Income Tax Severed Letters - 2019-12-30

Ruling

2019 Ruling 2018-0788191R3 F - Butterfly Transaction

Unedited CRA Tags
55(2), 55(3)(b), 55(3.1)

Principales Questions: Butterfly transaction of a corporation between two groups of shareholders.

Position Adoptée: Favorable rulings provided.

Raisons: Meets requirements of the law.

Technical Interpretation - Internal

1 August 2019 Internal T.I. 2018-0781951I7 - Employee benefit plan and recharge agreement

Unedited CRA Tags
9, 32.1, 248(1) "employee benefit plan"
no s. 7(3)(b) prohibition where at employer’s option to settle PSPs in cash or in shares
s. 7 rules do not apply to shares purchased through a trust
payments made by Canco to parent for the value of parent shares distributed by parent-funded EBP to Canco employees were not deductible under s. 32.1
recharge payments made for employees participating in parent-administered PSP not deductible to extent they were employed by affiliates during vesting period
request for deduction not to be allowed if based on case decision rather than error

Principal Issues: 1. Whether the Taxpayer is entitled to a deduction for reimbursement payments made to its parent corporation under section 32.1 on the basis that the reimbursement payments are contributions to an EBP in respect of the Taxpayer's employees. 2. If not, is the Taxpayer entitled to a deduction for the reimbursement payments under any other provision of the Act?

Position: 1. No. 2. Yes.

Reasons: 1. The reimbursement payments are not EBP contributions. The payments are not a proxy for the contributions made to the EBP by the parent corporation (given the significant differences in the amount and timing), nor is the recharge agreement part of the EBP. 2. The reimbursement payments are deductible as an ordinary business expense in computing the Taxpayer's income under section 9, subject to the general limitations of the Act such as section 18, section 67 and subsection 78(4).