John
B
Goetz:—This
is
an
appeal
relating
to
the
appellant’s
1976
taxation
year
whereby
the
Minister
asserts
that
certain
monies
paid
out
to
the
appellant
in
the
year
1976
under
a
registered
retirement
savings
plan
(RRSP)
were
income
to
the
appellant.
Facts
The
appellant
and
the
respondent
agreed
that
the
facts
are
hereinafter
set
forth
and
contained
in
the
appellant’s
notice
of
appeal
would
be
accepted
by
both
sides.
The
above-mentioned
facts
read
as
follows:
Early
in
1976,
within
60
days
of
the
end
of
the
1975
taxation
year,
I
entered
into
a
Registered
Retirement
Savings
Plan
(RRSP)
with
the
Bank
of
Montreal
and
deposited
the
amount
of
$1,635.62.
The
name
of
the
RRSP
was
the
First
Canadian
Retirement
Savings
Plan
and
the
Trustee
was
the
Royal
Trust
Company.
In
September
of
1976
I
decided
that
I
no
longer
wished
to
participate
in
the
Plan
and
requested
the
Bank
of
Montreal
to
cancel
the
Plan.
On
October
6,
1976
I
received
a
cheque
in
the
amount
of
$1,722.34
representing
the
premiums
of
$1,635.62,
interest
of
$90.40
less
a
fee
of
$3.68.
In
filing
my
income
tax
return
for
the
1976
taxation
year
I
excluded
the
payment,
except
for
the
interest
portion
from
my
taxable
income.
I
subsequently
received
notice
of
assessment
No
38761851
dated
August
9,
1977
wherein
I
was
notified
that
the
full
amount
of
the
payment,
ie
$1,722.34
had
been
added
to
my
previously
reported
taxable
income.
The
appellant
rests
his
appeal
on
the
interpretation
of
subsection
146(15)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act,
SC
1970-71-72,
c
63,
as
amended,
which
reads
as
follows:
(15)
Notwithstanding
anything
in
this
section,
where
an
amount
is
received
ina
taxation
year
as
a
benefit
under
a
registered
retirement
savings
plan
that
was
not,
at
the
end
of
the
year
in
which
the
plan
was
entered
into,
a
registered
retirement
Savings
plan,
such
part,
if
any,
of
the
amount
so
received
as
may
be
prescribed
shall
be
deemed,
for
the
purposes
of
this
Act,
to
have
been
received
in
the
taxation
year
otherwise
than
as
a
benefit
or
other
payment
under
a
registered
retirement
Savings
plan.
The
respondent’s
position
is
simply
that
the
monies
received
by
the
appellant
in
the
year
1976
were
received
from
a
registered
retirement
savings
plan
as
income
in
that
year.
He
relies
upon
subsection
(8)
of
section
146
of
the
Act
which
reads
as
follows:
(8)
There
shall
be
included
in
computing
the
income
of
a
taxpayer
for
a
taxation
year
all
amounts
received
by
him
in
the
year
as
a
benefit
out
of
or
under
a
registered
retirement
savings
plan.
The
respondent
also
relied
upon
paragraph
(b)
of
subsection
(1)
of
section
146
which
reads
as
follows:
(1)
In
this
section,
(b)
“benefit”
includes
any
amount
received
out
of
or
under
a
retirement
savings
plan
otherwise
than
as
a
premium
and
without
restricting
the
generality
of
the
foregoing
includes
any
amount
paid
to
an
annuitant
under
the
plan
(i)
in
accordance
with
the
terms
of
the
plan,
(ii)
resulting
from
an
amendment
to
or
modification
of
the
plan,
or
(iii)
resulting
from
the
termination
of
the
plan;
Counsel
for
the
respondent
asserted
that
the
monies
received
by
the
appellant
in
1976,
as
a
result
of
the
termination
of
the
plan,
were
considered
a
benefit
and
consequently
income
pursuant
to
subsection
(8)
of
section
146.
In
the
case
of
Alan
E
Valdes
v
MNR,
[1979]
CTC
2463;
79
DTC
410,
the
learned
Frank
Dubrule,
Esq,
QC,
Assistant
Chairman
of
the
Board,
took
the
position
that
subsection
146(15)
had
no
application
to
the
facts
in
that
case
which
were
quite
similar
to
the
facts
in
this
case.
At
pages
2464
and
412
respectively,
Mr
Dubrule
says:
His
(counsel
for
the
Minister)
submission
was
that
that
subsection
(146(15))
was
designed
to
assist
persons
who
paid
money
into
a
retirement
savings
plan
which
was
not
registered
and
accepted
by
the
Minister
of
National
Revenue
in
one
year,
but
it
was
so
registered
by
the
Minister
and
accepted
as
a
Registered
Retirement
Savings
Plan
in
the
next
year
or
at
some
later
time.
In
that
way
the
amount
paid
out
at
a
later
date
would
not
be
subject
to
double
taxation;
namely,
if
it
were
not
a
deduction
when
the
premium
was
paid
in,
then
it
would
not
be
income
to
the
recipient
when
paid
out
if,
of
course,
there
were
a
regulation
to
exempt
it.
His
suggestion
was
the
regulation
presumably
would
exempt
an
amount
equal
to
the
amount
paid
into
the
plan
if
the
plan
was
not
a
Registered
Retirement
Savings
Plan.
Consequently,
it
was
his
submission
that
that
subsection
has
no
application
in
the
circumstances
of
this
case.
Mr
Ruskin
(counsel
for
the
Minister)
also
pointed
out
that,
to
his
knowledge
and
from
his
search,
he
could
find
no
regulation
made
pursuant
to
section
146(15).
(Italics
mine.)
I
wholly
concur
with
my
learned
brother
Member
of
the
Board
that
subsection
146(15)
has
no
application
and
I
therefore
dismiss
the
appeal
accordingly.
Appeal
dismissed.
Email this Content