Principal Issues: What is the requisite degree of linkage, between a debt owing by the taxpayer to a creditor and a secondary obligation existing between that creditor (or someone not dealing at arm's length with that creditor) and certain non-residents, sufficient to potentially engage subsection 18(6.1) and 212(3.2), respectively?
Position: It is a question of fact, which can only be determined after a review of all of the facts and circumstances applicable to the particular situation. However, the "Clause B causality test" in subsections 18(6) and 212(3.1) should, in our view, be interpreted broadly enough to fulfill the policy intent of the new back-to-back loan rules as described in the 2014 Budget Plan.
Reasons: A textual, contextual and purposive approach should be used to determine the meaning of words in the Income Tax Act. Furthermore, there is similarity between the language in subsections 17(2), 18(6) and 212(3.1)