Please note that the following document, although believed to be correct at the time of issue, may not represent the current position of the CRA.
Prenez note que ce document, bien qu'exact au moment émis, peut ne pas représenter la position actuelle de l'ARC.
Please note that the following document, although believed to be correct at the time of issue, may not represent the current position of the CCRA.
Prenez note que ce document, bien qu'exact au moment émis, peut ne pas représenter la position actuelle de l'ADRC.
Principal Issues:
Will CCRA change its position concerning our interpretation of "only occasionally employed" for purposes of the application of subparagraph 212(1)(h)(vi) of the Act and apply the decision of the court in the Louis V. Nanne v. The Queen 2000 DTC 1653 (TCC) ("Nanne") case?
Position: Yes
Reasons:
Where the facts in a particular situation are similar to the facts in the Nanne case, we will apply the decision of the Nanne case on a case-by case basis.
XXXXXXXXXX 2003-018271
G. Allen
January 30, 2003
Dear XXXXXXXXXX:
Re: Interpretation of "Occasionally Employed" - Subparagraph 212(1)(h)(vi)
This letter is a reply to your letter dated August 15, 2002, wherein you requested our interpretation of the meaning of "only occasionally employed" in Canada for the purposes of subparagraph 212(1)(h)(vi) of the Income Tax Act (the "Act"). Specifically, you request our opinion concerning the maximum length of employment in Canada during a taxation year that we would consider falling within the meaning of "only occasionally employed" in Canada, for purposes of subparagraph 212(1)(h)(vi) of the Act.
The Canada Customs and Revenue Agency's previous position concerning the interpretation of "only occasionally employed", as reflected in Interpretation Bulletin 76R2 (IT-76R2) and technical interpretation E9707916, for purposes of the application of subparagraph 212(1)(h)(vi) of the Act, has been revised to reflect the decision of the court in the Louis V. Nanne v. The Queen 2000 DTC 1653 (TCC) ("Nanne") case. IT- 76R2 will be revised to reflect this new position concerning our interpretation of the phrase "only occasionally employed".
Based on the facts and the decision in the Nanne case, in general, we accept the methodology used by the court in determining whether an individual is "only occasionally employed" in Canada for the purposes of subparagraph 212(1)(h)(vi) of the Act. However, we have no specific comment to make concerning the maximum length of employment in Canada during a taxation year that we would consider falling within the meaning of "only occasionally employed" in Canada. Where the facts in a particular situation are similar to the facts in the Nanne case, the decision of the court in the Nanne case will be applied on a case-by-case basis.
We trust the above comments will be of assistance.
Yours truly,
Roberta Albert, CA
for Director
Financial Industries Division
Income Tax Rulings Directorate
All rights reserved. Permission is granted to electronically copy and to print in hard copy for internal use only. No part of this information may be reproduced, modified, transmitted or redistributed in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, or stored in a retrieval system for any purpose other than noted above (including sales), without prior written permission of Canada Revenue Agency, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0L5
© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2003
Tous droits réservés. Il est permis de copier sous forme électronique ou d'imprimer pour un usage interne seulement. Toutefois, il est interdit de reproduire, de modifier, de transmettre ou de redistributer de l'information, sous quelque forme ou par quelque moyen que ce soit, de facon électronique, méchanique, photocopies ou autre, ou par stockage dans des systèmes d'extraction ou pour tout usage autre que ceux susmentionnés (incluant pour fin commerciale), sans l'autorisation écrite préalable de l'Agence du revenu du Canada, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0L5.
© Sa Majesté la Reine du Chef du Canada, 2003