Search - 侵犯公民个人信息罪 交易明细 计算条数

Hancock & Anor v Revenue and Customs, [2019] UKSC 24-- summary under Redundancy/reading in words Summary Under Tax Topics- Statutory Interpretation- Redundancy/reading in words phrase read out of provision to give effect to intent The taxpayers relied on a literal interpretation of provisions to rely on proposition that it had avoided tax on a capital gain on the sale of their domestic private company for foreign-currency denominated loan notes through a partial conversion of some of the loan notes into qualifying corporate bonds (“QCBs”) and with the QCBs and the unconverted loan notes then being converted into one series of secured discounted loan notes (“SLNs”), with such notes then being sold on an exempt basis. ... However, she then stated (at paras. 21, 23-24, 26): [T]he appellants’ interpretation result would be inexplicable in terms of the policy expressed in these provisions. … Floyd and Lewison LJJ [below] did not give any meaning to the words “or include” in section 116(1)(b), but as I see it this was appropriate because … it is clear that the intention of Parliament was that each security converted into a QCB should be viewed as a separate conversion …. ... This enables the court, when interpreting a statute, to adopt (my words) a strained interpretation in place of one which would be contrary to the clear intention of Parliament. … Nothing in this judgment detracts from the principle in Luke but in my judgment, it is unnecessary to consider its application in this case because … the construction of the relevant provisions is clear without resort to it. ...

K & D Logging Ltd. v. The King, 2023 TCC 23-- summary under Subsection 20(21) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 20- Subsection 20(21) a s. 20(21) deduction cannot offset previously-recognized s. 17 income The taxpayer (K & D), which along with three other lenders, advanced funds in 1996 to a Uruguay farming corporation (Interan) of which the taxpayer was a 44% shareholder. ... On a CRA audit in 2009, a copy of the loan agreement was obtained by K & D from Uruguay, and it was determined that the loan was non-interest-bearing. K & D now argued that its deduction of an amount equal to the amounts it had previously recognized as interest income was authorized under s. 20(21). ...

R & S Industries Inc. v. The Queen, 2017 TCC 75-- summary under Subsection 171(1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 171- Subsection 171(1) Tax Court had jurisdiction to consider change to description of consideration in s. 97(2) election form R & S Industries was unsuccessful in a motion to have the Federal Court direct CRA to reconsider its decision to not permit R & S Industries to file an amended s. 97(2) election form so as to change the agreed amounts. R & S then appealed to the Tax Court with a view to convincing the Court that the allocation of consideration between partnership-interest and non-partnership interest consideration set out on the (T2059) election form did not reflect the actual agreed allocation. CRA viewed this as an attempted end run around R & S’s inability to amend its election, and sought to have the appeal dismissed on jurisdictional grounds. ...

Collins Family Trust v Canada (Attorney General), 2019 BCSC 1030, aff'd 2020 BCCA 196, rev'd 2022 SCC 26-- summary under Rectification & Rescission Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Rectification & Rescission Fairmont cast doubt on but did not overrule Pallen After noting that the applications before him for the rescission of transactions entailing reliance on an interpretation of s. 75(2) that was established by Sommerer to be incorrect – and that in Pallen “which concerned an almost identical set of facts … rescission was granted” (para. 3), Giaschi J stated (at para. 5): I agree with the submissions of the respondent that the decisions... in Fairmont and Jean Coutu have seriously undermined Pallen. ... [holding] that a tax plan similar to the ones before me (and therefore also similar to the plan in Pallen) constituted abusive tax avoidance and was subject to GAAR. … In Satoma the primary purpose was found by the trial judge to be to avoid payment of any tax…. ...

The Queen, 2010 TCC 467-- summary under Payment & Receipt Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Payment & Receipt set-off of debt constituted payment thereof The shareholder of a Canadian company (“Merchant 2000”) lent U.S. $650,000 to a wholly-owned U.S. subsidiary (“Merchant U.S.”) of Merchant 2000, and subsequently transferred that receivable to Merchant 2000 in exchange for a receivable from Merchant 2000 of $650,000. ... (See for example: Armstrong … 88 D.T.C. 1015 ….) ...

Canada (Attorney General), 2017 BCSC 994-- summary under Rectification & Rescission Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Rectification & Rescission taking back excess boot could not be rectified under the BCA provision for correcting “corporate” mistakes 627291 B.C. ... There has not been: (a) a breach of a provision of the BCA, a former Company Act or the regulations under any of them; (b) a default in compliance with the memorandum, notice of articles or articles of the company; and … (c) none of the following proceedings at or in connection with any of the following have been rendered ineffective: (i) a meeting of shareholders; (ii) a meeting of the directors or of a committee of directors; (iii) any assembly purporting to be a meeting referred to in subparagraph (i) or (ii); and (d) a consent resolution or records purporting to be a consent resolution has not been rendered ineffective. … [T]he mistake of not completing the Transaction in the most tax effective manner does not … fall within these subsections. ... Mayer J further found (at para 40 and 41): Even if the Greither Estate was seeking the remedy of equitable rectification, … I am not satisfied that the facts of this case would justify such relief…. ...

Dawson (quoted at para. 27): First, there must be a pre-ordained series of transactions; or, if one likes, one single composite transaction. …. ... It by no means follows that the Ramsay approach should be incapable of applying wherever the ultimate purchaser and price cannot be identified. … The FTT considered that the sale to Merrill Lynch "sufficiently corresponded to the scheme as planned" and commented that it "would be extraordinary if the application of the Ramsay approach could be defeated by the sale being to brokers rather than to the market by brokers on behalf of the Irish Trustees" …. The UT held that the FTT had been entitled to conclude that the involvement of Merrill Lynch made no material difference …. ...

Canada (Attorney General), 2016 SCC 55, [2016] 2 S.C.R. 670-- summary under Rectification & Rescission Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Rectification & Rescission rectification must give effect to common intention at time The taxpayer (“PJC Canada”), a Quebec corporation, implemented a plan, to neutralize the effect of FX fluctuations on its investment in a U.S. subsidiary (“PJC USA”), that overlooked foreign accrual property income considerations – so that interest generated to PJC USA on a loan that it made back to PJC Canada was included in PJC Canada’s income. ... In the AES case, the mistake consisted of a miscalculation in the adjusted cost base (“ACB”) of the transferred shares ― the procedure agreed to by the parties required the issuance and delivery of a note for an amount precisely equal to the shares’ ACB. ... [T]here is a fundamental difference between a contract under which one of a party’s prestations ― necessary for obtaining the intended tax result ― is to issue and deliver a note in an objectively calculable amount equal to the ACB of transferred shares, and a contract under which there is no obligation addressing FAPI, and no prestations agreed on that would prevent its fiscal consequences. …. ...

Anderson v Benson Trithardt Noren LLP, 2016 SKCA 120, aff'd 2017 SCC CanLii 8568-- summary under Rectification & Rescission Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Rectification & Rescission drop-down documents could not be declared retroactive to the previously-agreed effective date, as this would undercut the Tax Court The taxpayer’s accountants met with him on October 6, 2011, when it was agreed that he would transfer personally-owned land and equipment on s. 85 rollover basis to his corporation in order to facilitate paying off a loan owing by him to the corporation. ... In dismissing the appeal, Lane J. stated (at paras 29, 34): … The Chambers judge was correct to limit the application of the rectification remedy as he did. He saw the application for a declaration for what it was – an attempt to obtain equitable relief not available from the Tax Court, which is a superior court of record but not a court of inherent jurisdiction, and to thereby attempt to determine the outcome of an assessment appeal by essentially binding the hands of that Court. … The Chambers judge properly limited his decision to the issue between the appellants themselves. ...

Canada, 2017 FCA 39-- summary under Rectification & Rescission Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Rectification & Rescission foreign rectification order not dispositive The taxpayer’s Barbados and Cyprus subsidiaries paid amounts to the taxpayer in 2004, 2005 and 2006 as dividends and then, following CRA proposals to assess the dividends, obtained rectification orders from the applicable Barbados and Cyprus courts declaring that the amounts instead were loans to it (or otherwise gave rise to indebtedness). ... Moreover, since these foreign orders involve the appellant and its Foreign Affiliates and not the Minister, a third-party to the foreign proceedings, there is nothing to enforce against the Minister; homologation is therefore a non-issue. … However, Boivin JA further stated (at paras 19-20): I cannot agree … that pursuant to article 2822 C.c.Q. these foreign orders are dispositive and that the Minister has no choice under the ITA but to accept the dividends are actually loans because the orders from Barbados and Cyprus say so. ... These determinations are for the Tax Court judge to make, with a full evidentiary record at his or her disposal. … On this basis, he concluded that Lamarre ACJ should not have answered the Rule 58 question, and set aside her judgment and dismissed the Rule 58 motion before the Tax Court. ...