2 May 2005 External T.I. 2004-0103081E5 - test wind turbines - CRCE

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.

Principal Issues: whether proposed exploratory wind turbines will qualify as test wind turbines

Position: yes, provided proposed amendments to Regulation 1219(3) are promulgated

Reasons: favourable technical opinion from NRCan

2004-010308
XXXXXXXXXX T. Harris
(613) 957-2114
May 2, 2005

Dear XXXXXXXXXX:

Re: XXXXXXXXXX Wind Farm Project

We are writing in response to your request of November 10, 2004 concerning the eligibility of each of XXXXXXXXXX planned wind turbines to be installed by XXXXXXXXXX (the "Corporation") as a "test wind turbine" within the meaning of the proposed amendments to subsection 1219(3) of the Income Tax Regulations (the "Regulations"), that were published in Part I of the Canada Gazette, Vol. 139, No. 15 on April 9, 2005 (the "Proposed Amendments").

The Corporation is pursuing the development of a proposed wind farm project involving wind turbines to be located in XXXXXXXXXX (the "Project"). XXXXXXXXXX has negotiated a lease agreement, as well as an option to obtain future land rights on an exclusive basis if the wind farm is expanded. This lease agreement has been transferred to the Corporation. The Corporation will own all of the wind turbines relating to the Project and will also develop and operate the Project. One of the XXXXXXXXXX wind turbines referred to above (collectively referred to herein as the "Test Turbines") will be located at each of the following sites:

XXXXXXXXXX.

The capacity of each of the XXXXXXXXXX Test Turbines to be installed as described above will be XXXXXXXXXX megawatts. The planned nameplate capacity for the Project is XXXXXXXXXX MW. It is anticipated that each of the Test Turbines will be commissioned and enter into service in XXXXXXXXXX.

Natural Resources Canada ("NR Can") has reviewed the applications for technical opinions on the XXXXXXXXXX Test Turbines (the "Applications"; NR Can file numbers XXXXXXXXXX). NRCan has indicated that the cost of the proposed substation for the Project is relatively high when compared with other wind energy projects because the project will be connecting to a XXXXXXXXXX kV transmission line as opposed to a XXXXXXXXXX kV transmission line. Connection at this higher voltage level entails additional costs for the substation. In addition, the substation will be dual voltage (designed for a XXXXXXXXXX transformer) so that the substation will have sufficient capacity to handle the electrical energy for the entire proposed wind energy project.

It is our understanding, based upon representations and information provided on behalf of the Corporation in the Applications, that:

(i) at least 50% of the capital cost of the depreciable property to be used in the Project is projected to be the capital cost of property that is described in Class 43.1 of Schedule II to the Regulations or that would be such property but for subsection 1219(1) of the Regulations;

(ii) each of the Test Turbines will be a fixed location device that is part of a wind energy conversion system that would, but for section 1219 of the Regulations, be property of the Corporation that is described in subparagraph (d)(v) of Class 43.1 of Schedule II;

(iii) the Project will be connected through a single point of interconnection to a transmission grid owned by a power company with which the Corporation deals at arm's length and the Project will not share with any other project a point of interconnection to an electrical energy transmission or distribution system;

(iv) the primary purpose for installing each of the Test Turbines is to test the level of electrical energy produced by the Test Turbine from wind at its respective place of installation;

(v) there will be at least 1,500 meters between the respective bases of the Test Turbines and no other test wind turbine (as defined in proposed subsection 1219(3) of the Regulations as described in the Proposed Amendments) will be installed within 1,500 meters of any of the Test Turbines;

(vi) no other wind energy conversion system will be installed within 1,500 meters of any of the Test Turbines until the level of electrical energy produced from wind by such Test Turbine has been tested for at least 120 calendar days; and

(vii) the electrical energy produced from wind by the Test Turbines will, in aggregate, not exceed 20% of the planned nameplate capacity for the Project.

Opinion

Provided that:

(a) the Project will be undertaken as described in the Applications with the Test Turbines being installed and used for the testing program described therein;

(b) the facts and representations relating to this Project, including those referred to above, remain as stated in the Application; and

(c) subsections 1219(1) and (3) of the Regulations are amended substantially in the form contained in the Proposed Amendments;

it is our opinion that each of the XXXXXXXXXX Test Turbines will constitute a test wind turbine for purposes of subsection 1219(1) and (3) of the Regulations, as amended by the Proposed Amendments, at the time the respective wind energy conversion system that they form part of would, but for section 1219 of the Regulations, be property included in Class 43.1 to Schedule II of the Regulations because of subparagraph (d)(v) thereof.

Other Comments

(I) Except as expressly stated, our opinion does not imply acceptance or approval of any income tax implications relating to the Project. In particular, we are not providing any confirmation as to the extent to which the cost of any particular equipment, such as the proposed electrical substation, may be considered to be a "Canadian renewable and conservation expense" ("CRCE"), as defined in subsection 66.1(6) of the Income Tax Act (the "Act").

(II) Pursuant to paragraph (g.1) of the definition of "Canadian exploration expense" ("CEE") in subsection 66.1(6) of Act, expenses incurred by a taxpayer that qualify for inclusion in CRCE will be included in the taxpayer's CEE. Consequently, a taxpayer that qualifies as a "principal-business corporation" may be able to renounce amounts, in respect of the CEE incurred by it, to an investor that has acquired a "flow-through share" in its capital stock. However, amounts may only be renounced to a particular investor in respect of CEE incurred by the "principal-business corporation" on or after the date the agreement in writing relating to the acquisition of the flow-through share was made.

(III) Pursuant to subsection 66(12.6) of the Act, qualifying expenses incurred by a "principal-business corporation" in a particular calendar year may be deemed, in certain circumstances, to have been incurred by the "principal-business corporation" on the last day of the immediately preceding calendar year (this provision is generally referred to as the "look-back rule"). Where a "principal-business corporation" renounces CEE pursuant to subsection 66(12.6) of the Act having reliance on the "look-back rule" to an investor who has acquired a flow-through share of the "principal-business corporation", it will be subject to tax under Part XII.6, as determined under subsection 211.91(1) of the Act.

(IV) Where the amount of CEE that a "principal-business corporation" has renounced relying on the "look-back rule" exceeds the actual amount that it is entitled to renounce due to its failure to incur sufficient CEE in the next calendar year, the "principal-business corporation" must file form T101B with the Minister of National Revenue on or before March 31 of Year 3 (with Year 1 being the year in which the agreement to issue the flow-through shares was entered into) and must apply the excess fully to reduce one or more of the renunciations. Except for the purpose of Part XII.6 of the Act, any amount that has been renounced to any person will be deemed under paragraph 66(12.73)(d) of the Act, after the form T101B is filed, to have always been reduced by the portion of the excess identified therein in respect of that renunciation.

Yours truly,

for Director
Reorganizations and Resources Division
Income Tax Rulings Directorate
Policy and Planning Branch

c.c. Micheline Brown

Engineering, Research and Technical Team
Industrial Programs Division
Office of Energy Efficiency
Natural Resources Canada
580 Booth St., 18th Floor
Ottawa ON K1A 0E4