Income Tax Severed Letters - 2010-11-05

Ruling

2010 Ruling 2010-0358861R3 - Variation of trust indenture

Unedited CRA Tags
248(1), 245
IFRS-related amendments not disposition

Principal Issues: Whether the variation of a trust indenture to ensure compliance with the new International Financial Reporting Standards would result in (1) a disposition by the trust of its assets or in a resettlement of the trust, (2) a disposition by the existing unitholders of their units, (3) the application of GAAR.

Position: (1) no (2) no (3) no

Reasons: The amendments to the trust indenture are not substantial - previous rulings on this similar issue.

Technical Interpretation - External

1 November 2010 External T.I. 2010-0368211E5 - Revenues of a REIT

Unedited CRA Tags
122.1(1) "real estate investment trust"; 108(5); 104(21)

Principal Issues: Where a trust earns income through a subtrust, what amount, if any, would be viewed as the trust's revenues for the year derived from capital gains from dispositions of real or immovable properties for purposes of paragraphs (b) and (c) of the definition "real estate investment trust" in subsection 122.1(1), if the subtrust makes a designation in respect of the trust pursuant to subsection 104(21)?

Position: In the circumstances described in the opinion, the trust's revenues derived from capital gains from dispositions of real or immovable properties would include the portion of the net taxable gains of the subtrust in respect of which the subtrust has made a valid designation in respect of the trust pursuant to subsection 104(21) for the year. The trust's revenues derived from capital gains from dispositions of real or immovable properties would also include amounts that the subtrust has made payable to it in the year in respect of the non-taxable portion of capital gains that were realized by the subtrust from dispositions of real or immovable properties.

Reasons: To the extent that a valid designation is made in respect of the taxable portion of a capital gain under subsection 104(21) in respect of the trust, the amount is deemed to be a taxable capital gain for the year of the trust from the disposition by the trust of capital property and as such, is not deemed by subsection 108(5) to be income from an interest in the subtrust and not from any other source. The trust's revenues in respect of the designated amount are derived from capital gains from dispositions of the particular properties in respect of which the subtrust realized capital gains. Similarly, to the extent that the subtrust has made amounts payable to the trust in the year in respect of the non-taxable portion of capital gains realized by the subtrust from dispositions of real or immovable properties, the trust's revenues in respect of the amounts would be derived from capital gains from dispositions of the particular properties in respect of which the subtrust realized the capital gains.

28 October 2010 External T.I. 2010-0383221E5 - Beneficial Ownership - Change of title on property

Unedited CRA Tags
40(2), 54(1), 69(1), 248(1)

Principal Issues: Whether a change in legal title on the property that is owned by a parent, but for which the taxpayer has legal title, would result in a capital gain when the taxpayer's name is removed from legal title.

Position: In and of itself, a change in legal title would not cause a disposition to occur, and a capital gain would not be triggered.

Reasons: The definition of a disposition in ss.248(1), excludes any transfer of the property, where there is no change in beneficial ownership.

28 October 2010 External T.I. 2010-0374311E5 - Taxable Benefits - Recreational Vehicle

Unedited CRA Tags
6(1)(a), 15(1)

Principal Issues: What is Canada Revenue Agency's ("CRA") basis for calculating the personal use taxable benefit of a corporate asset?

Position: It is a question of fact. Generally, fair market value.

Reasons: The CRA's general position on the taxable status of employee benefits is discussed in Interpretation Bulletin IT-470R (Consolidated) - "Employees' Fringe Benefits" and the Employer's Guide T4130. Generally speaking, it is accepted that the value of an employment benefit is its fair market value. As noted in paragraph 10 of IT-470R, where a vacation property owned by an employer is used for vacation purposes by an employee, the employee's family or both, there is a taxable benefit conferred on the employee under paragraph 6(1)(a) the value of which is equivalent to the fair market value of the accommodation less any amount which the employee paid to the employer.

27 October 2010 External T.I. 2010-0379331E5 - Medical Expense Tax Credit

Unedited CRA Tags
118.2(2) Reg 5700

Principal Issues: Whether the following expenses are eligible medical expenses for the purposes of the medical expense tax credit: 1) a dock landing gate as a safety measure associated with the use of a wheelchair, 2) the application of 3M window film on all interior windows of a house to filter out UV rays, 3) an air purifier for a house because of asthma and a compromised immune system

Position: 1) Yes 2) no 3) Yes

Reasons: 1) Paragraph 118.2(2)(l.2) of the Act provides for reasonable expenses relating to renovations or alterations (including extensions) to a dwelling of the patient who lacks normal physical development or has a severe and prolonged mobility impairment, to enable the patient to gain access to, or to be mobile or functional within, the dwelling. 2) The application of 3M window film on all interior windows of a house to filter out UV rays is not a prescribed device under paragraph 5700(i) of the Regulations. There is also no other provision under subsection 118.2(2) of the Act which would permit the cost of the 3M window film to be claimed as an eligible medical expense for the purposes of the METC. 3) Under the list of prescribed devices or equipment in section 5700 of the Regulations, paragraph (c.1) describes an "air or water filter or purifier for use by an individual who is suffering from a severe chronic respiratory ailment or a severe chronic immune system disregulation to cope with or overcome that ailment or disregulation".

27 October 2010 External T.I. 2010-0362781E5 - Travel Expenses and Allowances

Unedited CRA Tags
6(1)(b), 6(6), 8(1)(h), 8(1)(h.1), 8(4) and 8(10)

Principal Issues: The deductibility of travel expenses (i.e., transportation, lodging and meals) by an employee or whether the employer can pay a tax-free allowance to the employee where an employee works on a construction site that is a road and is unable to return home at the end of the day.

Position: Question of fact. However, employee-paid amounts may be deductible or employer-paid amounts may be non-taxable in the particular circumstances.

Reasons: Various.

26 October 2010 External T.I. 2009-0339951E5 - Canadian Branch Tax

Unedited CRA Tags
219 ITA and Article X(6) Canada-US Treaty

Principal Issues: The application of Article X(6) of the Canada-US Treaty to certain US entities carrying on business in Canada through a permanent establishment.

Position: Question of fact.

Reasons: See our comments.

26 October 2010 External T.I. 2010-0373791E5 - Taxable Benefit for tuition

Unedited CRA Tags
6(1)()

Principal Issues: What is Canada Revenue Agency's ("CRA") accepted method for calculating a taxable employment benefit regarding reduced student tuitions?

Position: It is a question of fact.

Reasons: The CRA's general position on the taxable status of employee benefits is discussed in Interpretation Bulletin IT-470R (Consolidated) - Employees' Fringe Benefits and the Employer's Guide T4130. As noted in paragraph 20 of IT-470R, where an educational institution that charges tuition fees provides tuition free of charge or at a reduced amount to an employee of the institution, or to the spouse or children of the employee, the fair market value of the benefit must be included in the employee's income.

26 October 2010 External T.I. 2010-0369251E5 - Revenues of a REIT

Unedited CRA Tags
122.1(1) "real estate investment trust"

Principal Issues: Where a trust earns income through a limited partnership, what is the amount of a trust's "revenues" derived from the sources described in paragraphs (b) and (c) of the definition "real estate investment trust" in subsection 122.1(1)?

Position: In the circumstances described, it would be the revenues of the partnership to the extent of the trust's share of income/loss for the period.

Reasons: As the partnership is not a separate taxpayer from the partner for the purpose of computing its revenues, the revenues of the partnership are considered to be the revenues of the partners.

26 October 2010 External T.I. 2010-0372621E5 - Donation by will claimed by spouse

Unedited CRA Tags
118.1(1); 118.1(3); 118.1(5)

Principal Issues: Can an individual claim a tax credit for a charitable donation made by his/her deceased spouse's will in the year in which the spouse died?

Position: Yes

Reasons: In accordance with subsection 118.1(5) of the Act, charitable gifts made by an individual in his or her will are deemed to have been made by the individual in the year of death. The CRA's administrative practice allows a taxpayer to initially choose which spouse or common law partner will report a donation or gift and allows for the subsequent transfer of any carry-forward balances from one to the other. Since the gift made by an individual's will is deemed to be made in the year of death, the donation is available for the administrative practice of spouses sharing donations.

26 October 2010 External T.I. 2010-0380431E5 - Wholly dependent tax credit

Unedited CRA Tags
118(1)(b); 118(4); 118 (5)

Principal Issues: Can separated parents each claim the wholly dependent person tax credit for a child they have custody of?

Position: Yes.

Reasons: Assuming all conditions of paragraph 118(1)(b) of the Act are met and none of the limitations in subsections 118(4) and (5) apply, each parent would be able to claim the wholly dependent person tax credit for the child they have custody of.

22 September 2010 External T.I. 2008-0302591E5 - clinical fellow- fellowships

Unedited CRA Tags
5(1), 6(1), 6(3), 56(1)(o), 56(1)(n)(i)

Principal Issues: Are amounts paid to a radiation oncologist, clinical fellow included in income as employment income, research grant or fellowship?

Position: It is a question of fact. The CRA would likely consider that the amounts paid would be taxable as employment income.

Reasons: The CRA would likely consider that the amounts paid to the radiation oncologist, clinical fellow would be taxable as employment income but we do not have all the facts.

25 June 2010 External T.I. 2010-0360131E5 - First-Time Home Buyers' Tax Credit (HBTC)

Unedited CRA Tags
118.05(2), 118.05(4)

Principal Issues: (1) Can an individual who may otherwise be eligible for the HBTC be disqualified if a current home owner is also on legal title with the individual as part owner of a home? (2) What is the acceptable apportionment of the HBTC between the parties in that case?

Position: (1) No, provided that definition of a "qualifying home" is satisfied in subsection 118.05(1) and the qualifying home is legally registered. (2) Provided that multiple parties are eligible to claim the HBTC in respect of a particular qualifying home, the maximum total amount that can be claimed by all the parties is $750. If the individuals cannot agree as to what amount each may claim, the Minister may fix the portions. In this case, only the couple may be eligible for the HBTC since the parents of one of the spouses are already home owners themselves and would therefore not be considered to be first-time home buyers thereby violating one of the conditions in the definition of a "qualifying home" in subsection 118.05(1) of the Act. Consequently, if the couple is eligible to claim the HBTC, only the couple will be able to claim the credit of $750.

Reasons: (1) None of the conditions required to qualify for HBTC in section 118.05 would be violated if a current home owner is on legal title as part owner of the qualifying home. (2) Subsection 118.05(4) of the Act and definition of a "qualifying home" in subsection 118.05(1).

Conference

8 June 2010 STEP National Roundtable Q. 15, 2010-0363111C6 - Residency of a Trust

Principal Issues: 1. Is the concept of mind and management from the Garron case fact specific, or representative of general principles? 2. Does CRA propose to apply the mind and management concept to Canadian resident trusts, for implications such as provincial tax?

Position: 1. & 2. The residence of a trust in Canada, or in a particular province, is a question of fact, to be determined based on the unique facts in each case.

Reasons: This is a longstanding CRA position, as is noted in IT-447.

Technical Interpretation - Internal

19 October 2010 Internal T.I. 2007-0261551I7 - Barbados Exempt Insurance Companies (EICs)

Unedited CRA Tags
Canada-Barbados Tax Agreement - Articles IV and XXX(3)

Principal Issues: (1) Is a Barbados-incorporated EIC "liable to tax" within the meaning of Article IV of the Canada-Barbados tax treaty? (2) Is a Barbados-incorporated EIC eligible for benefits under the Canada-Barbados tax treaty? (3) Is a Barbados-incorporated EIC that is a foreign affiliate of a Canadian corporation eligible for exempt surplus treatment under Part LIX of the Income Tax Regulations?

Position: Assuming that an EIC is managed and controlled in Barbados and not a resident of convenience, our general answers are as follows: (1) Yes; (2) No; (3) Yes

Reasons: See below