5 October 1990 Ministerial Correspondence 90M10404 F - Comments on Departmental Submission from 1989

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.

W.R. McColm

SUBJECT:  Comments on Departmental Responses to Submission from 1989 24(1)

This memorandum is in reply to your request for confirmation of RCT practice as stated in the draft reply to the 24(1). We offer for your consideration the following comments:

Question A-8

In reply to the second concern raised in this question, RCT practice conforms to the Departmental response. In particular, the period of use requirement can be met by a combination of the parties listed in paragraphs (a) through (e). See as an example, opinion #5-7476, supporting this interpretation (attached).

Question A-10

The Department has yet to issue an opinion or advance income tax ruling on this matter. However, we agree with the opinion given to the joint committee that for purposes of 110.6 a partner will be considered to have disposed of property where the partnership in fact disposes of the property. This position is on our research file in a memo to C.D. McDonald dated July 24, 1986.

Question A-13

Departmental practice in this case also conforms to the response given to the Joint Committee. In determining the period of ownership, one may aggregate the periods of ownership of any of the parties specified in the definition. See as examples opinions #5-7739 and #5-6652 confirming this position (attached).

for DirectorBusiness and General DivisionRulings DirectorateLegislative and IntergovernmentalAffairs Branch