Search - 屯门 安南都护府

. … [T]he appearance of fairness has another aspect — that is, how the proceedings appear to the unrepresented party. ...

Those treaties fall into several categories: • Treaties that already contain a PPT that is narrower than the new PPT; • Treaties that did not contain a PPT, but were between countries with experience applying PPT- type rules to their tax treaties; and • Treaties that did not contain a PPT, and were between countries without experience applying PPT- type rules. ...

. … [A]ccording to [9634245], it is not possible to specify an amount in foreign currency. … [T]his interpretation is arguably inconsistent with the tax policy underlying subsections 191(4) and (5)… [and] with [CRA's] position regarding the application of section 51.1.... ...

The short answer appears to be — no…. Misinterpretation of effect of LLC Agreement (p. 439) First, with respect, the decision — that section 4.2 of the LLC agreement (together with certain provisions of the Delaware LLC Act) that required that profits be allocated to LLC owner capital accounts immediately vested those profits in the owners — seems to be wrong. ...

. … [T]he lease originator transfers the equipment that is subject to the underlying leases at fair market value to an SPE, often a limited partnership, in consideration…for limited partnership interests, assumed liabilities, and a note issued by the limited partnership…under subsection 97(2). … The limited partnership issues asset-backed notes, either directly to investors or to a conduit trust (that in turn issues commercial paper to investors). ... Alternatively, they can elect to include one or more exempt properties in a separate class for CCA purposes. … [S]ince the principal leasing business requirement must be met throughout each taxation year, including the first taxation year of a newly formed SPE, it is common to transfer a few leased pieces of equipment to the SPE at the time of its formation. ... This issue was raised in a CRA technical interpretation [2002-0156515 where] … A Co, B Co, and C Co each retained 10 percent of the leased equipment. … It is the CRA's position [in IT-443, para. 10] that the gross revenue of the partnership from a particular source is to be included in the gross revenue of the corporation from that source to the extent of the corporation's profit-sharing percentage. … [I]f the activities of the corporation and the partnership are considered to be two separate businesses of the corporation, the following determinations must be made: (1) which business is the corporation's principal business, (2) whether this principal business is the leasing of leasing property, and (3) whether the gross revenue from that principal business is at least 90 percent of the gross revenue of the corporation for the year from all sources. ...

Assume that the current spot rate for the Canadian dollar is US$1 = Cdn$1.25 and the taxpayer enters into an agreement to sell US$1 million a year from now at the forward rate of US$1 = Cdn$ 1.2685. If in a year's time the spot rate is US$1 = Cdn$1.20 (that is, the Canadian dollar has appreciated against the US dollar), the taxpayer realizes a gain of Cdn $68,500 (by selling US$1 million for Cdn$l,268,500 rather than at the spot rate of Cdn$1.20 or Cdn$1.2 million). ...

On the basis of the limited guidance that has been provided thus far by the OECD and the CRA, there is significant uncertainty as to how the PPT will interrelate with this commercial need to aggregate capital on a tax-efficient basis. … In example D, RCO is a CIV resident in state R, and the majority of its investors are also resident in state R. ... The OECD commentary indicates that even though RCO's investment decisions take into account the tax benefits provided under state R's extensive treaty network, it would not be reasonable to deny benefits to RCO under the treaty between state R and state S. … [T]his example suggests that it would not be reasonable to deny treaty benefits where an investor's decision to invest through a particular investment vehicle is not driven by a particular investment, and a particular investment made by the investment vehicle is not driven by the tax position of its investors. … The usefulness of example D is limited by the assumed fact that the majority of RCO's investors are resident in the same jurisdiction as RCO. ... According to the commentary, it would not be reasonable to deny RCO the benefit of the reduced withholding tax rate under the treaty between state R and state S, because the decision to establish a regional platform in state R was mainly driven by commercial factors. … This example suggests that it is acceptable to use a holding company that is resident in a third jurisdiction to manage a group of regional investments, so long as that holding company has sufficient substance in the jurisdiction in which it is resident. … Arguably, the threshold in, for example, Prévost Car, and Alta Energy may be insufficient. … Example M (p. 874) In example M, Real Estate Fund, a state C partnership treated as fiscally transparent under the domestic tax law of state C, is established to invest in a portfolio of real estate investments in a specific geographic area. ...

Potential unavailability of the safe-income exception for normal-course dividends (pp. 6:18-19) Dividends are … frequently paid to finance or support a corporation's parent company or a larger corporate group. Examples include dividends paid pursuant to an internal policy of cash pooling—for example, when cash is centralized for lender security, administration, or credit-rating purposes; for internal redistribution—for example, when payment is made to a moneylending corporation that lends the receipted funds to another entity within the same corporate group; or to cover general corporate expenses. … [T]he safe-income exception may not be available for several reasons, including …: the safe income is less than the profits distributed (for example, as a result of accelerated CCA claims or accrued but unpaid dividends associated with other shares); there is no inherent gain in the shares of Opco on which the dividend is paid (as a result of an unrelated decline in the aggregate value of Opco's assets, for example); or in the case of periodic dividends, the safe-income determination time concept is strictly applied (although, as discussed above, this should not be the case). ...

Dowdall, O'Mahoney & Co., [1952] AC 401…cited in 4145356 Canada Ltd v. ... [fn 111: … 9641375… 1999-0010305.] The result of this position is that the 20(11) deduction may be based on an effective tax rate that exceeds the actual U.S. tax rate imposed on the LLC's income. ... Under this formula, the less of its income an LLC distributes each year, the more its Canadian members will be limited to a foreign tax deduction in respect of the U.S. taxes paid – (oddly) unless the LLC distributes none of its income in which case the full amount of U.S. taxes would potentially be (creditable (provided the taxpayer has other U.S. source income to support the credit)…. ...

Chris Falk, Stefanie Morand, "Current Issues Forum: Pipeline Planning; Subsection 164(6) Circularity Issue; Eligible Dividend Designations", 2012 Ontario Tax Conference of Canadian Tax Foundation-- summary under Subsection 164(6) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 164- Subsection 164(6) Interaction of Subsections 40(3.6), 40(3.61) and 164(6) — the "Circularity" Issue As discussed in more detail in the Moraitis/Kakkar Article, if subsections 40(3.6), 40(3.61), and 164(6) are applied iteratively, the realization by the estate of any capital gain in the estate's first taxation year will have the effect of grinding to nil the amount of the loss that can be carried back pursuant to subsection 164(6), even if the loss is substantial and the gain is only nominal. By way of example, assume the following: • Ms. Y dies owning: a portfolio of managed publicly-traded securities, which securities are assumed (for illustrative purposes) not to have had any accrued gain or loss on death; and all of the shares of a private corporation, YCo, with PUC of $100,000. • The shares of YCo were held by Ms. ... Y's terminal year. • In the estate's first taxation year, YCo redeems 50% of the shares held by the estate for $500,000. 61 As a result of the redemption, the estate sustains a $450,000 capital loss. ...