Beaubier T.C.J.:
This appeal pursuant to the Informal Procedure was heard at Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, on July 2, 1998. The Appellant and his wife, Sylvia, testified.
The Appellant claimed the northern resident’s deduction for 1994 and 1995. It was disallowed. He appealed.
The assumptions in paragraph 10 of the Reply to the Notice of Appeal read:
10 In so reassessing the Appellant, the Minister made the following assumptions of fact:
(a) at all material times during the 1994 and 1995 Taxation Years:
(i) the Appellant maintained his principal residence (the “Residence”) in the city of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan:
a) the Appellant owned a house in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, inhabited by his wife and children;
b) the residential telephone listing for the house in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan was in the Appellant’s name;
c) the Appellant holds a professional membership with the Association of Professional Engineers of Saskatchewan;
d) the Appellant’s tax related mail (T4 slips, RRSP slips, donation receipts) was all sent to his Saskatoon address;
e) at all material times during the 1994 and 1995 Taxation Years, the Appellant’s principal place of residence was Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
(ii) the Appellant was employed by Cominco Ltd (the “Mine”) located at Polaris, Northwest Territories from January 1, 1994 to July 15, 1995;
(iii) the Appellant did not have income from a business with a permanent establishment outside the province of Saskatchewan;
(b) while at the Mine site, the Appellant stayed in an employer provided room at no cost to the Appellant;
(c) the Appellant’s employer did not include a taxable benefit on his T4 slips for the value of the room which is provided to him each year, or for the value of the meals that the Appellant was provided during the periods that he worked at the mine;
(d) the Appellant stayed at the Mine site for a period of 8 weeks and for the following 3 - 4 week period left the Prescribed Zone;
(e) the Appellant did not remain at the Mine for a period of 6 consecutive months;
(f) the Residence is not in a prescribed area as defined in section 7303 of the Income Tax Regulations (the “Regulations”).
At question is whether the Appellant met the requirements of the very first words of subsection 110.7(1) of the Income Tax Act in 1994 and 1995. They read:
110 7(1) Where, throughout a period (in this section referred to as the “qualifying period”) of not less than 6 consecutive months beginning or ending in a taxation year, a taxpayer who is an individual has resided in one or more particular areas each of which is a prescribed northern zone or prescribed intermediate zone for the year and files for the year a claim in prescribed form, there may be deducted in computing the taxpayer’s taxable income for the
year...
The Appellant is a professional engineer who was born and raised in Trail, British Columbia. He graduated from the University of British Columbia in 1983 and became an employee of Cominco. He first went to Yellowknife, Northwest Territories where he met and married Sylvia. In 1985 he was transferred to a mine near Saskatoon. In August, 1990, Cominco transferred him to a mining operation at Polaris, Northwest Territories, 1,000 miles north of Yellowknife. He was told that it was a two year assignment. The nearest village was Resolute Bay, 80 miles away, to which there was access by air. Polaris was, and is, nothing more than the Cominco mine.
The family stayed in the home that he and his wife had joint title to in Saskatoon. The Appellant became the operations manager of the mine. He had a room and bathroom which were locked and were permanently his. He put his personal goods there and subscribed for a personal telephone for the room. His room and board were free and were not treated as a taxable benefit by Cominco or by Revenue Canada. His service was six weeks in and three weeks out throughout the year, although once he was in for nine straight weeks and sometimes the service was eight weeks in and four weeks out.
Cominco left him there and this continued until July 15, 1995, when he quit Cominco. Until 1994 he reported his residence as Saskatchewan. But in 1994 he reported it as the Northwest Territories. In 1995 he resided in Saskatoon on the last day of the year and reported Saskatchewan as his residence at that time.
The Appellant’s driver’s licence was from the Northwest Territories. His health card was from Saskatchewan. There was no bank in Polaris; his banking was done in Saskatoon. He was registered as a professional engineer in Northwest Territories and as a “non right to practice” engineer in Saskatchewan.
The Appellant had was a member of a karate club in Polaris and his social life revolved around the mine and his fellow workers. Sylvia White developed her own friends. When Glen was in Saskatoon, he dealt with family matters. Sylvia handled all household matters and disciplined the children. The household phone in Saskatoon remained in Glen’s name. However, the family drifted further apart and by 1994 it was clear to them that Glen’s principal residence was in Polaris and Sylvia’s residence was in Saskatoon. On July 15, 1995 Glen ended that by quitting Cominco and moving to Saskatoon.
The Appellant’s position is that he resided in both Saskatoon and Polaris in 1994 and 1995, but that his principal residence was in Polaris.
The Respondent is of the view that the Appellant did not “throughout a period ... of not less than 6 consecutive months ...” (within subsection 110.7(1)) reside in Polaris. In the Respondent’s view, the three weeks out removed the continuity.
The Appellant’s situation is exactly that of many professional engineers, oil, construction, timber and mining workers in Canada today who work all over Canada and throughout the world. But by claiming dual residency, the Appellant is implicitly admitting that his alternating three week periods in Saskatoon were periods of residence. There is a simple basis for accepting this: intention and physical presence and compliance with other tests of residence. But once that is accepted, the Appellant can no longer establish continuous residence in Polaris.
In this case Glen White was alternating his residence every six and three weeks. The only evidence of his physical presence establishing the alternate residence in Saskatoon in 1994 is the alternating three week periods. His pattern of alternative residences established in 1994 continued in 1995 until July 15. Since that is the case, he has not established a continuous residence for six consecutive months in Polaris, Northwest Territories for either year. The onus is on Glen White to establish that.
For this reason his appeals are dismissed.
Appeal allowed in part.
Email this Content