Cameco - Federal Court finds that s. 231.1(1)(d) does not accord CRA an unfettered right to interview taxpayer personnel

Cameco appealed transfer-pricing assessments to the Tax Court. CRA then audited subsequent years, where essentially the same issues arose, and applied to the Federal Court for an order compelling Cameco to submit 25 listed employees of it and subsidiaries to CRA interviews.

McVeigh J rejected this application. First, CRA essentially was reading the requirement in s. 231.1(1)(d) - that personnel at the audited premises “answer all proper questions relating to the administration…of this Act” – out of context. S. 231.1(1)(d) was subject to the requirement in the s. 231.1(1) mid-amble that it must relate to the matters (principally respecting the audit of books and records) referenced in s. 231.1(1)(a) and (b).

Second, the Tax Court rules contained various procedural safeguards respecting the examination of the taxpayer’s personnel. In the context of the earlier years being under appeal, CRA’s requested interviews would have represented an end run around the Tax Court rules.

Neal Armstrong. Summary of Cameco Corp. v. Canada (National Revenue), 2017 FC 763 under s. 231.1(1)(d), Tax Court Rules, Rule 95 and Statutory Interpretation - Redundancy.