CRA indicates that if an agreement for the supply by a resident of IPP (e.g., copyright) has no stated restrictions on where the IPP may be used, the supply is wholly in Canada

A Canadian resident agrees with a non-resident (ACo) that, in consideration for royalty payments, the resident will upload books and designs created by him or her to the ACo platform, which ACo customers can then choose to receive in electronic form or print off or (in the case of the designs) have them printed on products acquired by them from ACo.

CRA found that the place of supply of all such supplies by the resident (being supplies of intangible personal property) was in Canada, indicating that, for purposes of ETA s. 142(1)(c) (generally indicating that a supply of IPP is made in Canada if it may be used in whole “or in part” in Canada), if there were no restrictions on where the IPP could be used in the written agreement (as was the case here), “the supply will be deemed to be made in Canada regardless of if it is actually used in Canada.”

However, CRA noted the potential availability of zero-rating under Sched. VI, Pt. V, s. 10 or 10.1.

Neal Armstrong. Summary of 3 November 2023 GST/HST Ruling 245549 under ETA s. 142(1)(c).