Fortin – Federal Court of Appeal finds that AMT could not be challenged on the basis that the taxpayer was not a high-income individual

The taxpayer. who was assessed federal AMT as a result of his realization in 2021 of a $539,000 capital gain that was eligible for the enhanced capital gains exemption, was unsuccessful in his argument that such assessment was contrary to the object of the minimum tax rules, and that the imposition was inequitable.

Goyette JA stated:

Mr. Fortin is correct; one of the objectives of the minimum tax was to increase the tax burden on high-income individuals … . However, it is Parliament that determined, in the Act, the criteria for establishing what constitutes a high income. Furthermore, it is well established that in interpreting the … Act, the Court cannot disregard or qualify the wording of a provision by introducing "unexpressed exceptions derived from [our] view of the object and purpose of the provision": Lehigh Cement … .”

As for the inequitable nature of the result, our Court cannot create … an exception based on fairness that is not found anywhere in the Act.

Neal Armstrong. Summary of Fortin v. Canada, 2026 CAF 160 under s. 127.51.