Search - 制暴无限杀机 下载

[I]t is not just that I find the purpose, agreement and distribution was to more easily and inexpensively distribute the money to those with rightful claims to it, in this case CRA would be in absolutely no different position with respect to the Corporation’s unpaid taxes then had the Corporation not distributed the money to the Appellant first, but had itself directly made the identical distributions to the patients of their ‘in trust’ amounts and to the other legitimate suppliers, debts and creditors of the Corporation …. I do not accept that it was the intention of Parliament or … Livingston to have section 160 apply in circumstances where CRA not only wasn’t but could never be … in any different position whatsoever as a result of the transfer. ...

Lamarre ACJ noted (at para. 81, see also 98) the principle that "in order to characterize the proceeds from a derivative transaction, one needs to identify the underlying item that created the risk … to which the derivative relates (which item does not necessarily need to be a transaction)" and that if, as was the case here, "it is found that the derivative was used to hedge a capital investment, any gain derived from the derivative will be on capital account. ... The Crown position "which denies capital treatment … if there is no sale or proposed sale of the underlying item being hedged … has no legal basis" (para. 97), and "the settlement of derivative contracts in advance of their maturity date does not preclude those transactions from constituting a hedge (Echo Bay …)" (para. 88). ...

In finding that the brokers’ services also would have been taxable on this basis, Pizzitelli J stated (at para 21): [I]f I had been required to [consider whether their services fall within the ambit of paragraph (r.4) of the definition of financial services in subsection 123(1)], I would have found that at best, the services … were merely preparatory to the provision or potential provision of a qualifying financial service thereunder. … [T]heir services comprised “market research” and “the collection, collation and provision of information” contemplated by paragraph (r.4.). ...

Factors mentioned by Owen J included: Settlement offers made by Cameco (one less than 30 days before trial, and one after trial) did not have any real bearing given their “ de minimis nature” (i.e., although Cameo offered “$32 million of additional taxable earnings in 2006 … no additional tax in any of the three years under appeal” was offered (paras. 20-21). ...

. … Putting down a new carpet, or new laminate wood flooring … [is not] sufficiently significant to contribute to whether a building might be said to have been “gutted.” ...

Baker, none of the three trustees took into consideration … any aspect of Mr. ... Baker … received his benefit of B Shares from the Trust which was expressly established to benefit employees. Thus … he received the benefit “"by virtue of"” that employment. ...

The King, 2024 TCC 130-- summary under Section 5 Summary Under Tax Topics- Excise Tax Act- Schedules- Schedule VI- Part V- Section 5 a Canadian agent’s services were not zero-rated since they were partly performed in Canada The appellant (MELP) was found to be performing its services to Canadian patients who underwent bariatric surgery at the surgical unit in Mexico of a Mexican company (“LIMARP”) as agent for LIMARP given that their conduct- including MELP being subject to control over health-related matters by LIMARP, and being implicitly authorized to deal with the patients before and after the operation, and MELP quite regularly remitting the fees that it collected from the Canadian patients, other than the 50% portion thereof retained by it for its services, to LIMARP – implied an agency arrangement. Accordingly, MELP was not subject to GST/HST on the ½ portion of the patient fees that it collected as agent for LIMARP. ...

Trower, separated from her husband in 2015 and ceased to be a shareholder and director of their company (“Cove” – previously owned on a 49/51 basis) on or shortly before October 2, 2016. ... In this case the dividend was not declared (or approved) until February 2017 and so no dividend was payable in 2016. … I accept that practice in the “real world” does not always conform with best practice. … [and] that directors and/or shareholders may make a decision and act upon it, even though they may not record that decision in writing until a later date. ... He did not have that power before he became the sole shareholder and director. … While I am not able to determine the nature of the transfers in 2016, in my view, absent her agreement, they could not be and are not dividends paid to Ms. ...

. … The taxpayers chosen as lead appellants can proceed to the determination of their appeals faster and without the complications and time requirements of being heard as part of a larger group. ... [T]he promotional materials … talked of dealing with the matters by lead cases. … The Promoter clearly controlled all aspects of the Program… and it controlled the litigation that resulted therefrom. ...

. … HLP loaned an amount in question to Nuinsco that would have been otherwise able to be distributed to Partnerco and its fellow partners. As a result, the Partnercos indirectly transferred property to Nuinsco and then on to the Appellant and the other Holdcos. … The question is therefore whether Partnerco transferred this property for less than FMV. … The Appellant has shown that at the end of this series of transactions, Partnerco was left none the poorer. ...