Kempo,
J.T.C.C.:—These
reasons
were
not
formally
read
at
the
conclusion
of
the
hearing
as
there
was
considerable
exchange
between
the
Court
and
Mr.
Parks
with
respect
to
the
equitable
relief
he
was
requesting
and
the
jurisdictional
limitations
upon
the
Court
which
is
not
empowered
to
rewrite
or
otherwise
alleviate
against
what
Mr.
Parks
continually
labelled
as
an
unfair
law.
These
reasons
are
a
capsulization
of
the
essence
of
the
verbal
exchange
and
represent
the
outcome
which
was
unfavourable
to
each
of
the
appellants.
The
informal
procedure
appeals
of
Edwin
Parks
and
Carol
Parks
were,
on
consent
application,
heard
on
common
evidence.
Mrs.
Parks'
appeal
is
determinable
on
the
outcome
of
her
husband’s
appeal
because
the
amount
of
her
claimed
child
tax
credit
turned
on
the
calculation
of
family
income
which
included
her
husband's
net
income.
The
taxation
year
under
appeal
for
both
appellants
is
1990.
The
thrust
of
Mr.
Parks’
position
at
the
hearing
was
as
stated
in
his
letter
of
appeal
thusly:
I
disagree
with
the
decision
of
Revenue
Canada
and
my
1990
reassessment
which
I
deem
un
air.
.
..
Reassessment
approximately
February
1992
(contesting)
RRSP—Canada
Trust
$2,100
of
which
$210
was
deducted
and
remitted
to
Revenue
Canada.
This
RRSP
taken
out
with
First
Investors
Corporation
in
May
1984
was
worth
$4,758.78.
This
RRSP
was
rolled
over
in
November
26,
1986
and
had
a
maturity
date
of
November
26,
1991,
and
would
have
been
worth
approximately
$7,900,
had
the
company
remained
in
business.
Revenue
Canada
is
requesting
an
additonal
sum
of
$936.92,
although
they
have
not
considered
a
capital
loss
to
my
credit.
I
am
a
senior
and
being
taxed
at
the
highest
rate
possible
and
I
do
not
deem
this
treatment
fair.
No
evidence
was
advanced
and
this
matter
was
presented
as
a
point
of
law,
namely
that
Revenue
Canada
had
erred
in
not
taking
into
account
the
losses
Mr.
Parks
had
suffered
in
his
RRSP
plan
occasioned
by
governmental
failure
to
“pull
the
carpet
out
from
under
the
Principal
Group
prior
to
November
of
1986”.
The
Court
was
not
provided
with
nor
is
aware
of
any
authority
enabling
this
relief
to
be
granted
to
Mr.
Parks.
Gains
enjoyed
or
losses
suffered
within
a
RRSP
plan
are
fiscal
non-events.
Once
a
RRSP
is
deregistered,
the
amount
paid
out
on
deregistration
is
included
into
income.
Mr.
Parks’
RRSP
losses
within
his
plan
are
essentially
irrelevant
as
there
are
no
provisions
in
the
Income
Tax
Act,
R.S.C.
1952,
c.
148
(am.
S.C.
1970-71-72,
c.
63)
(the
"Act")
allowing
for
their
recognition.
The
appeals
of
Edwin
L.
Parks
and
Carol
D.
Parks
are
dismissed.
Appeals
dismissed.
Email this Content