Search - 哈尔滨到北京 公里数

.-- summary under Paragraph 149.1(4)(a) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 149.1- Subsection 149.1(4)- Paragraph 149.1(4)(a) foundation’s registration subject to revocation because it had invested in a Delaware partnership (with stated separate existence) carrying on business A Quebec private foundation, which had invested in a foreign partnership (FP) that was governed by the Delaware Revised Uniform Partnership Act (DRUPA), submitted that “the FP is a separate legal entity from its members under the statutory provisions of the … DRUPA … by virtue of which it was created and consequently it is the FP that operates the business and not the members,” so that its registration was not subject to revocation under s. 149.1(4)(a). ...

After finding that the allowances were not taxable under s. 5(1) or s. 6(3), CRA went on find that they were non-taxable as not being income from a source, stating: We also refer you to … Fries … where the [Supreme] Court determined that an amount must come from one of the sources listed in the Act to be taxable. ...

Notwithstanding our general view described above, we note that the CRA has previously applied … GAAR … in situations where mutual fund trust status was artificially achieved to facilitate abusive tax avoidance. ...

After indicating that such conversion would not cause a share disposition if no shares were cancelled and the rights of the shareholders were not substantively altered, CRA went on to indicate that if there otherwise was a disposition, s. 51 would not apply, stating: … 2013-0473771E5 … confirmed that a person who has a membership interest in a non-share capital corporation would not be considered to hold a share in that corporation. ...

CRA noted that Bill C-208 did not contain a coming into force provision, and stated: In cases where an enactment is silent with respect to the particular day it comes into force, subsection 6(2) of the Interpretation Act provides that it is construed as coming into force at the end of the day before the day the enactment received Royal Assent … (June 29, 2021). Regarding the particular question, CRA noted the presumption in Gustavson Drilling [1977] 1 S.C.R. 271 that “statutes are not to be construed as having retrospective operation unless such a construction is expressly or by necessary implication required by the language,” and then stated: Bill C-208 does not contain express language that would require its application to a disposition of shares occurring before the day of Royal Assent and, in our view, the language in Bill C-208 does not require such application by necessary implication. … [T]he amendments to section 84.1 … apply only to dispositions that occur on or after … June 29, 2021 …. ...

CRA responded: [F]or the 2016 and subsequent years,... taxpayers who have failed to report the disposition of their principal residence [are required to] amend their income tax return …. For the sale of a residence in 2016, Schedule 3 … must be completed, on which must be stated the year of disposition of the property, its proceeds of disposition as well as its description. … Form T2091 … (or Form T1255 …), is required for the designation if the property was not the taxpayer's principal residence for all the years in which the taxpayer was the owner. For dispositions in 2017 and subsequent years … taxpayers will also be required to complete Form T2091 (IND) (or Form T1255). ...

X's capital cost ($200,000) and the amount by which that cost exceeded the proceeds of disposition ($50,000) would be deemed to be CCA deducted in preceding taxation years, whereas “the capital cost to the corporation of the building for the purposes of all other provisions of the Act would, in accordance with our position in paragraph 10(a) of … IT-217R … be considered to be Mr. ...

6 May 2014 CALU Roundtable, 2014-0523321C6- 2014 CALU Conference-- summary under Paragraph 20(1)(bb) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 20- Subsection 20(1)- Paragraph 20(1)(bb) segregated fund not a "security" After quoting authorities on the meaning of "security," including a statement in Canadian & Foreign Securities Co. v. ... " CRA responded: A segregated fund policy is a contract of insurance and … is not a share or security of the taxpayer. Consequently … paragraph 20(1)(bb) … does not apply to fees paid by a taxpayer in respect of the advisability of the acquisition or disposition of segregated fund policies, or for the administration or management thereof as the requirements of that paragraph are not met. ...

., hereafter « Quebec Inc. ») in exchange for shares of two classes in the capital of Quebec Inc.: the first class of shares having a low PUC and an ACB equal to their FMV (the "1971 FMV Shares") and the second class of shares having a high PUC (which was the purpose of the second transaction) and a high ACB equal to their FMV (the "Stripping Shares"). ... The CRA continues of the view that ITA subsection 84(2) should have applied in this case especially by reason of … MacDonald …. ... In short, in a situation such as in the Descarries case, the three avoidance transactions are…an abuse of the Integration Rules. … We also are concerned by the specificity of the principle proposed by the TCC to the effect that in carrying out the three avoidance operations, subsection 84.1(1) could be utilized to distribute surplus of a corporation in the form of a capital gain to the extent that that the capital gain was not reduced y a capital loss which was sustained from the disposition of shares whose ACB is derived from the FMV of those shares on Valuation Day…. ...

Was the requirement in s. 110.6(1) – qualified small business corporation share – para. ... CRA responded: In this case, the "determination time" … is February 5, 2011. ... X … owned the shares … the requirement regarding the 24-month holding period of the shares would not be satisfied …. ...