Azzopardi – Tax Court of Canada finds that a limited partner was bound by the settlement made by the partnership’s designated member

After the Minister made an initial determination that the losses of a film partnership for its 2001 fiscal period were $134.9 million rather than the claimed amount of $255.8 million, the partner who was the designated member filed a notice of objection on behalf of the partnership, resulting in the Minister redetermining the loss to be $194.9 million. The taxpayer, who had an interest in the partnership of under 0.115%, took the position that he was entitled to have a say in how the partnership loss was redetermined.

Spiro J rejected the various arguments advanced by the taxpayer, who had an interest in the partnership of under 0.115%, that he should not be bound by the redetermination, including that:

• the Minister should not have accepted the designated member as the taxpayer’s representative (Spiro J found that the designated member was designated as such in the partnership information return or otherwise authorized by the partnership to so act and that it was unnecessary for the taxpayer to have separately authorized that partner to so act under the “streamlined process” contemplated by s. 165(1.15)); and
• the Minister should not have taken 10 years to reassess the taxpayer (Spiro J found that s. 152(1.7)(b) allows the Minister one year to reassess from the time that a redetermination becomes final and binding, and the Minister was well within the one year period).

Neal Armstrong. Summary of Azzopardi v. The King, 2023 TCC 51 under s. 165(1.15).