John
B
Goetz:—This
is
an
appeal
by
the
appellant
with
respect
to
an
assessment
concerning
his
1977
taxation
year.
The
appellant
claimed
as
a
deduction
from
his
income
the
sum
of
$685.08
which
was
disallowed
by
the
respondent.
In
assessing
the
appellant,
the
respondent
relied,
inter
alia,
upon
section
12,
paragraph
18(1)(a)
and
subsection
248(1)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act,
SC
1970-71-72,
c
63,
as
amended.
Facts
The
appellant
is
74
years
of
age
and
is
a
retired
or
semi-active
insurance
salesman.
He
indicated
that
two-thirds
of
his
income,
now
that
he
is
retired,
comes
from
revenue
from
investments.
He
sought
to
deduct
the
sum
of
$685.08
from
his
income,
which
figure
related
to
subscriptions
to
the
Financial
Times
and
the
Toronto
Globe
and
Mail
—Business
Section;
postage
used
in
forwarding
stocks
and
bonds
to
his
broker,
correspondence
with
respect
to
errors
and
accounts
with
his
broker
and
trust
companies
with
respect
to
dividends.
He
also
claimed
car
expenses
because
mail
was
not
delivered
to
the
place
where
he
lived
and
he
had
to
drive
four
miles
a
day
in
order
to
pick
up
daily
issues
of
the
Globe
and
Mail
and
any
other
correspondence
relating
to
his
investment
activities.
He
also
claimed
certain
accounting
fees
relating
to
his
dealings
in
stocks
and
bonds
and
he
said
he
spends
three
to
four
hours
a
day
on
speculating
as
to
what
he
would
do
with
respect
to
his
investment
portfolio.
He
claimed
for
telephone
calls
when
he
would
call
in
to
a
broker,
seeking
advice;
in
other
situations
he
would
call
collect
if
he
were
buying
or
selling
securities.
Findings
The
appellant,
to
be
successful,
must
qualify
under
paragraph
18(1)(a)
of
the
Act
which
reads
as
follows:
(1)
In
computing
the
income
of
a
taxpayer
from
a
business
or
property
no
deduction
shall
be
made
in
respect
of
(a)
an
outlay
or
expense
except
to
the
extent
that
it
was
made
or
incurred
by
the
taxpayer
for
the
purpose
of
gaining
or
producing
income
from
the
business
or
property;
Paragraph
20(1)(b)
of
the
Act
reads
as
follows:
(1)
Notwithstanding
paragraphs
18(1)(a),
(b)
and
(h),
in
computing
a
taxpayer’s
income
for
a
taxation
year
from
a
business
or
property,
there
may
be
deducted
such
of
the
following
amounts
as
are
wholly
applicable
to
that
source
or
such
part
of
the
following
amounts
as
may
reasonably
be
regarded
as
applicable
thereto:
(b)
such
amount
as
the
taxpayer
may
claim
in
respect
of
any
business,
not
exceeding
10%
of
his
cumulative
eligible
capital
in
respect
of
the
business
at
the
end
of
the
year.
“Business”
is
defined
as
follows
in
subsection
248(1):
“Business”
includes
a
profession,
calling,
trade,
manufacture
or
undertaking
of
any
kind
whatever
and
includes
an
adventure
or
concern
in
the
nature
of
trade
but
does
not
include
an
office
or
employment.
Unfortunately,
the
appellant
does
not
qualify
for
a
deduction
under
the
definition
of
“business”
or
for
the
purpose
of
gaining
income
under
paragraph
18(1)(a)
of
the
Act
in
that
he
clearly
stated:
“I
am
not
in
business”,
and
further,
“I
am
a
hobby
investor
to
keep
me
from
being
senile”.
As
a
result,
it
is
quite
clear
that
he
does
not
qualify
under
section
18
or
section
20
and
I
therefore
dismiss
the
appeal.
Appeal
dismissed.
Email this Content