Search - 哈尔滨到北京 公里数

[fn 6: This characterization has recently been confirmed in … 2003-0006645 …] However, an Extendible Step-Up Note should not be considered a prescribed debt obligation for these purposes, as a holder of an Extendible Step-Up Note has no present right, at the time that the note is acquired, to any interest beyond the initial maturity date or extended maturity date, as the case may be…. ...

.-- summary under Subsection 248(25.4) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 248- Subsection 248(25.4) Example of sale of ½ of capital interest plus ½ of right to enforce income payment (p.271) [A]ssume that a beneficiary's capital interest in a unit trust initially consists of 1,000 units purchased for $10,000 on December 23, 2015. ... Consequently, the total adjusted cost base of the 500 units sold is $5,200: $5,000 + $200. ...

[fn: 58: See … Viking Food … and Ekamant Canada] …. [Finance’s] commentary associated with the application of the strategic business expansion exception in subsection (16) … would imply that the deeming rule under 212.3(25) is not intended to supplant any party who would otherwise be considered to have control in the absence of such deeming rule…. [T]he most appropriate … approach to determine whether a non-resident corporation controls a CRIC in the context of a partnership is to apply a two-part test (the “Two-Part Test”): one examining control under the current state of affairs and the second under the legal fiction created by the deemed ownership rule. ... The shares of this Canadian general partner, in turn, will be owned by one or more individuals- likely principals of the private equity firm. … This first alternative private equity structure works well in a situation where the fund is at the beginning stages of its life cycle…. ...

Brian Kearl, Carl Deeprose, "Leaving Canada's New High Tax Rate Regime: Considerations, Tips and Traps", 2016 Conference Report (Canadian Tax Foundation),32:1-24-- summary under Article 4 Summary Under Tax Topics- Treaties- Income Tax Conventions- Article 4 Test of a permanent home available (p. 32:9) In Salt, … [t]he appellant successfully argued that the tie-breaker rules deemed him to be resident in Australia because he had leased his house in Canada to an unrelated third party on arm's length terms and conditions, and therefore did not have a permanent home available in Canada. ... The CRA's position is that a home in Canada that is leased to someone other than "a third party on arm's length terms and conditions" counts as a permanent home that is "available" to the individual. … Test of centre of vital interests (p.32:10) In Gaudreau, … the Court ruled that … if a person who has a home in one state sets up a second in the other state while retaining the first, the fact that he retains the first in the environment where he has always lived, where he has worked, and where he has family and possessions, can, together with other elements, go to demonstrate that he has retained his centre of vital interests in the first state. ...

For 2011 and later periods, these items include ■ exempt surplus dividends received (or deemed to have been received) from another foreign affiliate; ■ tax refunds or credits received by a shareholder affiliate in respect of exempt surplus dividends received from another foreign affiliate; ■ taxable dividends received by an affiliate from a corporation resident in Can­ada that would be deductible under section 112 if the dividend were instead received by the Canadian taxpayer in respect of which the affiliate is a foreign affiliate; ■ certain amounts in respect of tax payments or tax losses in a consolidated group added under regulation 5907(1.02), (1.1), or (1.2); and ■ certain adjustments under regulation 5905, such as those required under the fill-the-hole rule in regulation 5905(7.2). Inclusion in exempt earnings of taxable gain already recognized in Canada or abroad (p. 1257) …[E]xempt earnings include ■ the taxable portion of capital gains from dispositions of capital property used in active business operations that, if the dispositions are internal, have been recognized under foreign tax laws as required by regulation 5907(5.l); and ■ the non-taxable portion of capital gains where the taxable portion of the cap­ital gain has been included in FAPI, either because the property was not excluded property or, if it was excluded property, because the disposition was subject to one of the rollover rules. ... Meaning of deduction from exempt loss (p. 1259) Regulation 5907(2.02) also potentially applies when a disposition of property gives rise to an amount that is deducted in computing exempt loss. … … Presumably the word "deduction" was intended to capture positive amounts that, when netted with negative amounts arising in the same year, result in an overall loss that is included in exempt loss. ...

See also … 2003-0019235] provide that trust property can be distributed to the children of the deceased in any circumstances before the spouse's death (for example, if the spouse remarries); [F.n.220 … 2002-0154435] or permit or require the trust to pay life insurance premiums. [F.n.221 … 2006-0185551C6] The CRA's view regarding life insurance on the life of the spouse is questionable. ... Although … Gilbert Estate … [F.n.222 83 DTC 645 (TRB).] … held that a son's disclaimer of his interest in a trust did not cleanse an otherwise qualifying spousal trust, Maria Elena Hoffstein noted that Gilbert Estate was decided before subsection 248(8) was enacted and may have been legislatively overturned by the enactment. ...

Marc-Antoine Mongrain, Jean-François Thuot, "Income, Phantom Income, and Phantom Deductions", Canadian Tax Focus, Vol. 15, No. 1, February 2025, p. 2-- summary under Paragraph 55(2.1)(c) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 55- Subsection 55(2.1)- Paragraph 55(2.1)(c) CRA or ARQ treatment of not adjusting for phantom income or phantom deductions (pp. 2-3) At the 2024 " CRA Update on Subsection 55(2) and Safe Income: Where are we Now? ”, CRA departed from its previous interpretation of Kruco, and indicated that “phantom” income (i.e., income for ITA purposes not resulting in tangible cash inflows) should no longer be included in computing safe income. ... Example 2 Where Opco has revenue of $1 million, tangible expenses of $200,000 and a phantom deduction of $150,000 so that its net income is $650,000, and it pays taxes of $150,000, one can consider that the phantom deduction offsets the taxes payable (which otherwise would reduce the safe income attributable to the shares), and that $650,000 ($650,000 net income + [$150,000 phantom deduction − $150,000 tax]) is the resulting safe income contributing to the capital gain on the shares. ...

", COVID-19 and Canadian Tax for the Owner-Manager/Canadian Tax Focus (Canadian Tax Foundation), July 2020, p. 4-- summary under Eligible Remuneration Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 125.7- Subsection 125.7(1)- Eligible Remuneration Example of Treaty-exempt U.S. corp employee US employees in Canada for several days a quarter (p. 4) Consider the case of a US-resident corporation, NR Co, that provides services in Canada … [and] does not have a permanent establishment in Canada … [has] a payroll account in Canada, which it maintains in respect of its US-resident employees who work in Canada on an intermittent basis … [and] had the requisite decline in qualifying revenue …. ... Treaty-exempt non-resident can be an eligible entity (p. 4) NR Co is an eligible entity because it is a corporation and is not exempt from tax. … Mostly non-resident payroll might be eligible remuneration if some Canadian withholding (p. 4) … The salary paid to A in respect of the services performed in Canada will qualify [as eligible remuneration] only if NR Co has not applied for a non-resident employer certification pursuant to paragraph 153(7)(a). … [A]mounts paid at any time by an employer to an employee at a time that the employer is a "qualifying non-resident employer" and the employee is a "qualifying non-resident employee" are excluded [from “eligible remuneration”]. … If NR Co chooses not to file an application pursuant to paragraph 153(7)(a) to be classified as a qualifying non-resident employer, or is not eligible to be considered a qualifying non-resident employer for some other reason (for example, failing to comply with the requirements of the certified non-resident employer program), it would be liable to withhold, but it would be eligible for the CEWS. ...

. … Canco has a $10 trade payable to Subject Corp. at the acquisition time for goods previously purchased from Subject Corp. and used in Canco's active business. ... However, Canco's Bad Assets to Total Assets ratio after Canco repays its indebtedness to Subject Corp. is 80% [fn 33: Bad Assets = ($80 Investment in Subject Corp.) over Total Assets = $100 ($20 in business assets + $80 investment in Subject Corp.) = $80] (greater than 75%). ...