tax (section 2 of By-law 02-253 of the applicant, entitled By‑law
concerning certain subsidy by-laws).
[52] Fourthly,
according to the applicant’s budget estimates, in 2003, the change in the tax
system allowed approximately $8.1 million in additional revenue to be entered
into the books for PILTs from the federal government (2003 budget, pages 34 and
88). In fact, according to the evidence on the record, the new real property
tax rate set by the applicant in 2003 represents an approximately $7.5 million
increase for the federal Crown in terms of payments made by the Minister in
respect of the department’s federal properties. In the case of the respondent,
the change in the tax system represents an annual increase varying between
$750,000 and $1,000,000 (excluding the silos and piers).
[53] To this very
day, the variable-rate property tax system is still in force, and the applicant
has used it in every fiscal year since 2003, including 2004, the year which is
the subject of this review. As a result, every year, the application has
adopted a tax by-law requiring that a variable-rate general property tax be
levied on and collected for every taxable immovable that is entered on the
property assessment roll and located in one of the sectors described in section
149 of the Charter.
[54] Under section
3, item 13 of the By-law concerning taxes (fiscal
2004) (By‑law 03-201), the general property tax rates applied in
2004 to the assessed value of the immovables concerned in the Montréal sector
were as follows:
(a) non-residential
immovables: 4.0547%
(b) immovables
containing six or more dwelling units: 1.9917%
(c) serviced
vacant lots: 3.6064%
(d) residual:
1.8032%.
[55] However, since
2004, the applicant has levied and collected a special variable-rate water tax
on every immovable entered on the property assessment roll. In 2004, the rate
applicable to non-residential immovables was 0.04% (section 4, item 1 of By-law
03-201). The respondent does not contest that this special tax constitutes a
form of property tax.
7. Decision
rendered by the Tribunal in 2004
[56] In January
2004, Diane Loiseau, a revenue analyst working for the applicant, sent the
respondent a PILT application under the PLTA and the CCPR for the 2004 taxation
year in respect of the respondent’s immovables or real property entered on the
property assessment roll (the 2004 application). The 2004 application added up
to a total of $3,177,045.08 (excluding the Montréal‑Est sector).
[57] The 2004
application is in compliance with By-law 03-201.
[58] In the case at
bar, under section 3, item 13 of By-law 03-201, the general property tax rates
applied in 2004 on the assessed value of the immovables located in the Montréal
sector were as follows:
(a)
non-residential
immovables: 4.0547%
(b)
immovables
containing six or more dwelling units: 1.9917%
(c)
serviced
vacant lots: 3.6064%
(d)
residual:
1.8032%.
[59] Under section
3, item 14 of By-law 03-201, the general property tax rates applied in 2004 to
the assessed value of the immovables located in the Montréal-Est sector were as
follows:
(a) non-residential immovables: 4.3944%
(b) immovables containing six or more
dwelling units: 1.5343%
(c) serviced vacant lots: 2.9376%
(d) residual: 1.4688%.
[60] Therefore, the
rate indicated the applicant in its 2004 application was made up of:
(1)
the rate
of 4.0547% (Montréal sector), or of the rate of 4.3944% (Montréal-Est sector);
(2)
the rate
of 0.04% for the special water tax (section 4, item 1 of By-law 03-201).
[61] Sylvie Vachon,
Vice-President, Administration and Human Resources, Montréal Port Authority
(the Tribunal), responded to this application for payment in a letter dated
March 19, 2004. In this letter, a cheque in the amount of $1,326,497.53 was
enclosed, on the following basis:
(1) $1,196,305.49
for the Montréal sector; and
(2) $130,192.04
for the Montréal-Est sector. This figure also included certain adjustments to
PLRTs from previous years, the legality of which is not contested in the
present application for judicial review.
[62] In the case of
the Montréal sector, the rate used by the Tribunal for the year 2004 was 2.4115
per $100 of assessment, while the rate used in the Montréal-Est sector was
4.4344 per $100 of assessment. In both sectors, the Tribunal added a rate of
0.04 per $100 of assessment to each rate, to account for the special water tax.
[63] Accordingly,
the Tribunal subtracted $1,985,245.66 from the $3,177,045.08 (excluding the
Montréal-Est sector) claimed by the respondent as a PLRT, for the following
reasons:
(1) According to the Tribunal, the
tax rate of 2.4115% per $100 excludes the tax equivalent of the former business
occupancy tax. Accordingly, the Tribunal subtracted $737,889.67 from the
payment;
(2) In addition, the Tribunal was
of the opinion that the respondent did not have to make any payment in respect
of the piers and silos entered on the applicant’s assessment roll. For this
reason, the Tribunal subtracted $1,247,355.98 from the amount claimed by the applicant
as a PLRT.
[64] According to
the evidence on the record, the Tribunal based its position on a memorandum
dated March 17, 2004, written by the director of the respondent’s Real Property
Department, Benoit Rheault. In this memorandum, he states that, compared with
2002, the impact of including the equivalent of the business tax, which was
approximately $776,039 in 2003, would be nearly $746,113 in 2004, for a
cumulative total of $1,522,152. On the basis of the information in the
applicant’s 2003 budget, the director of the Real Property Department used a
ratio of real property tax/business tax equivalent to 58.49%/41.51%. The
special water tax (0.04%) was not considered in the calculation of the
proportion of the real property tax (58.49%). Rather, it was added to the
weighted rate used (4.0547 per $100 of assessment x 58.49% = 2.3715 per $100 of
assessment) for a total of 2.4115 per $100 of assessment in the Montréal
sector.
With regard to the portion of the taxes attributed to the piers and silos, the
director of the Real Property Department noted that, had it not been for the
respondent’s decision to withdraw the piers and silos from the assessment roll
and to cease making, retroactively to 1999, any PLRTs on these infrastructures,
the portion of the property taxes attributed to these items alone would have
been $687,364 in 2003 and $687,878 in 2004, excluding the impact of the
business tax or its equivalent.
8. The
present application and related litigation
[65] Although this
application for judicial review strictly concerns the Tribunal’s decision for
the 2004 taxation year, it is important to note that the dispute over the
calculation of the effective real property tax rate also includes the 2003 and
2005 to 2007 fiscal years. In the case of the exclusion of the silos and piers,
the fiscal years concerned are 1999 to 2003 and 2005 to 2007. Accordingly, the
overall financial stakes for these two public bodies are considerable.
[66] On October 8,
2003, the applicant first applied to the advisory panel, submitting all the
unresolved disputes it then had with the respondent. In addition to the issue
of the effective real property tax rate and the exclusion of silos and piers,
the respondent also refused to pay the applicant any compensation for ending
the freeze on PLRTs for the year 1993 ($2,581,977.12 in capital). The advisory
panel has yet to render a decision.
[67] On February 20,
2004, the applicant applied to the Court of Quebec, claiming $3,795,144.66 from
the respondent for the 1993 and 1999 to 2003 fiscal years. The applicant’s
action was dismissed on June 9, 2004, by Mr. Justice Jacques Désormeau, who
allowed the respondent’s declinatory exception to the effect that the Court of
Quebec did not have jurisdiction. However, he referred the matter to the
Superior Court (Ville de Montréal c. Administration portuaire de Montréal,
Court of Quebec, No. 500-22-094380-048, June 9, 2004). On January 21, 2005, the
Quebec Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal of the action, but on the ground
that neither the Court of Quebec nor the Superior Court had jurisdiction in
this matter. In its judgment, the Court of Appeal stated that the applicant
should instead apply to the Federal Court to have any decision made by the
respondent under the supposed authority of the PLTA and CCPR set aside (Ville
de Montréal c. Administration portuaire de Montréal,
2005 QCCA 31, [2005] Q.J. No. 263 (Que. C.A.) (QL), leave to
appeal to S.C.C. refused [2005] S.C.C.A. No.126). Meanwhile, on October 22,
2004, Prothonotary Richard Morneau of this Court dismissed the respondent’s
motion to strike the present application for judicial review on the grounds
that it is not covered in subsections 18.1(3) and (4) of the FCA and that the
applicant must first apply to the advisory panel provided for in section 11.1
of the PLTA (City of Montréal v. Montréal Port Authority,
2004 FC 1476). This decision was not appealed.
[68] The applicant
did not file an application for judicial review in this Court against the
decisions of the Tribunal regarding the 1993 and 1999 to 2003 fiscal years.
However, in addition to the year 2004, applications for judicial review were
also filed in this Court for the 2005 (Docket No. T-682-05), 2006 (Docket No.
T-722-06), and 2007 (Docket No. T-558-07) fiscal
years.
[69] The parties
agreed in writing that the Federal Court order a stay of proceedings in dockets
T-682-05
and T-722-06 while the final decision in this case is pending. In fact, in
Docket T-682-05, the parties filed an agreement dated December 14, 2005, in which
the following is stated: [translation] “The
undersigned lawyers, on behalf of the parties, agree to be bound, for the
purposes of the settlement of the application for judicial review, by the final
decision to be rendered in Docket T-795-04”. At that time, there was not yet
any application concerning the 2007 fiscal year (Docket T-558-07).
[70] It was
therefore on this basis that this application was heard by the Court in January
and February 2007. Accordingly, the Court expects the parties to apply the
principles stated in the present decision to the other related files in which
there is a dispute between them on the matter of the effective real property
tax rate or about the issue of the exclusion of the silos and piers. This being
said, a party may undertake or continue any application for judicial review
before the Court and any proceeding before the advisory panel, the
Administrative Tribunal of Québec or any other body or tribunal having
jurisdiction in connection with any dispute for any given taxation
year concerning property value, property dimension, claims that a payment
should be supplemented because of unreasonable delay, or any amendment to an
entry on the property assessment roll.
9.
Issues
and positions of the parties
[71] The issue to be
decided today is whether the Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction, breached a
principle of procedural fairness, acted unlawfully, or otherwise rendered a
decision based on an error in law or an erroneous finding of fact made in a
perverse or capricious manner or without regard for the material before it:
(a) by
determining that the property tax rate that would be applicable to the
respondent’s property, if it were taxable property, corresponds to the rate
applicable to the “residual” category, rather than the rate applicable to the
“non-residential immovables” category, these rates being set by the applicant’s
by-laws (the effective real property tax rate issue);
(b) by
determining that the piers and silos are included in Schedule II of the PLTA
(the exclusion of piers and silos issue).
[72] For the
purposes of the hearing, this application was joined with the application made
by the applicant in T-631-05, in which the legality of a decision rendered in
March 2005 by a manager of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is also the
subject of an application for judicial review before this Court.
[73] On one hand, I
am satisfied that the Court has exclusive jurisdiction to review the impugned
decision rendered in March 2004 by the Tribunal (see City of Montréal
v. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, 2006 FC 113 and the case law cited in
this decision). On the other hand, considering the special circumstances of
this matter, this is not a case where exhausting all available remedies
beforehand will lead to the dismissal of an application for judicial review (City
of Montréal v. Montréal Port Authority, 2006 FC 114). In fact, the advisory
panel had not yet been appointed by the Governor in Council when the present
application was filed. This is a case in which the advice given by the advisory
panel is not binding on the parties and does not settle the issues of law and
jurisdiction raised here. The advisory panel obviously does not have any
expertise in giving legal opinions about the application of the law. As regards
the issue of whether the piers and silos are excluded from the application of
the CCPR, this is not a dispute concerning the “property value”, the “property
dimension” or the “effective rate” within the meaning of the definitions used
in the PLTA or the CCPR.
[74] The oral and
written submissions made by counsel for the parties in both files tend to
overlap or complement each other. Therefore, as far as the effective real
property tax rate is concerned, it seems to me to be easier to group the
various submissions together and apply them mutatis mutandis to the
particular situation in each of these two files.
(a) The
effective real property tax rate issue
[75] The applicant
and the respondent do not agree on the effective real property tax rate that
would be applicable to the non-taxable properties in question if they were
taxable for the purposes of calculating the amount due under the PLTA and the
CCPR for each of the taxation years in question.
[76] The applicant
submits that by not using the real property tax rate usually levied on owners
of non-residential immovables, the Tribunal acted arbitrarily and capriciously,
and that its decision is based on an error in law and is contrary to the law
and the obligations imposed on the respondent by the PLTA and the CCPR.
[77] The applicant
submits that the respondent must comply to section 7 of the CCPR, which
provides that the PLRT shall not be less than the product of the corporation
effective rate and the corporation property value in the taxation year of that
corporation property. In this case, the only adjustments allowed are those
authorized by regulation at subsection 7(2) and section 9 of the CCPR.
Furthermore, under
section 2 of the CCPR, the “corporation effective rate” is either the real
property tax rate or the frontage or area tax rate applicable to the
corporation property if it were taxable. Therefore, the applicant submits that
the respondent had no choice but to apply the rates applicable to
non-residential properties entered on the assessment roll, as set out in the
applicant’s by-laws.
[78] In contrast,
the respondent argues that it has the discretion to choose a different real
property tax rate. Accordingly, the respondent submits that the expression
“that a corporation would consider applicable” in section 2 of the CCPR must be
interpreted to give it such discretion in determining the applicable effective
rate.
[79] The respondent
submits that in determining the applicable real property tax rate, it is not in
any way supplanting the taxing authority; rather, it is exercising the
authority specifically granted to it under the PLTA and the CCPR to determine
the amount of the PLRT payable to the applicant. Since only those corporations
included in Schedule IV to the PLTA are legally required to make a payment in
lieu of the business occupancy tax (PLBOT), the respondent submits that it did
not act arbitrarily or in a capricious manner by not using the real property
equivalent of the former business tax, especially considering that it has a constitutional
immunity (Re Exported Natural Gas Tax, supra).
[80] The respondent
also submits that if one accepts the applicant’s argument that a Crown
corporation does not have any discretion as to the determination of the
effective rate, this in a way creates a right to payment, which is directly
contrary to sections 3 and 15 of the PLTA, as well as section 6 of the CCPR. To
sum up, if the respondent cannot deduct the real property equivalent of the
former business occupancy tax from the amount of the PLRT,, this would strike
down the CCPR or render them inapplicable, since only the corporations included
in Schedule IV to the PLTA are legally obliged to make a PLBOT.
[81] By paying the
total amount claimed by the applicant, the respondent further submits that the
objectives of its mission would be compromised, since it would be required to
increase its rates, fees and tariffs.
(b) The
exclusion of piers and silos issue
[86] In the
alternative, the applicant points out that the word “silo” is not mentioned in
Schedule II and that the term “reservoir” only refers to liquids. On the
contrary, the respondent submits that a silo is a “reservoir”, as provided in
paragraph 10 of Schedule II to the PLTA. In addition, the respondent argues
that if the word “reservoir” was intended to be associated with liquids only,
Parliament would not have then included the term “storage tanks”.
10. Standard of
judicial review
[92] Under sections 2 and 18 of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C.
1985, c. F-7, as amended, (the FCA), this Court has exclusive jurisdiction to
review the impugned decision (see City of Montréal
v. Montréal Port Authority, 2006 FC 114
and the case law cited in that decision). Parliament has already specified
in paragraph 18.1(4)(c) of the FCA that if the Federal Court is
satisfied that a tribunal “erred in law in making a decision or an order,
whether or not the error appears on the face of the record”, it may review that
decision or order. At first glance, this seems to suggest that the standard of
review that applies to errors of law is correctness. However, when an error of
fact is alleged to have been made by a federal board, commission or other
tribunal, paragraph 18.1(4)(d) of the FCA requires a demonstration
that it “based its decision or order on an erroneous finding of fact that it
made in a perverse or capricious manner or without regard for the material
before it”. This seems to suggest that where errors of fact are concerned, the
standard of review is patent unreasonableness.
[94] In the case of
the impugned decision of the Tribunal, these four factors lead to the
conclusion that the applicable standard of review is correctness.
First factor
[95] Under section 3
of the PLTA, the Minister may make a PLRT out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund
in respect of federal properties not administered by a corporation included in
schedules III and IV to the PLTA, whereas the corporations included in
schedules III and IV of the PLTA themselves process the applications for
payment sent to them by the taxing authorities. In both cases, the Minister or
the corporation has jurisdiction ratione materiae.
[96] In this regard,
neither the PLTA nor the CCPR contains any privative clause or provides for a
right of appeal from a decision rendered by the Minister or the corporations
included in Schedule III or IV to the PLTA. Accordingly, this first factor is neutral
in the analysis of the degree of deference required.
Second factor
[97] As far as the
expertise of the Tribunal in this case is concerned, this factor favours a low
degree of deference.
[98] In the case at
bar, the Minister or the corporations included in schedules III and IV to the
PLTA are not a “specialized tribunal” in the usual sense. The “decisions” which
the Minister or the corporations included in schedules III and IV to the PLTA
render are in fact made by managers whose personal knowledge and expertise in
municipal taxation matters may vary considerably.
[99] I note that
under section 11.1 of the PLTA and section 12.1 of the CCPR, the Minister or
the corporation may request non-binding advice in case of a disagreement with
the taxing authority about, inter alia, the property value or effective
rate.
The members of the advisory panel are appointed by the Governor in Council and
have a specialized jurisdiction. They serve during good behaviour for a set
term and must have relevant training or experience. The appointment of such an
advisory panel seems to suggest that, from an institutional standpoint, the
Minister and Crown corporations have relatively little or less expertise than
the members of the advisory panel do, especially where questions of property
values or effective rates are concerned.
[100] However, the
Tribunal in question and the advisory panel are not in a better position than
this Court to answer the questions of jurisdiction and of law disputed by the
parties.
Third factor
[101] The purpose of
the PLTA is another factor in favour of a low degree of deference. Although the
purpose of the PLTA is the fair and equitable administration of PILTs, in
practice, their calculation and payment are subject to certain statutory or regulatory
conditions, which leaves little practical discretion to the Tribunal in
question, or for that matter to the Minister or Crown corporations. However,
every PILT application must be studied individually by the Tribunal.
Accordingly, in this case, it cannot be said that the decision in question
raises a “polycentric” issue which would require the weighing of opposing
interests.
Fourth factor
[102] Finally, the
nature of the issue is the most important factor in this case.
[103] The dispute
between the applicant and the respondent concerns above all the determination
of the effective real property tax rate which is to be used as the basis for
calculating the amount of the PLRT payable by the respondent to the applicant.
The Tribunal claims the discretion to replace the real property tax rate which
is usually payable by other owners of non-residential immovables with a
different rate unique to the respondent. This is essentially a jurisdictional
issue.
[104] The issue of
whether or not the tax levied by the taxing authority is a real property tax is
a question of mixed law and fact.
[105] The issue of
whether the Tribunal may, when calculating the PLRT, exclude certain immovables
and real property which in its opinion are included in Schedule II to the PLTA
is also a matter of jurisdiction and thus a question of mixed law and fact.
[106] In all these
cases, the Court will have to interpret the act and regulations in question to
determine their exact scope, and this favours the standard of correctness.
[107] Where the
standard of correctness applies, the Court may undertake its own
reasoning process to arrive at the result it judges correct.
This is what the undersigned did in this case. After analysing the applicable
federal statutes and regulations and thoroughly reviewing the evidence on the
record and the facts on which the Tribunal based its decision, I conclude that
the impugned decision of the Tribunal must be set aside in part. In my opinion,
the decision is in most respects (except for exclusion of the piers) contrary
to law or otherwise erroneous in law.
[108] First of all,
the jurisdiction granted to the Tribunal under the CCPR to determine the
effective rate must be characterized. The respondent is not in the same
situation as an ordinary taxpayer who receives a municipal tax bill. As a
physical or legal person, the taxpayer must pay the specified amount upon
receipt of the tax bill. This amount is a debt owed to the municipality, and if
the taxpayer does not pay it, the municipality may institute legal proceedings
to recover it. This is not possible in the case at bar, because in
principle the PLTA does not confer any right to a payment.
[109] This being said,
when it makes a payment, as explained above, the respondent is nevertheless
legally required to comply with the regulations enacted by the Governor in
Council under paragraph 9(1)(f) of the PLTA. Under subsection 7(1) of
the CCPR, the amount of the PLRT made by a corporation included in schedules
III and IV of the PLTA must not be less that the product of the following two
factors:
(a) the
corporation effective rate in the taxation year applicable to the corporation
property in respect of which the payment may be made; and
(b) the
corporation property value in the taxation year of that corporation property.
[110] However, section
2 of the CCPR specifies that the “corporation effective rate” is the rate of
real property tax or of frontage or area tax “that a corporation would consider
applicable” to its property if that property were taxable.
[111] The respondent
submits that by using the expression “that a corporation would consider
applicable”, the Governor in Council intended to give Crown corporations
sweeping discretion in this area. Therefore, the respondent could ignore the
real property tax rate applicable to other owners of taxable non-residential
immovables and choose a real property tax rate which excludes the tax
equivalent of the former business occupancy tax abolished by the applicant in
2003.
[112] I do not think
that the use of the term “that a corporation would consider applicable” in the
definition of “corporation effective rate” in section 2 of the CCPR confers the
power to ignore the real property tax rate which usually applies to
non-residential immovables. In my opinion, the use of the expression “that a
corporation would consider applicable” simply reflects the fact that it is the
corporation which determines the effective real property tax rate by referring to
the real property tax rate prescribed by the taxing authority. If the
Governor in Council had intended to grant the absolute discretion which the
respondent claims with respect to determining the effective rate, he could have
done so by using much broader terms, such as “the rate it considers to be
reasonable”.
[113] It goes without
saying that the Tribunal must exercise its jurisdiction within the limits of
the law. If the discretion granted to the respondent’s manager is to be
discussed here, I would say that it is a “bound” discretion. Accordingly, the
Tribunal cannot ignore the real property tax rate which would otherwise apply
to the respondent’s property if it were taxable property. The definition of
“corporation effective rate” in the CCPR must be read in its entirety. In short, what must
be determined is the real property tax rate “that a corporation would consider
applicable to its corporation property if that property were taxable
property”.
[114] The immovables
and real property of the respondent are not taxable. If they were taxable, they
would then fall within the category of non-residential immovables. For the
years 2003, 2004 and 2005, the general real property tax rate applicable to
non-residential immovables located in the Montréal sector was 4.172%,
4.0547%, and 3.8812% respectively.
[115] I agree that
these rates represent a significant increase of the real property tax rate in
comparison with previous years, since in 2002 the general real property tax
rate was 1.9702% and the tax rate for non-residential immovables was 0.3384% in
the former city of Montréal. This increase is explained by the repeal in
2003 of the former business tax. This is a legislative choice which belongs
exclusively to the applicant, and the validity of this choice is not directly
challenged in these proceedings.
[116] On this point,
it is useful to refer to section 2 of the PLTA, which defines “real property
tax” as meaning a tax of general application:
(a) levied
by a taxing authority on owners of real property or immovables or, if the owner
is exempt from the tax, on lessees or occupiers of real property or immovables,
other than those lessees or occupiers exempt by law, and
(b) computed
by applying a rate to all or part of the assessed value of taxable property.
[117] I note that in Germain v.
City of Montréal, [1995] R.J.Q. 2313, affd [1997] 1 S.C.R. 144, the Quebec
Court of Appeal ruled that the surtax levied by the respondent on
non-residential immovables in Montréal was actually a direct tax and could not
be considered to be an indirect tax simply because the owner might pass on the
cost of the tax to a lessee. The Court stated the following at page 2322:
[translation]
The surtax on non-residential immovables
meets the criteria of a real property tax. It is levied on an immovable, must
be paid by the owner, is set on the basis of the value of the immovable, and
constitutes a charge on the owner.
[118] Since 2003, the
applicant has chosen to apply a tax system which uses a variable-rate general
real property tax. Under this system, a different real property tax rate
applies to each of the four categories to which the assessment units belong.
These categories are as follows: (1) non‑residential immovables; (2)
immovables containing six or more dwelling units; (3) serviced vacant lots; (4)
residual.
[119] In the case at
bar, the variable-rate general real property tax meets the criteria of a real
property tax as set out in Germain: it is levied on immovables entered
on the applicant’s assessment roll; it is levied on the basis of the value
appearing on the assessment role; and, finally, it is payable by the owner. The fact
that some rates were increased to recover the tax equivalent of the former
business occupancy tax—which incidentally had already been repealed by a large
number of taxing authorities on the island of Montréal, including the former
city of Montréal‑Est, before the municipal mergers—does not change the
eminently “real property” character of the new variable-rate tax. In fact, even
the Minister uses the real property tax rate applicable to non-residential
immovables, as set out in the applicant’s by-laws, when calculating the amount
of the PLRT payable under section 3 of the PLTA.
[120] I reject any
argument to the effect that the payment of the tax equivalent, in the form of a
PLRT, of a variable-rate real property tax based on the category of immovables
applicable in this case would be contrary to the purpose of the PLTA and the
provisions of the CCPR. The various constitutional arguments made by the
respondent do not apply in this case.
[121] In the case at
bar, the Tribunal used a real property tax rate (excluding the rate of the
special water tax) of 2.3715 per $100 of assessment. The rate used is slightly
higher than the former real property rate applicable in 2002 to non-residential
immovables in the former city of Montréal. The general
real property tax rate of 1.9702% added to the tax rate of 0.3348% on non‑residential
immovables gives a combined total of 2.3050 per $100 of assessment. The
discrepancy is explained by the increase in the real property tax rate on
non-residential immovables in 2003 (adjusted in a proportion of real property
tax/business tax equivalent to 58.49%/41.51%).
[122] Not only does
the impugned decision appear to me to be contrary to law and erroneous in law,
but I am also of the opinion that the Tribunal acted arbitrarily or
capriciously, such that no matter what standard of review applies in this case,
the final result is the same.
[123] By reducing the
effective rate of the real property tax by more than 40%, according to the
evidence on the record, the decision of the Tribunal allowed the respondent to
save, at the applicant’s expense, approximately $737,889.67 for the year 2004
alone. This is contrary to section 6 of the CCPR and to the purpose of the
PLTA, which provides for fair and equitable payments to municipalities.
[124] Therefore, the
Court is warranted in intervening and setting aside this last part of the
impugned decision rendered by the Tribunal in March 2004.
12. The
exclusion of piers and silos issue
(a) “Federal
property” and “corporation property”
[126] Section 2 of the
PLTA defines “federal property”. Meanwhile, section 6 of the CCPR specifies
that “[t]he payment made by a corporation in lieu of a real property tax or
frontage or area tax in respect of any corporation property that would be
federal property if it were under the management, charge and direction of a
minister of the Crown is made without any condition, in an amount that is
not less than the amount referred to in sections 7 to 11” [emphasis added]. It
is obvious that the words “if it were under the management, charge and
direction of a minister of the Crown” are very similar to the words used in
paragraph (a) of the definition of “federal property” in section 2 of
the PLTA: “ . . . that are under the administration of a minister of the
Crown”.
[127] The definition
of “corporation property” in section 2 of the CCPR is used to define the
respective scopes of application of parts I and II of the CCPR. In the case of
Part I, paragraph (a) of the definition of “corporation property” refers
by necessary implication to the definition of “federal property” in section 2
of the PLTA. The same applies to subparagraph (a.1)(i), which applies in
the case at bar because it designates “any real property or immovable that is
owned by Her Majesty in right of Canada and that is managed by a port authority
included in Schedule III to the Act”. It is also interesting to note that
subparagraph (a.1)(ii) specifies that any other real property or
immovable on which a port authority engages in port activities referred to in
paragraph 28(2)(a) of the Canada Marine Act and in respect of
which the port authority is exempt from real property tax is also subject to a payment
under section 6 of the CCPR (PLRT or PLFAT), because this is “corporation
property”. Finally, in the case of a payment in lieu of a business occupancy
tax (PLBOT), the definition of “corporation property” used in Part II of the
CCPR had to be amended to designate “any real property or immovable occupied or
used by a corporation included in Schedule IV to the Act in respect of which
occupancy or use the corporation is exempt from business occupancy tax”.
[128] Under paragraph
2(3)(b) of the PLTA, the works included in Schedule II to the PLTA are
excluded from the definition of “federal property.” More specifically,
paragraphs 3 and 10 of Schedule II to the PLTA specify that the following works
are not “federal property”:
3. Docks, wharves, piers, piles,
dolphins, floats, breakwaters, retaining walls, jetties
10. Reservoirs, storage tanks,
fish-rearing ponds, fishways
[Emphasis added]
[129] I agree with the
AGC’s proposal to the effect that a regulation is subordinate legislation. The
interpretation suggested by the applicant would mean that the regulation has a
broader scope than the Act, which would be contrary to the purpose of the PLTA,
namely, to provide for fair and equitable payments. In my opinion, the
definition of “corporation property” in section 2 of the CCPR is subordinate to
the definition of “federal property” in section 2 of the PLTA, which
excludes the works mentioned in Schedule II to the PLTA. We must turn to the
applicable principles of statutory interpretation (see especially Pierre-André
Côté, The Interpretation of Legislation in Canada, 3d ed., Montréal, Les
Éditions Thémis, 2000 at page 282) and provisions of the federal Interpretation
Act (see the Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-21, sections 12,
15 and 16), which support such a conclusion.
(b) Interpretation
of the term “reservoirs”
[130] In the
alternative, the
applicant notes that the word “silo” is not mentioned in Schedule II. The
respondent, however, submits that a silo is a “reservoir” as provided in paragraph
10 of Schedule II and that if the word “reservoir” were to be connected with
liquids only, Parliament would not have followed it with the term “storage
tanks”.
[131] On numerous
occasions, the Supreme Court has adopted the approach advocated by Elmer Driedger, according to
which “the words of an Act are to be read in their
entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with
the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of Parliament”
(as cited in Rizzo
& Rizzo Shoes Ltd. (Re),
[1998] 1 S.C.R. 27 at paragraph 21).
[132] Upon reading
Schedule II to the PLTA, it becomes clear that Parliament intended to separate
the structures, work, machinery and equipment included therein into different
categories. This Schedule contains 13 paragraphs. Although some paragraphs
mention only one item (paragraphs 4, 5, 6, and 7), others mention several
items, sharing common characteristics.
[133] Paragraph 10 is
at issue in this case, namely, reservoirs, storage tanks, fish-rearing ponds,
and fishways. All of the terms in this paragraph are connected with liquids. I
also note that, before the PLTA was amended in 2000, paragraph 10 also included
the words “outdoor swimming pools”. Accordingly, I am of the opinion that the
word “reservoir” must be interpreted in its plain meaning.
[134] On this point,
the parties submitted definitions from a number of dictionaries. In Le grand dictionnaire
terminologique,
the word “réservoir” is defined first as a [translation]
“large vessel in which raw, semi-finished or completely processed
materials are stored, usually in liquid form” and secondly as a [translation] “place, receptacle for
holding a relatively large quantity of liquid; Flexible or rigid
receptacle containing fuel, lubricant or other liquids; Watertight
enclosure for holding or storing a fluid (liquid or gaseous products)”
[emphasis added]. (Le
grand dictionnaire terminologique, under the entry “réservoir”, on
line: Grand dictionnaire terminologique < http://www.olf.gouv.qc.ca/ressources/gdt.html >).
[135] Likewise, the Grand
Larousse universel gives the following definitions:
[translation]
1. Place created or set up for
accumulating and storing certain things.
2. Receptacle for liquid or gaseous
products . . .
3. Place where materials are stored up .
. .
[Emphasis added]
[136] The word “silo”,
however, is not associated with liquids. For example, Le grand Robert de la langue
française, 2d
ed., gives the following definitions:
[translation]
1. Underground area dug out and then used
as a reservoir (above or below ground) where agricultural products are stored. Dock,
elevator, trench, granary, store. Wheat silos, grain silos (cement,
metal), silage silo (stack silo, pit silo, vertical silo . . . ), for
pulps, roots and tubers (permanent, temporary). Store wheat, grain in a
silo. Ensile
2. Techn. Underground missile launch
site.
3. […] Tech. Multi-story garage. Parking-silo.
4. Perj. (Metaphorically from 1.). Apartment
silo, office silo . . . : multi-story, densely occupied modern building. Rabbit
hutch.
[137] The French
expression “reservoirs d’emmagasinage” also seems to indicate that these are
reservoirs for liquids. Accordingly, the French version of the PLTA must be
reconciled with the English version. In the English version, the words “storage
tanks” are used, which refer to the notion of liquids. For example, under the definition of the
word “storage”, the Oxford English Dictionary defines “storage tank” as
follows: “storage tank, a tank for storage (e.g. of petrol)” (Oxford
English Dictionary, s.v. “storage”, on line: Oxford English Dictionary
<http://dictionary.oed.com>).
[138] Likewise, the
relevant excerpts from the definition of “tank” are as follows:
1. a. In India, A pool or lake, or an artificial
reservoir or cistern, used for purposes of irrigation, and as a storage-place
for drinking-water.
(b) In Australia, an artificial reservoir
designed to hold water for livestock; U.S.
dial., an artificial pond or lake.
b. A natural pool or pond; a ‘stank’.
dial. and U.S. . . .
2. a. An artificial receptacle, usually
rectangular or cylindrical and often of plate-iron, used for storing water,
oil, or other liquids in large quantities. Also spec. a water receptacle (with
transparent sides) in which to keep fish; an aquarium.
b. The fuel container of a motor vehicle.
3. Short for tank-engine, -steamer, etc.
. . . .
[139] Accordingly, I
agree with the applicant that the term “reservoir” refers exclusively to the storage
of liquids, not dry goods. Even if seeds, grains or flour are no longer stored
in the silos, this does not change their nature and primary function. If
Parliament had intended to include silos in Schedule II, it would have simply
used the word “silo” or even “grain elevator”. Accordingly, I am of the opinion
that the immovables identified as “silos” on the property assessment roll are
not excluded under subsection 2(3) of the PLTA and are subject to a PILT, be
they Crown property or corporation property described in schedules III and IV
of the PLTA.
(c) Financial impact
[140] According to the
table entitled [translation]
“Calculation of lost revenue – 2004 Fiscal Year (excluding Montréal-Est)”
submitted to the Court on February 7, 2007, the amounts to be paid as PLRTs in
2004 for silos and piers, if both of them are included, are $1,124,399.38 and
$122,956.60 respectively at the real property tax rate for non-residential
immovables (that is, 4.094 per $100 of assessment) applied to the value appearing
on the property assessment roll. However, the respondent cannot arbitrarily
ignore the “rate of real property tax . . . applicable to its . . .
property if that property were taxable property”, on one hand, or “the value .
. . attributable by an assessment authority . . . as the basis for computing
the amount of any real property tax that would be applicable to that property
if it were taxable property”, on the other.
[141] Therefore, I
conclude that, for the year 2004, the amount of the PLRT to be paid to the
applicant for the silos is $1,124,399.38. The piers, however, must be excluded
from the calculation made under section 6 of the CCPR.
13. Conclusion
and remedies
[142] For the reasons
given above, the application for judicial review is allowed in part.
[143] In closing, it
is important to clarify a few points regarding the remedies available to the
Court under sections 18 and 18.1 of the FCA. On the one hand, the Court does
not have jurisdiction to order the respondent or the Tribunal to pay the
applicant any amount of money whatsoever, including any interest at the legal
rate. On the other hand, the respondent acts as a federal board, commission or
other tribunal when it makes a decision, takes action, or makes a payment under
the PLTA and the CCPR. Whenever such a decision, action or payment is contrary
to law, the Court has jurisdiction to render a declaratory judgment against the
respondent and order it to comply with the law, as well as to declare the
impugned decision to be invalid or unlawful and refer the matter back to the
respondent for determination in accordance with such directions as the Court
considers to be appropriate (subsections 18(1) and 18.1(3) of the FCA).
[144] Therefore, it
would be inappropriate to specify in the accompanying order the exact amounts
of the PLRTs which the applicant could reasonably expect to receive from the
respondent for 2004. It is enough to simply quash the impugned decision and
refer the matter back to the respondent so that the exact amounts may be calculated
by the Tribunal in compliance with the Act and the applicable regulations.
[145] It would also be
inappropriate to make a final ruling on the issue of whether the Tribunal has
the authority to supplement the amounts calculated pursuant to section 7 of the
CCPR to take into consideration the fact that the final payment was not made
within the time limit prescribed by regulation. This issue was not
debated before the Court by counsel for the parties. On this point, I simply
note that a corporation must make a payment in lieu of real property tax (PLRT)
within 50 days after receipt of an
application for the payment. The amounts which the applicant could reasonably have
expected to receive were not paid by the respondent within the time limit
prescribed by regulation. Accordingly, the applicant should be allowed to
adduce any evidence and make any additional submissions to the Tribunal about
the exact amounts to be paid as a PLRT, including the legal authority for and
appropriateness of granting a supplement for the delay in payment.
[146] Following
submissions by counsel, there will be no order as to costs.
ORDER
THE COURT
DECLARES AND ORDERS that:
1.
This
application for judicial review is allowed in part.
2.
For
every taxation year after 2002, the effective rate applicable to the
respondent’s properties is the general real property tax rate applicable
to non-residential immovables in the sector or sectors where the respondent’s
properties are located, to which is added, where appropriate, the
special water tax rate applicable to immovables in that class.
3.
For
every taxation year after 2002, the respondent must not exclude from the
calculation of the effective rate, or deduct from the payment in lieu of real
property tax, the tax equivalent of the former business tax repealed by the
applicant in 2002.
4.
The
impugned decision rendered by the Tribunal in March 2002 is invalid and
unlawful, and the respondent could not make adjustments in the amounts of
$737,889.67 (properties other than the silos) and $1,124,399.38 (silos) for the
year 2004.
5.
The
decision of the Tribunal rendered in March 2004 is set aside, and the matter is
referred back to the respondent so that the Tribunal may render a new decision
and so that the respondent may make a payment in lieu of real property tax
(PLRT) pursuant to the Act and the applicable regulations within 50 days after
the expiry of the time limit specified in paragraph 8 or after the date on
which the applicant advises the respondent that no additional submissions will
be made or evidence adduced under paragraph 7, whichever deadline or event
comes first, as the case may be.
6.
The
new decision of the Tribunal and the amount of any PLRT made by the respondent
shall be in accordance with the following declarations:
(a)
the
silos must be included in the calculation of the PLRT;
(b)
the
wharves do not have to be included in the calculation of the PLRT;
(c)
The
applicable effective rate for the year 2004 is 4.0947% per $100 of assessment
applied to the value of the respondent’s immovables entered on the property
assessment roll.
(d)
The
only rate substitutions or payment deductions authorized are those
expressly set out in sections 7 and 9 of the Crown Corporation Payments Regulations
(CCPR).
7.
Before
rendering a new decision, the Tribunal must allow the applicant to adduce any
additional evidence and make any additional submissions concerning the exact
amount of the payment to be made under section 6 of the CCPR, including the
legal authority for and appropriateness of granting any supplements for delayed
payments, where applicable.
8.
The
additional evidence or submissions mentioned in paragraph 7 may be filed with
the Tribunal within 30 days after the date of this order.
9.
There
will be no order as to costs.
“Luc Martineau”
Certified true translation
Michael Palles
ANNEX
Payments
in Lieu of Taxes Act,
R.S.C. 1985, c. M-13
|
2.
(1) In this Act,
"taxation
year"
«année
d’imposition »
"taxation
year" means the fiscal year of a taxing authority;
"assessment
authority"
«autorité
évaluatrice »
"assessment
authority" means an authority that has power by or under an Act of
Parliament or the legislature of a province to establish the assessed
dimension or assessed value of real property or immovables;
"taxing
authority"
«autorité
taxatrice »
"taxing
authority" means
(a)
any municipality, province, municipal or provincial board, commission,
corporation or other authority that levies and collects a real property tax
or a frontage or area tax pursuant to an Act of the legislature of a province,
(b)
any council of a band within the meaning of the Indian Act that levies
and collects a real property tax or a frontage or area tax pursuant to an Act
of Parliament,
(c)
any band within the meaning of the Cree-Naskapi (of Quebec) Act,
chapter 18 of the Statutes of Canada, 1984, that levies and collects a tax on
interests in Category IA land or Category IA-N land as defined in that Act,
(d)
the Council within the meaning of the Sechelt Indian Band Self-Government
Act, chapter 27 of the Statutes of Canada, 1986, if it levies and
collects a real property tax or a frontage or area tax in respect of Sechelt
lands, as defined in that Act,
(e)
a first nation named in Schedule II to the Yukon First Nations
Self-Government Act, if it levies and collects a real property tax or a
frontage or area tax in respect of settlement land, as defined in that Act,
or in respect of lands in which an interest is transferred or recognized
under section 21 of that Act,
(f)
the Nisga’a Nation or a Nisga’a Village, as defined in the Nisga’a Final
Agreement given effect by the Nisga’a Final Agreement Act, if it
levies and collects a real property tax or a frontage or area tax in respect
of Nisga’a Lands, as defined in that Agreement,
(g)
the Tlicho Government, as defined in section 2 of the Tlicho Land Claims
and Self-Government Act, if it levies and collects a real property tax or
a frontage or area tax in respect of Tlicho lands, as defined in section 2 of
the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act; or
(h)
the Nunatsiavut Government, as defined in section 2 of the Labrador Inuit
Land Claims Agreement Act, or an Inuit Community Government, as defined
in section 1.1.1 of the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement approved by that
Act, if it levies and collects a real property tax or a frontage or area tax
in respect of Labrador Inuit Lands or Community Lands, as defined in section
1.1.1 of that Agreement, as the case may be.
"real
property tax"
«
impôt foncier »
"real
property tax" means a tax of general application to real property or
immovables or any class of them that is
(a)
levied by a taxing authority on owners of real property or immovables or, if
the owner is exempt from the tax, on lessees or occupiers of real property or
immovables, other than those lessees or occupiers exempt by law, and
(b)
computed by applying a rate to all or part of the assessed value of taxable
property;
"department"
«ministères
»
"department"
means
(a)
any department named in Schedule I to the Financial Administration Act,
(a.1)
any division or branch of the federal public administration named in Schedule
I.1 to that Act,
(a.2)
any commission under the Inquiries Act designated as a department for
the purposes of the Financial Administration Act,
(b)
any corporation established by or under an Act of Parliament or performing a
function on behalf of the Government of Canada included in Schedule I to this
Act;
"Minister"
«ministre
»
"Minister"
means the Minister of Public Works and Government Services;
"federal
property"
«propriété
fédérale »
"federal
property" means, subject to subsection (3),
(a)
real property and immovables owned by Her Majesty in right of Canada that are under the
administration of a minister of the Crown,
(b)
real property and immovables owned by Her Majesty in right of Canada that
are, by virtue of a lease to a corporation included in Schedule III or IV,
under the management, charge and direction of that corporation,
(c)
immovables held under emphyteusis by Her Majesty in right of Canada that are under the
administration of a minister of the Crown,
(d)
a building owned by Her Majesty in right of Canada that is under the
administration of a minister of the Crown and that is situated on tax exempt
land owned by a person other than Her Majesty in right of Canada or
administered and controlled by Her Majesty in right of a province, and
(e)
real property and immovables occupied or used by a minister of the Crown and
administered and controlled by Her Majesty in right of a province;
"taxable
property"
«propriété
imposable »
"taxable
property" means real property and immovables in respect of which a
person may be required by a taxing authority to pay a real property tax or a
frontage or area tax;
"effective
rate"
«taux
effectif »
"effective
rate" means the rate of real property tax or of frontage or area tax
that, in the opinion of the Minister, would be applicable to any federal
property if that property were taxable property;
"business
occupancy tax"
«taxe
d’occupation commerciale »
"business
occupancy tax" means a tax levied on occupants in respect of their use
or occupation of real property or immovables for the purpose of or in
connection with a business;
"property
value"
«valeur
effective »
"property
value" means the value that, in the opinion of the Minister, would be
attributable by an assessment authority to federal property, without regard
to any mineral rights or any ornamental, decorative or non-functional
features thereof, as the basis for computing the amount of any real property
tax that would be applicable to that property if it were taxable property;
"assessed
value"
«valeur
fiscale »
"assessed
value" means the value established for any real property or immovable by
an assessment authority for the purpose of computing a real property tax;
(2)
For the purposes of the definition “taxing authority” in subsection (1),
where one authority collects a real property tax or a frontage or area tax
that is levied by another authority, the authority that collects the tax
shall be deemed to be the authority that levies and collects the tax.
(3)
For the purposes of the definition “federal property” in subsection (1),
federal property does not include
(a)
any structure or work, unless it is
(i)
a building designed primarily for the shelter of people, living things,
fixtures, personal property or movable property,
(ii)
an outdoor swimming pool,
(iii)
a golf course improvement,
(iv)
a driveway for a single-family dwelling,
(v)
paving or other improvements associated with employee parking, or
(vi)
an outdoor theatre;
(b)
any structure, work, machinery or equipment that is included in Schedule II;
(c)
any real property or immovable developed and used as a park and situated
within an area defined as “urban” by Statistics Canada, as of the most recent
census of the population of Canada taken by Statistics Canada, other than
national parks of Canada, national marine parks of Canada, national park
reserves of Canada, national marine park reserves of Canada, national
historic sites of Canada, national battlefields or heritage canals;
(d)
any Indian reserve, or any land referred to in any of paragraphs (c) to (e)
of the definition “taxing authority” in subsection 2(1), except for the part
(i)
that is occupied for residential purposes by an employee of Her Majesty in
right of Canada who would not, but for that employment, live on that reserve
or land, or
(ii)
that is occupied by a minister of the Crown;
(e)
any real property or immovable for which an original Crown grant has not
issued, except to the extent that it
(i)
is designated for a specific use by or under an Act of Parliament, or
(ii)
is used by an Indian within the meaning of the Indian Act or an Inuk and is
prescribed under paragraph 9(1)(e);
(f)
any real property for which an original Crown grant has not issued, except to
the extent that it
(i)
is reserved in the records of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern
Development at Whitehorse or Yellowknife for the use of a department or an
agency of the Government of Canada, and is either situated within a
municipality or, in the case of real property that is not situated within a
municipality, used in accordance with the reservation, or
(ii)
is situated within a municipality and is reserved in the records of the
Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development at Whitehorse or Yellowknife for the use of an Indian within the
meaning of the Indian Act or an Inuk;
(g)
any real property or immovable developed or used as a public highway that, in
the opinion of the Minister, does not provide, as its primary function,
immediate access to real property or immovables owned by Her Majesty in right
of Canada; or
(h)
unless otherwise prescribed, any real property or immovable leased to or
occupied by a person or body, whether incorporated or not, that is not a
department.
(4)
In determining the effective rate in respect of an experimental farm station,
agricultural research station or other similar facility on federal property,
the Minister shall take into account the rates of tax applicable to farms
operated by agricultural enterprises.
2.1
The purpose of this Act is to provide for the fair and equitable
administration of payments in lieu of taxes.
3.
(1) The Minister may, on receipt of an application in a form provided or
approved by the Minister, make a payment out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund
to a taxing authority applying for it
(a)
in lieu of a real property tax for a taxation year, and
(b)
in lieu of a frontage or area tax
in
respect of federal property situated within the area in which the taxing
authority has the power to levy and collect the real property tax or the
frontage or area tax.
(1.1)
If the Minister is of the opinion that a payment under subsection (1) or part
of one has been unreasonably delayed, the Minister may supplement the
payment.
…
4.
(1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3) and 5(1) and (2), a payment referred
to in paragraph 3(1)(a) shall not exceed the product of
(a)
the effective rate in the taxation year applicable to the federal property in
respect of which the payment may be made, and
(b)
the property value in the taxation year of that federal property.
…
9.
(1) The Governor in Council may make regulations for carrying out the
purposes and provisions of this Act and, without restricting the generality
of the foregoing, may make regulations
(f)
respecting any payment that may be made in lieu of a real property tax or a
frontage or area tax by any corporation included in Schedule III or IV and,
without limiting the generality of the foregoing, providing that any payment
that may be made shall be determined on a basis at least equivalent to that
provided in this Act;
(g)
respecting any payment that may be made in lieu of a business occupancy tax
by every corporation included in Schedule IV;
10.
The Minister may make regulations
(a)
establishing a form of application for a payment under this Act;
(b)
respecting the making of an interim payment in respect of a payment under
this Act; and
(c)
respecting the recovery of any overpayments made to a taxing authority,
including recovery by way of set-off against other payments under this Act to
the taxing authority.
11.
(1) Notwithstanding any other Act of Parliament or any regulations made
thereunder,
(a)
every corporation included in Schedule III or IV shall, if it is exempt from
real property tax, comply with any regulations made under paragraph 9(1)(f)
respecting any payment that it may make in lieu of a real property tax or a
frontage or area tax; and
(b)
every corporation included in Schedule IV shall, if it is exempt from
business occupancy tax, comply with any regulations made under paragraph
9(1)(g) respecting any payment that it may make in lieu of a business
occupancy tax.
…
11.1
(1) The Governor in Council shall appoint an advisory panel of at least two
members from each province and territory with relevant knowledge or
experience to hold office during good behaviour for a term not exceeding
three years, which term may be renewed for one or more further terms. The
Governor in Council shall name one of the members as Chairperson.
(1.1)
A member appointed under subsection (1) may be removed for cause by the
Governor in Council.
(2)
The advisory panel shall give advice to the Minister in the event that a
taxing authority disagrees with the property value, property dimension or
effective rate applicable to any federal property, or claims that a payment
should be supplemented under subsection 3(1.1).
(3)
The Chairperson shall supervise and direct the operation and functioning of
the advisory panel.
(4)
The Chairperson may establish divisions of the advisory panel, and all or any
of the powers, duties and functions of the panel may be exercised or
performed by all or any of those divisions.
(5)
Each member of the advisory panel is entitled to be paid, unless the member
is employed in the federal public administration,
(a)
remuneration in an amount fixed by the Governor in Council for each day or
part of a day that the member is performing duties under this Act; and
(b)
reasonable travel and other expenses incurred in the course of their duties
under this Act while absent from their ordinary place of residence.
…
15. No right to a payment is conferred by this Act.
SCHEDULE
II
(Section 2)
1.
Canal structures — walls and locks
2.
Conveyor belts and conveyance systems other than elevators and escalators,
letter sorting equipment, computers, built-in cranes, lathes, drills,
printing presses and weigh scales
3.
Docks, jetties, piers, piles, dolphins, floats, breakwaters, retaining walls,
jetties
4.
Drydocks
4.1
(1) Fortifications including, without limiting the generality of the
foregoing, improvements such as ramparts, retaining walls, stockades and
outerworks composed of Redan, Salient, Bastion, Demi-Bastion, Tenaille,
Curtain and similar elements
(2)
For the purpose of this item, the following are components of fortifications:
escarp walls, courtyard walls, postern tunnels, sallyports, underground
tunnels, underground magazines, earth ramparts, gun emplacements, parapets,
banquettes, fraises, terre-plein, drawbridges, entrance gates, guérite,
machicolation, musketry galleries, ditches, moats, counterscarp galleries,
caponniers, mine galleries, glacis, ravelin, reverse fire galleries, entrance
cuttings, stockades, embrasures, barbettes, casemates, demi-casemates and
lunettes
5.
Gasoline pumps
6.
Gun butts
7.
Monuments
8.
Penitentiary walls, fencing
9.
Pole lines, transmission lines, light standards, unenclosed communications
towers, unenclosed lighthouses and range lights
10.
Reservoirs, storage tanks, fish-rearing ponds, fishways
11.
Roads, sidewalks, aircraft runways, paving, railway tracks
12.
Snow sheds, tunnels, bridges, dams
13.
Water mains, sewer mains
|
2.
(1) Les définitions qui suivent s’appliquent à la présente loi.
«année
d’imposition »
"taxation
year"
«année
d’imposition » L’exercice de l’autorité taxatrice.
«autorité
évaluatrice »
"assessment
authority"
«autorité
évaluatrice » Autorité habilitée en vertu d’une loi fédérale ou provinciale à
déterminer les dimensions fiscales ou la valeur fiscale d’un immeuble ou d’un
bien réel.
«autorité
taxatrice »
"taxing
authority"
«autorité
taxatrice »
a)
Municipalité ou province, organisme municipal ou provincial, ou autre autorité
qui, sous le régime d’une loi provinciale, lève et perçoit un impôt foncier
ou un impôt sur la façade ou sur la superficie;
b)
conseil de la bande — au sens de la Loi sur les Indiens — qui, sous le
régime d’une loi fédérale, lève et perçoit un impôt foncier ou un impôt sur
la façade ou sur la superficie;
c)
bande — au sens de la Loi sur les Cris et les Naskapis du Québec,
chapitre 18 des Statuts du Canada de 1984 — qui lève et perçoit un impôt sur
les droits sur les terres de catégorie IA ou IA-N, au sens de cette loi;
d)
le conseil — au sens de la Loi sur l’autonomie gouvernementale de la bande
indienne sechelte, chapitre 27 des Statuts du Canada de 1986 —, s’il lève
et perçoit un impôt foncier ou un impôt sur la façade ou sur la superficie
sur les terres secheltes, au sens de la même loi;
e)
la première nation dont le nom figure à l’annexe II de la Loi sur
l’autonomie gouvernementale des premières nations du Yukon, qui lève et
perçoit un impôt foncier ou un impôt sur la façade ou sur la superficie d’une
terre désignée, au sens de cette loi, ou d’une terre dont le droit de
propriété lui est transféré ou lui est reconnu en vertu de l’article 21 de
cette loi;
f)
la Nation nisga’a ou un village nisga’a, au sens de l’Accord définitif
nisga’a mis en vigueur par la Loi sur l’Accord définitif nisga’a, qui
lève et perçoit un impôt foncier ou un impôt sur la façade ou sur la
superficie relativement aux Terres-Nisga’a, au sens de l’accord;
g)
le gouvernement tlicho, au sens de l’article 2 de la Loi sur les revendications
territoriales et l’autonomie gouvernementale du peuple tlicho, qui lève
et perçoit un impôt foncier ou un impôt sur la façade ou sur la superficie
relativement aux terres tlichos, au sens de l’article 2 de la Loi sur la
gestion des ressources de la vallée du Mackenzie;
h)
le gouvernement nunatsiavut, au sens de l’article 2 de la Loi sur l’Accord
sur les revendications territoriales des Inuit du Labrador, ou
l’administration de toute communauté inuite, au sens de la définition de
«gouvernement de communauté inuite » à l’article 1.1.1 de l’accord sur des
revendications territoriales approuvé aux termes de cette loi, s’il lève et
perçoit un impôt foncier ou un impôt sur la façade ou sur la superficie
relativement aux terres des Inuit du Labrador ou aux terres communautaires,
selon le cas, au sens de l’article 1.1.1 de l’accord.
«
impôt foncier »
"real
property tax"
«
impôt foncier » Impôt général :
a)
levé par une autorité taxatrice sur les immeubles ou biens réels ou les
immeubles ou biens réels d’une catégorie donnée et auquel sont assujettis les
propriétaires et, dans les cas où les propriétaires bénéficient d’une
exemption, les locataires ou occupants autres que ceux bénéficiant d’une
exemption;
b)
calculé par application d’un taux à tout ou partie de la valeur fiscale des
propriétés imposables.
«ministères
»
"department"
«ministères
»
a)
Les ministères mentionnés à l’annexe I de la Loi sur la gestion des
finances publiques;
a.1)
tout secteur de l’administration publique fédérale mentionné à l’annexe I.1
de cette loi;
a.2)
toute commission nommée sous le régime de la Loi sur les enquêtes
désignée comme tel pour l’application de la Loi sur la gestion des
finances publiques;
b)
les personnes morales constituées sous le régime d’une loi fédérale ou
exerçant des fonctions pour le compte du gouvernement du Canada et
mentionnées à l’annexe I.
«ministre
»
"Minister"
«ministre
» Le ministre des Travaux publics et des Services gouvernementaux.
«propriété
fédérale »
"federal
property"
«
propriété fédérale » Sous réserve du paragraphe (3) :
a)
immeuble ou bien réel appartenant à Sa Majesté du chef du Canada dont la
gestion est confiée à un ministre fédéral;
b)
immeuble ou bien réel appartenant à Sa Majesté du chef du Canada et relevant,
en vertu d’un bail, d’une personne morale mentionnée aux annexes III ou IV;
c)
immeuble dont Sa Majesté du chef du Canada est emphytéote et dont la gestion
est confiée à un ministre fédéral;
d)
bâtiment appartenant à Sa Majesté du chef du Canada, dont la gestion est
confiée à un ministre fédéral mais qui est situé sur un terrain non imposable
qui n’appartient pas à Sa Majesté du chef du Canada ou qui est contrôlé et
administré par Sa Majesté du chef d’une province;
e)
immeuble ou bien réel occupé ou utilisé par un ministre fédéral et administré
et contrôlé par Sa Majesté du chef d’une province.
«propriété
imposable »
"taxable
property"
«propriété
imposable » Immeuble ou bien réel pouvant être assujetti par une autorité
taxatrice à un impôt foncier ou un impôt sur la façade ou sur la superficie.
«taux
effectif »
"effective
rate"
«taux
effectif » Le taux de l’impôt foncier ou de l’impôt sur la façade ou sur la
superficie qui, selon le ministre, serait applicable à une propriété fédérale
si celle-ci était une propriété imposable.
«taxe
d’occupation commerciale »
"business
occupancy tax"
«taxe
d’occupation commerciale » Impôt auquel sont assujettis les occupants d’un
immeuble ou d’un bien réel du fait qu’ils l’occupent ou l’utilisent,
directement ou indirectement, pour leurs activités commerciales ou
professionnelles.
«valeur
effective »
"property
value"
«valeur
effective » Valeur que, selon le ministre, une autorité évaluatrice
déterminerait, compte non tenu des droits miniers et des éléments décoratifs
ou non fonctionnels, comme base du calcul de l’impôt foncier qui serait
applicable à une propriété fédérale si celle-ci était une propriété
imposable.
«valeur
fiscale »
"assessed
value"
«valeur
fiscale » Valeur attribuée à un immeuble ou à un bien réel par une autorité
évaluatrice pour le calcul de l’impôt foncier.
(2)
Dans les cas où une autorité perçoit un impôt foncier ou un impôt sur la
façade ou sur la superficie qui est levé par une autre autorité, c’est celle
qui perçoit l’impôt qui, pour l’application de la définition de « autorité
taxatrice » au paragraphe (1), est réputée être l’autorité qui lève et
perçoit l’impôt.
(3)
Sont exclus de la définition de « propriété fédérale » au paragraphe (1) :
a)
les constructions ou ouvrages, sauf :
(i)
les bâtiments dont la destination première est d’abriter des êtres humains,
des animaux, des plantes, des installations, des biens meubles ou des biens
personnels,
(ii)
les piscines extérieures,
(iii)
les améliorations apportées aux terrains de golf,
(iv)
les entrées des maisons individuelles,
(v)
l’asphaltage des stationnements pour employés et les autres améliorations s’y
rattachant,
(vi)
les amphithéâtres de plein air;
b)
les constructions, les ouvrages, les machines ou le matériel mentionnés à
l’annexe II;
c)
les immeubles et les biens réels aménagés en parc et utilisés comme tels dans
une zone classée comme « urbaine » par Statistique Canada lors de son dernier
recensement de la population canadienne, sauf les parcs nationaux du Canada,
les parcs marins nationaux du Canada, les réserves à vocation de parc
national du Canada ou de parc marin national du Canada, les lieux historiques
nationaux, les champs de bataille nationaux et les canaux historiques;
d)
toute réserve indienne ou toute terre visée à l’un des alinéas c) à e) de la
définition de « autorité taxatrice » au paragraphe 2(1), sauf la partie :
(i)
où loge une personne n’y vivant que parce qu’elle est employée par Sa Majesté
du chef du Canada,
(ii)
qui est occupée par un ministre fédéral;
e)
les immeubles et les biens réels pour lesquels aucun titre de concession n’a
été délivré par la Couronne, sauf s’ils sont, selon le cas :
(i)
destinés à un usage particulier sous le régime d’une loi fédérale,
(ii)
utilisés par des Indiens, au sens de la Loi sur les Indiens, ou des Inuit et
identifiés conformément à l’alinéa 9(1)e);
f)
les biens réels pour lesquels aucun titre de concession n’a été délivré par
la Couronne, sauf s’ils sont, selon le cas :
(i)
affectés, dans les registres de Whitehorse ou de Yellowknife du ministère des
Affaires indiennes et du Nord canadien, à l’usage d’un ministère ou organisme
fédéral et situés dans une municipalité ou, hors des municipalités, utilisés
conformément aux conditions de l’affectation,
(ii)
situés dans une municipalité et affectés, dans les registres de Whitehorse ou
de Yellowknife du ministère des Affaires indiennes et du Nord canadien, à
l’usage des Indiens, au sens de la Loi sur les Indiens, ou des Inuit;
g)
les immeubles et les biens réels aménagés ou utilisés comme voies publiques
et n’ayant pas, selon le ministre, pour fonction première de permettre
l’accès direct à un immeuble ou à un bien réel appartenant à Sa Majesté du
chef du Canada;
h)
les immeubles et les biens réels pris à bail ou occupés par une personne ou
par un organisme autre qu’un ministère, constitué ou non en personne morale,
sauf exception prévue par règlement du gouverneur en conseil.
(4)
Afin de déterminer le taux effectif applicable à une station agronomique, un
centre de recherches en agriculture ou des installations semblables situés
sur une propriété fédérale, le ministre tient compte des taux d’imposition
s’appliquant aux fermes exploitées par des entreprises agricoles.
2.1
La présente loi a pour objet l’administration juste et équitable des
paiements versés en remplacement d’impôts.
3.
(1) Le ministre peut, pour toute propriété fédérale située sur le territoire
où une autorité taxatrice est habilitée à lever et à percevoir l’un ou
l’autre des impôts mentionnés aux alinéas a) et b), et sur réception d’une
demande à cet effet établie en la forme qu’il a fixée ou approuvée, verser
sur le Trésor un paiement à l’autorité taxatrice :
a)
en remplacement de l’impôt foncier pour une année d’imposition donnée;
b)
en remplacement de l’impôt sur la façade ou sur la superficie.
(1.1)
S’il est d’avis que le versement de tout ou partie du paiement visé au
paragraphe (1) a été indûment retardé, le ministre peut augmenter le montant
de celui-ci.
[…]
4.
(1) Sous réserve des paragraphes (2), (3) et 5(1) et (2), le paiement visé à
l’alinéa 3(1)a) ne peut dépasser le produit des deux facteurs suivants :
a)
le taux effectif applicable à la propriété fédérale en cause pour l’année
d’imposition;
b)
la valeur effective de celle-ci pour l’année d’imposition.
[…]
9.
(1) Le gouverneur en conseil peut, par règlement, prendre toutes mesures
utiles à l’application de la présente loi et, notamment :
f)
régir les paiements à verser par les personnes morales mentionnées aux
annexes III ou IV en remplacement de l’impôt foncier ou de l’impôt sur la
façade ou sur la superficie et prévoir, entre autres, que leur base de calcul
sera au moins équivalente à celle prévue par la présente loi;
g)
régir les paiements à verser par les personnes morales mentionnées à l’annexe
IV en remplacement de la taxe d’occupation commerciale;
10.
Le ministre peut, par règlement :
a)
établir la formule de demande à employer pour les paiements visés par la
présente loi;
b)
régir tout versement provisoire relatif à un paiement visé par la présente
loi;
c)
régir le recouvrement des trop-payés à une autorité taxatrice, y compris par
déduction sur les paiements à verser à celle-ci en vertu de la présente loi.
11.
(1) Par dérogation à toute autre loi fédérale ou à ses règlements :
a)
les personnes morales mentionnées aux annexes III ou IV qui sont exemptées de
l’impôt foncier sont tenues, pour tout paiement qu’elles versent en
remplacement de l’impôt foncier ou de l’impôt sur la façade ou sur la
superficie, de se conformer aux règlements pris en vertu de l’alinéa 9(1)f);
b)
les personnes morales mentionnées à l’annexe IV qui sont exemptées de la taxe
d’occupation commerciale sont tenues, pour tout paiement qu’elles versent en
remplacement de celle-ci, de se conformer aux règlements pris en vertu de
l’alinéa 9(1)g).
[…]
11.1
(1) Le gouverneur en conseil constitue un comité consultatif composé d’au
moins deux membres de chaque province et territoire — dont un président —
possédant une formation ou une expérience pertinentes. Les membres sont
nommés à titre inamovible pour un mandat renouvelable d’au plus trois ans.
(1.1)
Les membres du comité nommés en vertu du paragraphe (1) le sont sous réserve
de révocation motivée par le gouverneur en conseil.
(2)
Le comité a pour mandat de donner des avis au ministre relativement à une
propriété fédérale en cas de désaccord avec une autorité taxatrice sur la
valeur effective, la dimension effective ou le taux effectif ou sur
l’augmentation ou non d’un paiement au titre du paragraphe 3(1.1).
(3)
Le président assure la direction du comité.
(4)
Le président peut constituer au sein du comité des formations pouvant exercer
tout ou partie des attributions du comité.
(5)
Sauf s’ils font partie de l’administration publique fédérale, les membres du
comité reçoivent la rémunération fixée par le gouverneur en conseil pour les
jours ou fractions de jour pendant lesquels ils accomplissent leurs fonctions
et sont indemnisés des frais de déplacement et de séjour entraînés par
l’accomplissement, hors de leur lieu ordinaire de résidence, de leurs
fonctions.
[…]
15. La présente loi ne confère aucun droit à un paiement.
ANNEXE
II
(article 2)
1.
Murs et écluses des canaux
2.
Tapis roulants et transporteurs autres qu’ascenseurs et escaliers mécaniques,
matériel de tri du courrier, ordinateurs, grues fixes, tours, foreuses,
presses à imprimer et appareils de pesage
3.
Bassins, appontements, jetées, pilotis, poteaux d’amarrage, quais flottants,
brise-lames, murs de soutènement, digues
4.
Cales sèches
4.1
(1) Fortifications, notamment les améliorations telles que les suivantes :
rempart, mur de soutènement, palissade et travaux externes, constitués de
redan, saillant, bastion, demi-bastion, tenaille, courtine et éléments
semblables
(2)
Pour l’application du présent article, les composantes des fortifications
sont les suivantes : mur d’escarpe, mur sur cour, poterne, sallyport, tunnel
souterrain, magasin souterrain, rempart en terre, plateforme de canon, parapet,
banquette, fraise, terre-plein, pont-levis, porte d’entrée, guérite,
mâchicoulis, galerie des mousquets, fossé, douve, galerie de la contrescarpe,
caponnière, contre-mine, glacis, ravelin, galerie de tir intérieur, entrée
encastrée, palissade, embrasure, barbette, casemate, demi-casemate et lunette
5.
Pompes à essence
6.
Buttes de tir
7.
Monuments
8.
Murs et clôtures de pénitenciers
9.
Lignes sur poteaux, lignes de transmission, réverbères électriques, tours de
communication ouvertes, phares ou feux de balisage ouverts
10.
Réservoirs, réservoirs d’emmagasinage, viviers, passes à poissons
11.
Chemins, trottoirs, pistes d’envol ou d’atterrissage, pavements, voies
ferrées
12.
Abris contre la neige, tunnels, ponts, barrages
13.
Conduites d’eau, égouts collecteurs
|
Crown Corporation Payment Regulations, SOR/81-1030
|
Interpretation
2.
In these Regulations,
"corporation
property" means
(a)
except in Part II, any real property or immovable owned by Her Majesty in
right of Canada that is under the management, charge and direction of a
corporation included in Schedule III or IV to the Act, or that has been
entrusted to such corporation;
(a.1)
except in Part II,
(i)
any real property or immovable that is owned by Her Majesty in right of
Canada and that is managed by a port authority included in Schedule III to
the Act, and
(ii)
any real property or immovable, other than any real property or immovable
owned by Her Majesty in right of Canada, that is held by a port authority
included in Schedule III to the Act, on which the port authority engages in
port activities referred to in paragraph 28(2)( a ) of the Canada Marine Act
and in respect of which the port authority is exempt from real property tax;
and
(b)
in Part II, any real property or immovable occupied or used by a corporation
included in Schedule IV to the Act in respect of which occupancy or use the
corporation is exempt from business occupancy tax; ( propriété d’une
société )
"corporation
effective rate" means the rate of real property tax or of frontage or
area tax that a corporation would consider applicable to its corporation
property if that property were taxable property; ( taux effectif applicable à
une société )
"corporation
property value" means the value that a corporation would consider to be
attributable by an assessment authority to its corporation property, without
regard to any mineral rights or any ornamental, decorative or non-functional
features thereof, as the basis for computing the amount of any real property
tax that would be applicable to that property if it were taxable property. (
valeur effective de la propriété d’une société )
PART
I
PAYMENTS
IN LIEU OF A REAL PROPERTY TAX OR A FRONTAGE OR AREA TAX
General
5.
In this Part, “corporation” means, in respect of any payment that may be made
by it, every corporation included in Schedule III or IV to the Act.
6.
The payment made by a corporation in lieu of a real property tax or frontage
or area tax in respect of any corporation property that would be federal
property if it were under the management, charge and direction of a minister
of the Crown is made without any condition, in an amount that is not less
than the amount referred to in sections 7 to 11.
Calculation
of Payments
7.
(1) Subject to subsection (2), a payment made by a corporation in lieu of a
real property tax for a taxation year shall be not less than the product of
(a)
the corporation effective rate in the taxation year applicable to the
corporation property in respect of which the payment may be made; and
(b)
the corporation property value in the taxation year of that corporation
property.
(2) Where all or part of the real property tax levied by a taxing authority
in a taxation year is for school purposes and is levied at different rates
(a)
for taxpayers of different religious denominations, or
(b)
for taxpayers of different religious denominations and for different classes
of taxable property,
there
shall be substituted for the corporation effective rate referred to in paragraph
(1)(a), a rate equal to the aggregate of
(c)
that part of the corporation effective rate in the taxation year that is used
in determining the amount of the real property tax that is levied for
purposes other than school purposes,
and
(d)
if paragraph (a) applies, a rate for school purposes obtained by dividing
(i)
the portion of the real property tax levied for school purposes by the taxing
authority in the taxation year,
by
(ii)
the assessed value of all taxable property under the jurisdiction of the
taxing authority in respect of which such portion of the real property tax
for school purposes is levied in the taxation year, or
(e)
if paragraph (b) applies, a rate for school purposes for each class of
taxable property determined by dividing
(i)
the portion of the real property tax levied for school purposes by the taxing
authority in respect of property of such class in the taxation year,
by
(ii)
the assessed value of all taxable property of such class under the jurisdiction
of the taxing authority in respect of which such portion of the real property
tax for school purposes is levied in the taxation year.
Deductions
9.
In determining the amount of a payment for a taxation year under section 7,
there may be deducted
(a)
if there is in effect a special arrangement for the provision or financing of
an education service by the corporation, the amount established by that
arrangement;
(b)
if there is in effect a special arrangement for an alternative means of compensating
a taxing authority, or a body on behalf of which the authority collects a
real property tax, for providing a service, the amount established by that
arrangement;
(c)
if a taxing authority, or a body on behalf of which the authority collects a
real property tax, is, in the opinion of the corporation, unable or unwilling
to provide the corporation property with a service, and no special
arrangement exists, an amount that, in the opinion of the corporation, does
not exceed reasonable expenditures incurred or expected to be incurred by the
corporation to provide the service; and
(d)
an amount that, in the opinion of the corporation, is equal to any
cancellation, reduction or refund in respect of a real property tax that the
corporation considers would be applicable to the taxation year in respect of
its corporation property if it were taxable property.
Time
and manner of payments
12.
(1) Subject to subsection (2), where a corporation makes a payment in
accordance with section 6, it shall be made
(a)
only to the taxing authority for the area in which the corporation property
is situated; and
(b)
within 50 days after receipt of an application for the payment.
(2) Where a corporation is unable to make a final determination of the amount
of a payment made in accordance with section 6 within the time referred to in
paragraph (1)(b), the corporation shall make, within that time, an interim
payment that corresponds to the estimated total payment to be made.
Advisory
panel
12.1
Section 11.1 of the Act applies to a corporation with respect to payments in
lieu of a real property tax or a frontage or area tax, as if the reference to
“the Minister” were a reference to “a corporation” and any reference to
“federal property” were a reference to “corporation property”.
|
Définitions
2.
Les définitions qui suivent s’appliquent au présent règlement.
«propriété
d’une société»
a)
Sauf à la partie II, l’immeuble ou le bien réel qui appartient à Sa Majesté
du chef du Canada et dont une société mentionnée aux annexes III ou IV de la
Loi a la gestion, la charge et la direction, ou l’immeuble ou le bien réel
confié à une telle société;
a.1)
sauf à la partie II,
(i)
l’immeuble ou le bien réel qui appartient à Sa Majesté du chef du Canada et
dont une administration portuaire mentionnée à l’annexe III de la Loi a la
gestion,
(ii)
l’immeuble ou le bien réel, autre qu’un immeuble ou un bien réel qui
appartient à Sa Majesté du chef du Canada, qu’une administration portuaire
mentionnée à l’annexe III de la Loi détient, sur lequel elle exerce des
activités portuaires visées à l’alinéa 28(2)a) de la Loi maritime du Canada
et à l’égard duquel elle est exemptée de l’impôt foncier;
b)
dans la partie II, l’immeuble ou le bien réel occupé ou utilisé par une
société mentionnée à l’annexe IV de la Loi bénéficiant, à l’égard de
celui-ci, d’une exemption de la taxe d’occupation commerciale.
( corporation property )
«taux
effectif applicable à une société» Le taux de l’impôt foncier ou de l’impôt
sur la façade ou sur la superficie qui, de l’avis de la société, serait
applicable à sa propriété si celle-ci était une propriété imposable. (
corporation effective rate )
«valeur
effective de la propriété d’une société» La valeur qui, de l’avis de la
société, serait déterminée par une autorité évaluatrice, abstraction faite de
tous droits miniers et de tous éléments décoratifs ou non-fonctionnels, comme
base du calcul de l’impôt foncier applicable à sa propriété si celle-ci était
une propriété imposable. ( corporation property value )
PARTIE
I
PAIEMENTS
VERSÉS EN REMPLACEMENT DE L’IMPÔT FONCIER OU DE L’IMPÔT SUR LA FAÇADE OU SUR
LA SUPERFICIE
Dispositions
générales
5.
Dans la présente partie, « société » s’entend, à l’égard de tout paiement
qu’elle peut verser, de toute société mentionnée aux annexes III ou IV de la
Loi.
6.
Le paiement effectué par une société en remplacement de l’impôt foncier ou de
l’impôt sur la façade ou sur la superficie à l’égard d’une propriété qui
serait une propriété fédérale si un ministre fédéral en avait la gestion, la
charge et la direction n’est assorti d’aucune condition et ne doit pas être
inférieur aux sommes visées aux articles 7 et 11.
Calcul
des paiements
7.
(1) Sous réserve du paragraphe (2), un paiement versé par une société en
remplacement de l’impôt foncier pour une année d’imposition ne doit pas être
inférieur au produit des deux facteurs suivants :
a)
le taux effectif applicable à la société dans l’année d’imposition en cause à
l’égard de la propriété de celle-ci pour laquelle le paiement peut être
versé;
b)
la valeur effective de la propriété de la société pour cette année
d’imposition.
(2) Dans le cas où tout ou partie de l’impôt foncier levé par une autorité
taxatrice pour une année d’imposition est une taxe scolaire et que le taux de
celle-ci varie :
a)
soit selon la religion du contribuable, ou
b)
soit à la fois selon la religion du contribuable et selon la catégorie de
propriétés imposables,
le
taux effectif applicable d’une société visé à l’alinéa (1)a) peut être
remplacé par le taux qui est égal à la somme des éléments suivants :
d’une
part :
c)
la partie du taux effectif applicable à une société qui s’applique à la
partie de l’impôt foncier qui n’est pas une taxe scolaire,
d’autre
part, un taux de taxe scolaire déterminé de la façon suivante :
d)
s’il s’agit du cas prévu à l’alinéa a), ce taux est le quotient résultant de
la division du montant visé au sous-alinéa (i) par le montant visé au
sous-alinéa (ii) :
(i)
la partie de l’impôt foncier qui constitue la taxe scolaire,
(ii)
le montant de l’évaluation de toutes les propriétés imposables qui sont du
ressort de l’autorité taxatrice et qui constituent, pour l’année
d’imposition, l’assiette de la partie de l’impôt foncier qui est une taxe
scolaire,
e)
s’il s’agit du cas prévu à l’alinéa b), le taux de la taxe scolaire qui
s’applique à chaque catégorie de propriétés imposables est le quotient
résultant de la division du montant visé au sous-alinéa (i) par le montant
visé au sous-alinéa (ii) :
(i)
la partie de l’impôt foncier qui constitue la taxe scolaire pour la catégorie
concernée,
(ii)
le montant de l’évaluation de toutes les propriétés imposables de cette
catégorie qui sont du ressort de l’autorité taxatrice et qui constituent,
pour l’année d’imposition, l’assiette de la partie de l’impôt foncier qui est
une taxe scolaire.
Déductions
9.
Dans le calcul du paiement visé à l’article 7 pour une année d’imposition
donnée, peut être déduit :
a)
au titre d’un service d’enseignement que la société fournit ou finance, aux
termes d’une entente spéciale en vigueur, la somme calculée conformément à
celle-ci;
b)
au titre d’un autre service pour lequel l’autorité taxatrice ou l’organisme
pour le compte duquel elle perçoit un impôt foncier sont dédommagés en vertu
d’une entente spéciale en vigueur, la somme calculée conformément à celle-ci;
c)
au titre d’un service — non visé par une entente spéciale — que, selon la
société, l’autorité taxatrice ou l’organisme pour le compte duquel elle perçoit
un impôt foncier ne veulent ou ne peuvent pas fournir à une propriété de la
société, une somme qui, selon la société, ne dépasse pas les frais
raisonnables qu’elle a engagés ou estime devoir engager pour fournir le
service;
d)
une somme égale, selon la société, à tout remboursement, suppression ou
réduction de l’impôt foncier qui, pour l’année d’imposition, s’appliquerait,
selon elle, à ses propriétés si celles-ci étaient des propriétés imposables.
Modalités
de versement
12.
(1) Sous réserve du paragraphe (2), le paiement effectué par une société en
application de l’article 6 est versé :
a)
uniquement à l’autorité taxatrice du lieu où la propriété est située;
b)
dans les cinquante jours suivant la réception de la demande de paiement.
(2) Lorsqu’une société est incapable de déterminer de façon définitive le
montant du paiement à verser aux termes de l’article 6 au cours du délai visé
à l’alinéa (1)b), elle doit, au cours de ce délai, effectuer un versement
provisoire qui correspond au montant estimatif total du paiement.
Comité
consultatif
12.1
L’article 11.1 de la Loi s’applique à toute société en ce qui touche les
paiements versés en remplacement de l’impôt foncier ou de l’impôt sur la
façade ou sur la superficie, les mentions du ministre et des propriétés
fédérales valant respectivement mention de la société et des propriétés de la
société.
|
An
Act respecting municipal taxation, R.S.Q. c. F-2.1
|
CHAPTER
V
CONTENTS
OF THE PROPERTY ASSESSMENT ROLL
DIVISION
I
UNITS
OF ASSESSMENT
§ 1.
— General rule
Immovables.
31.
Subject to Division IV, the immovables situated in the territory of a local
municipality shall be entered on the property assessment roll.
“roll”.
For
the purposes of this chapter, the word “roll” means the property assessment
roll.
DIVISION
III
OTHER
PARTICULARS
Taxable
value.
55.
Whenever the law provides that only part of the value of an immovable is
taxable or that it is exempt from property taxes, the roll must state the
taxable value of the immovable or the fact that it is exempt, as the case may
be.
Reference
to legislative source.
All
information entered pursuant to this section must be accompanied with a
reference to its legislative source.
CHAPTER
X
ADMINISTRATIVE
REVIEW AND PROCEEDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL
DIVISION
I
ADMINISTRATIVE
REVIEW
Agreement.
138.4.
The applicant may, where the applicant has not brought a proceeding under
section 138.5, enter into an agreement with the assessor on an alteration to
the roll.
Time
limit.
The
agreement may be entered into
1)
on or before the thirtieth day following the sending by the assessor of the
writing required under the first paragraph of section 138.3 ;
2)
before the expiry of the applicable time limit for the sending of the writing
required under the first paragraph of section 138.3, if the assessor has not
sent the writing within that time limit.
Date
of effect.
The
agreement must be in writing and specify the date from which the alteration
to the roll resulting from the agreement is to have effect.
Agreement
null.
An
agreement entered into after the expiry of the time limit set out in the
second paragraph is null.
DIVISION
II
PROCEEDINGS
BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL
Proceeding
before Tribunal.
138.5.
The person having filed the application for review may, if the person has not
entered into an agreement under section 138.4, bring before the Tribunal a
proceeding relating to the same subject-matter as the application.
Filing
of complaint.
If
such an agreement is entered into, the following persons other than the
person having made the application for review may, in the circumstances
mentioned, if applicable, bring a proceeding before the Tribunal to contest
the alteration arising from the agreement:
1)
the person in whose name the unit of assessment or business establishment
concerned by the alteration is entered on the roll or was entered thereon
immediately before the alteration;
2)
the person who, as a result of the alteration, was entered on the roll as
lessee or occupant of the unit of assessment;
3)
the local municipality, the school board or the municipal body responsible
for assessment concerned, if the alteration concerns a unit of assessment or
a business establishment that is not entered on the roll in its name and if
the proceeding is based on a question of law;
4)
the Minister, if the alteration concerns an entry used in calculating a sum
payable by the Government under section 210, 254 or 257;
5)
(subparagraph repealed).
…
CHAPTER
XVIII
FISCAL
PROVISIONS
DIVISION
I
TAXABLE
IMMOVABLES
§
2. — Exceptions
Immovables
exempt from tax.
204.
The following are exempt from all municipal or school property taxes:
1)
an immovable included in a unit of assessment entered on the roll in the name
of the State or of the Société immobilière du Québec;
1.1)
an immovable included in a unit of assessment entered on the roll in the name
of the Crown in right of Canada or a mandatary thereof;
…
Taxable
immovable.
208.
Where an immovable that is not taxable under paragraph 1 or 1.1 of section
204 is occupied by a person other than a person referred to in that section
or a corporation that is a mandatary of the State, unless its owner is the
Société immobilière du Québec, the property taxes to which that immovable
would be subject without that exemption are levied on the lessee or, if there
is no lessee, on the occupant, and are payable by the lessee or occupant.
However, that rule does not apply in the case of an immovable referred to in
paragraph 1.1 of section 204 where, according to the legislation of the
Parliament of Canada relating to subsidies to municipalities that are to
stand in lieu of property taxes, and according to the instruments made under
that legislation, such a subsidy is paid in respect of the immovable notwithstanding
its being occupied as described in this paragraph.
…
DIVISION
III
BUSINESS
TAX
Business
tax.
232.
Every local municipality may, by by-law, impose a business tax on any person
entered on its roll of rental values carrying on, for pecuniary gain or not,
an economic or administrative activity in matters of finance, trade, industry
or services, a calling, an art, a profession or any other activity
constituting a means of profit, gain or livelihood, except an employment or
charge.
Imposition.
The
tax shall be imposed, according to the roll, on the occupant of each business
establishment on the basis of its rental value, at the rate fixed in the
by-law.
…
Exemptions.
236.
No business tax may be imposed by reason of
1)
an activity carried on by
(a)
the State or the Crown in right of Canada, a mandatary of the Crown in right
of Canada, the Société immobilière du Québec, the Corporation d'hébergement
du Québec, the Régie des installations olympiques, the Agence métropolitaine
de transport, the Société de la Place des Arts de Montréal or the École
nationale de police du Québec;
(b)
a local municipality, a community, a regional county municipality, a
mandatary of any such body or a transit corporation whose budget is, by law,
submitted to an elected municipal body;
(c)
a school board, a general and vocational college, a university establishment
within the meaning of the University Investments Act ( chapter I-17) or the
Conservatoire de musique et d'art dramatique du Québec;
(d)
a private educational institution operated by a non-profit body under a
permit issued under the Act respecting private education ( chapter E-9.1), a
private educational institution accredited for purposes of subsidies under
that Act or an institution whose instructional program is the subject of an
international agreement within the meaning of the Act respecting the
Ministère des Relations internationales ( chapter M-25.1.1);
(e)
a public institution within the meaning of the Act respecting health services
and social services ( chapter S-4.2), a health and social services agency
referred to in that Act or a public institution within the meaning of the Act
respecting health services and social services for Cree Native persons (
chapter S-5);
(f)
a private institution defined in paragraph 3 of section 99 or in section 551
of the first Act referred to in subparagraph e of this paragraph or defined
in section 12 of the second Act referred to, under a permit issued to the
institution under the Act that is applicable to the institution, and which is
an activity inherent in the mission of a local community service centre, a
residential and long-term care centre or a rehabilitation centre within the
meaning of the first Act referred to or of a reception centre within the
meaning of the second Act referred to;
(g)
a cooperative or non-profit organization under a childcare centre or day care
centre permit or an accredited home childcare coordinating office pursuant to
the Educational Childcare Act (chapter S-4.1.1);
(h)
a person recognized as a person responsible for home childcare under the Act
mentioned in subparagraph g, and which is an activity inherent in the mission
of such a person;
2)
an activity carried on by a public body or any person mentioned in section
204 for the purpose of allowing the use of a public road or works forming
part of it, or the use of works used for the protection of wildlife or of the
forest and situated in an unorganized territory;
3)
an activity carried on by an episcopal corporation, a fabrique, a religious
institution or a Church constituted as a legal person, as part of the
exercise of public worship;
4)
an activity carried on without pecuniary gain by a religious institution or a
fabrique in the immediate pursuit of the religious or charitable objects for
which it was established;
5)
an activity carried on by the recognized person in the immovable in respect
of which the recognition under section 243.4 has been granted and is in
force;
6)
(paragraph replaced) ;
7)
(paragraph replaced) ;
8)
(paragraph repealed) ;
9)
the operation of a cemetery without pecuniary gain;
10)
an activity carried on for agricultural or horticultural exhibition purposes
by an agricultural or horticultural society or by any person mentioned in
section 204;
11)
an activity related to an agricultural operation registered in accordance
with a regulation adopted pursuant to section 36.15 of the Act respecting the
Ministère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'Alimentation ( chapter
M-14);
12)
an activity by reason of which a forest producer's certificate is issued
pursuant to section 120 of the Forest Act ( chapter F-4.1);
13)
an activity consisting in furnishing to others a residential immovable other
than an immovable for which the operator is required to hold a classification
certificate issued under the Act respecting tourist accommodation
establishments (chapter E-14.2), or in furnishing to the persons residing in
the immovable or their guests such goods or related service as are reserved
for them, to the extent that the activity is carried on in the immovable or
dependencies thereof where the goods or related service are furnished;
14)
an activity carried on by the Société du Palais des congrès de Montréal in
the immovable designated under that name.
|
CHAPITRE
V
CONTENU
DU RÔLE D'ÉVALUATION FONCIÈRE
SECTION
I
UNITÉ
D'ÉVALUATION
§
1. — Règle générale
Immeubles.
31.
Sous réserve de la section IV, les immeubles situés sur le territoire d'une
municipalité locale sont portés au rôle d'évaluation foncière.
«rôle».
Pour
l'application du présent chapitre, le mot «rôle» signifie le rôle
d'évaluation foncière.
SECTION
III
AUTRES
MENTIONS
Valeur
imposable.
55.
Chaque fois que la loi dispose que seule une partie de la valeur d'un
immeuble est imposable ou qu'il est exempt de taxe foncière, le rôle fait
état de la valeur imposable de cet immeuble ou du fait de son exemption,
selon le cas.
Renseignement
inscrit.
Chaque
renseignement inscrit en vertu du présent article est accompagné d'une
mention de sa source législative.
CHAPITRE
X
RÉVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE ET RECOURS DEVANT LE TRIBUNAL
SECTION
I
RÉVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE
Modification
au rôle.
138.4.
Le demandeur peut, s'il n'a pas formé le recours prévu à l'article 138.5,
conclure avec l'évaluateur une entente sur une modification au rôle.
Entente.
L'entente
peut être conclue :
1°
au plus tard le trentième jour qui suit l'expédition par l'évaluateur de
l'écrit prévu au premier alinéa de l'article 138.3;
2°
avant l'expiration du délai applicable pour l'expédition de l'écrit prévu au
premier alinéa de l'article 138.3, si l'évaluateur ne l'a pas expédié dans ce
délai.
Écrit.
L'entente
doit être écrite et prévoir la date de prise d'effet de la modification au
rôle qui en découle.
Nullité.
Toute
entente conclue après l'expiration du délai prévu au deuxième alinéa est
nulle.
SECTION
II
RECOURS
DEVANT LE TRIBUNAL
Recours
au Tribunal.
138.5.
La personne qui a fait la demande de révision peut, si elle n'a pas conclu
une entente en vertu de l'article 138.4, former devant le Tribunal un recours
ayant le même objet que la demande.
Délai.
Si
une telle entente est conclue, les personnes suivantes autres que celle qui a
fait la demande de révision peuvent, dans les circonstances mentionnées le
cas échéant, former un recours devant le Tribunal pour contester la
modification découlant de l'entente:
1°
la personne au nom de laquelle l'unité d'évaluation ou l'établissement
d'entreprise visé par la modification est inscrit au rôle ou l'était
immédiatement avant celle-ci;
2°
la personne qui, par l'effet de la modification, a été inscrite au rôle à
titre de locataire ou d'occupant de l'unité d'évaluation;
3°
la municipalité locale, la commission scolaire ou l'organisme municipal
responsable de l'évaluation intéressé, si la modification concerne une unité
d'évaluation ou un établissement d'entreprise qui n'est pas inscrit au rôle à
son nom et si le recours est fondé sur une question de droit;
4°
le ministre, si la modification concerne une inscription utilisée dans le
calcul d'une somme payable par le gouvernement en vertu de l'un des articles
210, 254 et 257;
5°
(paragraphe abrogé).
[…]
CHAPITRE
XVIII
DISPOSITIONS
FISCALES
SECTION
I
IMMEUBLES
IMPOSABLES
§
2. — Exceptions
Immeubles
exempts de taxes.
204.
Sont exempts de toute taxe foncière, municipale ou scolaire:
1°
un immeuble compris dans une unité d'évaluation inscrite au nom de l'État ou
de la Société immobilière du Québec;
1.1°
un immeuble compris dans une unité d'évaluation inscrite au nom de la
Couronne du chef du Canada ou d'un mandataire de celle-ci;
[…]
Paiement
de taxes foncières.
208.
Lorsqu'un immeuble non imposable en vertu du paragraphe 1° ou 1.1° de
l'article 204 est occupé par un autre qu'une personne mentionnée à cet
article ou qu'une société qui est mandataire de l'État, sauf si son
propriétaire est la Société immobilière du Québec, les taxes foncières
auxquelles cet immeuble serait assujetti sans cette exemption sont imposées
au locataire ou, à défaut, à l'occupant, et sont payables par lui. Toutefois,
cette règle ne s'applique pas dans le cas d'un immeuble visé au paragraphe
1.1° de l'article 204 lorsque, suivant la législation du Parlement du Canada
relative aux subventions aux municipalités pour tenir lieu des taxes
foncières et selon les actes pris en vertu de cette législation, une telle
subvention est versée à l'égard de l'immeuble malgré l'occupation visée au
présent alinéa dont il fait l'objet.
[…]
SECTION
III
TAXE
D'AFFAIRES
Taxe
d'affaires.
232.
Toute municipalité locale peut, par règlement, imposer une taxe d'affaires
sur toute personne inscrite à son rôle de la valeur locative qui exerce, à
des fins lucratives ou non, une activité économique ou administrative en
matière de finance, de commerce, d'industrie ou de services, un métier, un
art, une profession ou toute autre activité constituant un moyen de profit,
de gain ou d'existence, sauf un emploi ou une charge.
Imposition.
La
taxe est imposée, selon le rôle, à l'occupant de chaque établissement
d'entreprise sur la base de la valeur locative de celui-ci, au taux fixé dans
le règlement.
[…]
Taxes
d'affaires.
236.
La taxe d'affaires ne peut être imposée en raison:
1°
d'une activité exercée par:
a)
l'État ou la Couronne du chef du Canada, un mandataire de la Couronne du chef
du Canada, la Société immobilière du Québec, la Corporation d'hébergement du
Québec, la Régie des installations olympiques, l'Agence métropolitaine de
transport, la Société de la Place des Arts de Montréal ou l'École nationale
de police du Québec;
b)
une municipalité locale, une Communauté, une municipalité régionale de comté,
un mandataire de l'une d'elles ou une société de transport dont le budget,
selon la loi, est soumis à un collège d'élus municipaux;
c)
une commission scolaire, un collège d'enseignement général et professionnel,
un établissement universitaire au sens de la Loi sur les investissements
universitaires ( chapitre I-17) ou le Conservatoire de musique et d'art
dramatique du Québec;
d)
un établissement d'enseignement privé tenu par un organisme à but non
lucratif conformément à un permis délivré en vertu de la Loi sur
l'enseignement privé ( chapitre E-9.1), un établissement d'enseignement privé
agréé aux fins de subventions en vertu de cette loi ou un établissement dont
le régime d'enseignement est l'objet d'une entente internationale au sens de
la Loi sur le ministère des Relations internationales ( chapitre M-25.1.1);
e)
un établissement public au sens de la Loi sur les services de santé et les
services sociaux ( chapitre S-4.2), une agence de la santé et des services
sociaux visée par cette loi ou un établissement public au sens de la Loi sur
les services de santé et les services sociaux pour les autochtones cris (
chapitre S-5);
f)
un établissement privé visé au paragraphe 3° de l'article 99 ou à l'article
551 de la première loi mentionnée au sous-paragraphe e du présent paragraphe
ou visé à l'article 12 de la seconde, conformément à un permis délivré à
l'établissement en vertu de celle de ces lois qui lui est applicable, et qui
constitue une activité propre à la mission d'un centre local de services
communautaires, d'un centre d'hébergement et de soins de longue durée ou d'un
centre de réadaptation au sens de la première de ces lois ou d'un centre
d'accueil au sens de la seconde;
g)
une coopérative ou un organisme à but non lucratif conformément à un permis
de centre de la petite enfance ou de garderie ou conformément à un agrément à
titre de bureau coordonnateur de la garde en milieu familial qui lui a été
délivré en vertu de la Loi sur les services de garde éducatifs à l'enfance
(chapitre S-4.1.1);
h)
une personne reconnue à titre de responsable d'un service de garde en milieu
familial, en vertu de la loi mentionnée au sous-paragraphe g, et qui
constitue une activité propre à la mission d'un tel responsable;
2°
de l'activité d'un organisme public ou d'une autre personne mentionnée à
l'article 204 exercée dans le but de fournir l'usage d'une voie publique ou
d'un ouvrage qui en fait partie, ou l'usage d'un ouvrage utilisé pour la
protection de la faune ou de la forêt et situé dans un territoire non
organisé;
3°
de l'activité d'une corporation épiscopale, d'une fabrique, d'une institution
religieuse ou d'une Église constituée en personne morale qui entre dans le
cadre de l'exercice du culte public;
4°
de l'activité exercée dans un but non lucratif dans la poursuite immédiate de
ses objets constitutifs de nature religieuse ou charitable par une institution
religieuse ou une fabrique;
5°
de l'activité exercée, dans l'immeuble visé par une reconnaissance en vigueur
et prévue à l'article 243.4, par la personne reconnue;
6°
(paragraphe remplacé) ;
7°
(paragraphe remplacé) ;
8°
(paragraphe abrogé) ;
9°
de l'exploitation dans un but non lucratif d'un cimetière;
10°
de l'activité exercée à des fins d'exposition agricole ou horticole par une
société d'agriculture ou d'horticulture ou par une autre personne mentionnée
à l'article 204;
11°
de l'activité reliée à une exploitation agricole enregistrée conformément à
un règlement adopté en vertu de l'article 36.15 de la Loi sur le ministère de
l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'Alimentation ( chapitre M-14);
12°
de l'activité en raison de laquelle est délivré un certificat de producteur
forestier en application de l'article 120 de la Loi sur les forêts ( chapitre
F-4.1);
13°
de l'activité consistant à fournir à autrui un immeuble résidentiel autre
qu'un immeuble dont l'exploitant doit être titulaire d'une attestation de
classification délivrée en vertu de la Loi sur les établissements
d'hébergement touristique ( chapitre E-14.2) ou consistant à fournir aux
personnes qui résident dans l'immeuble ou à leurs visiteurs un bien ou un
service connexe qui leur est réservé, dans la mesure où l'activité est
exercée dans l'immeuble ou dans ses dépendances où le bien ou le service
connexe est fourni;
14°
d'une activité exercée par la Société du Palais des congrès de Montréal dans
l'immeuble désigné sous ce nom.
|
Email this Content