Search - 司法拍卖网 人民法院

Canada, 2020 FCA 90-- summary under Redundancy/reading in words Summary Under Tax Topics- Statutory Interpretation- Redundancy/reading in words narrower construction avoided rendering language redundant Before going on to indicate that the expansive interpretation of s. 149(1)(d.5) submitted by the taxpayer would have the effect of making it unnecessary in the provision to refer to a municipality, Mactavish JA stated (at para, 52): [L]egislatures generally avoid the use of unnecessary or superfluous words in legislation, and that every word in a statute is presumed to have a specific role to play in advancing the legislative purpose: … Proulx, 2000 SCC 5 ….. ...

. … Before 2007 … it would appear that the risk borne by Visa Canada was almost entirely non-existent, with the risk instead largely being borne by Visa International and the issuing financial institutions. ... …Proposed subsection 4(1) of the Regulations stipulates that a "person at risk" does not include a person who becomes at risk solely through the provision of a clearing, settlement or authorization service. … [O]therwise taxable administrative services, such as those provided in respect of credit card transactions, do not fall within the definition of a "financial service" only because the service provider agrees to assume the remote risk of honouring the payment authorized under the credit transaction in the event of a failure by the relevant financial institution. ...

. … Justice Sharlow … [in Arnaud] concluded that paragraph 146(9)(b) did not apply to the case before her since there was no collateral arrangement. … [T]he appellants here did not enter into any collateral agreement that would have allowed them to recover their loss in whole or in part. ...

In finding that the base payments made in its 1999 to 2002 taxation years did not satisfy the requirement under s. 18(1)(a) of having been incurred for the purpose of producing income from the taxpayer’s business, Owen J stated (at para. 40) that an “expenditure of the income that has been determined for a taxation period cannot be incurred as part of the process of earning that income” and that it should be considered in this regard “that the base payment only arises after the conclusion of the producer’s income earning process in respect of potash subject to the base payment tax” (para. 66) given that “[t]o compute the amount of a base payment for a year, a producer must first compute its profits for that year” (para. 64) and that “Liability for a base payment will exist only in respect of potash that has been “sold or otherwise disposed of” by a producer … [i.e.,] potash … [that] is no longer capable of producing income for the producer” (para. 65). ... The Saskatchewan legislature simply chose in the case of the base payment to substitute quantity of potash as a proxy for income to ensure that a minimum amount of tax would be collected in respect of such potash even if the producer did not have profits for the year …. ...

CRA took the position that the production activity referenced in Reg. 1204(1)(b) “ceased at the wellhead” – and it reassessed to the taxpayer (a participant in the joint venture) to reduce the amount of the taxpayer’s production profits by the expenses of the OLS (effectively treating them as equalling the income from transporting the crude, and then deducting the same amounts as an expense applicable to the transportation profits). CRA in particular relied on the exclusion in Reg. 1204(3)(a) for “income … derived from transporting … petroleum”. ... The OLS had no impact one way or the other on the amount of income realized by the joint venture owners from the sale of the Hibernia crude and did not in and of itself generate any income or loss for the joint venture owners. … …[P]aragraph 1204(3)(a) was intended to ensure that additional income derived from transporting/transmitting crude does not attract the resource allowance. ...

After referring (at para. 36) to the Marshall v Kerr principle that “because one must treat as real that which is only deemed to be so, one must treat as real the consequences and incidents inevitably flowing from or accompanying that deemed state of affairs, unless prohibited from doing so," Henderson LJ stated (at paras. 39, 42): The unambiguous effect of the deeming in section 15(2) is … that the performance by Mr Fowler of the relevant diving activities is treated as the carrying on by him of a trade, giving rise to trading income …. This treatment entirely displaces the charge to tax on employment income …. ... My approach does not depend to any significant extent on the provisions of article 3(2) … however, I would accept … that the purpose of article 3(2) is to anchor the provisions of the treaty … to the domestic tax law of the Contracting State which is applying the treaty. ...

. … A communication revealing the name of a law firm or lawyer – without anything else, such as actual legal advice – is not a confidential communication made for the purpose of receiving legal advice from a lawyer acting in a legal capacity. ...

An approach to reasonableness review that respects legislative intent must therefore assume that those who interpret the law — whether courts or administrative decision makers — will do so in a manner consistent with this principle of interpretation. … [W]hatever form the interpretive exercise takes, the merits of an administrative decision maker’s interpretation of a statutory provision must be consistent with the text, context and purpose of the provision. ... Where, for example, the words used are “precise and unequivocal”, their ordinary meaning will usually play a more significant role in the interpretive exercise …. ...

And the identification of what (if anything) is to be acquired by an outgoing ultimately requires … a comparison of the expected structure of the business after the outgoing with the expected structure but for the outgoing, not with the structure before the outgoing. ... If a once-and-for-all payment is made for the acquisition of an asset of enduring advantage which, once acquired, forms part of the profit-earning structure of the business, the payment is incurred on capital account. … It was necessary for the Trustee to purchase the GMEs in order to continue to carry on its business as it had done up to that point. But the purchase price was a once-and-for-all payment for the acquisition of an asset of enduring advantage – the 18 GMEs – which once acquired formed part of the profit-earning structure of the Trustee's business. ...

In allowing the taxpayer’s appeal from the disallowance of expenses claimed under s. 8(1)(f), Rennie J.A. stated (at para. 6): [R]egarding the contract objectively, it was an implicit or implied term that the employee would be required to incur certain costs in order to earn the commissions contemplated by the contract; see Sattva [2014 SCC 53, [2014] 2 S.C.R. 633] at para 49 [“in contractual interpretation, the goal of the exercise is to ascertain the objective intent of the parties — a fact-specific goal — through the application of legal principles of interpretation”]. ...