Income Tax Severed Letters - 2013-05-08

Ministerial Correspondence

12 February 2013 Ministerial Correspondence 2013-0474471M4 - Apprenticeship Job Creation Tax Credit

CRA Tags
127(9), 127(5), ITR 7310

Principal Issues: 1. For purposes of an employer computing its eligible salaries and wages payable for purposes of claiming the apprenticeship job creation tax credit, whether an employee who is an apprentice in a federally regulated trade such as an aircraft maintenance engineer licensed by Transport Canada can be considered an "eligible apprentice" within the meaning of subsection 127(9) of the Income Tax Act. 2. Whether an individual apprenticing to become licensed as an aircraft maintenance engineer is entitled to the apprenticeship incentive grant and/or the apprenticeship completion grant.

Position: 1. No. 2. No.

Reasons: 1. The definition of "eligible apprentice" in subsection 127(9) of the Act refers to "a trade prescribed in respect of a province or in respect of Canada. It is interpreted to refer to a trade prescribed in respect of a province and/or territory or a trade prescribed in respect of Canada. Although an aircraft maintenance engineer is a trade that is federally regulated and as such, can be considered to be a trade in respect of Canada, it is not a trade "prescribed" in respect of Canada. Section 7310 of the Income Tax Regulations defines what is a "prescribed trade in respect of a province" (i.e., the Red Seal trades) and in that regard, an aircraft maintenance engineer is not a Red Seal trade. As currently enacted, the Regulations are silent on what is a "prescribed trade in respect of Canada" and in this regard, there are no draft amendments to the Regulations currently proposed. 2. Not a Red Seal trade.

15 January 2013 Ministerial Correspondence 2012-0472351M4 - Lump-sum awarded from Cdn Human Rights Tribunal

CRA Tags
110.2, 120.31

Principal Issues: Can a lump-sum employment equity payment awarded by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal be taxed as though it was received in the year the payment relates to, or does it need to be taxed in the actual year it is received?

Position: In this case, yes it can be taxed as though it was received in the year it relates to.

Reasons: Sections 110.2 and 120.31 of the Act together provide for a lump-sum employment equity payment relating to prior years to be taxed as if it had been received in the year the payment relates to, as long as all conditions of these provisions are met (e.g. payment satisfies the definition of "qualifying amount") and the taxpayer files Form T1198.

Technical Interpretation - External

21 March 2013 External T.I. 2012-0467221E5 - Retiring allowance converted to ELHT contribution

CRA Tags
248(1), 144.1, 56(1)(a)(ii), 153(1)(c)

Principal Issues: Does an employer have to source deduct from a retiring allowance if some or all of the payment is contributed to an Employee Life and Health Trust?

Position: Yes

Reasons: The retiring allowance is taxable under subparagraph 56(1)(a)(ii) of the Act. The contribution to the ELHT is separate from the retiring allowance and there is no provision in the Act which reduces or eliminates the income tax withholding on a retiring allowance when the allowance is contributed to an ELHT.

Conference

28 November 2010 Roundtable, 2011-0424761C6 - CTF 2010 Q&A #22 - ELHTs & HWTs

CRA Tags
6(1), 144.1

Principal Issues: Interaction of new ELHT regime with existing HWT regime

Position: Both will exist