Search - 微信撤回和删除的区别 官方

Jorré J below had found that the taxpayer’s teaching activities were a distinct source of income from her law practice and also made the factual finding that her part-time law practice verged on charitable volunteerism (“du bénévolat”) – and, more generally, found that as such practice had a personal aspect, the question as to whether her practice was a business could (consistently with Stewart) be tested through determining whether it had a reasonable expectation of profit, as to which there was none. ... In affirming the decision below, Nadon JA stated (at paras. 50-51, TaxInterpretations translation): [S]he invoiced her clients for the expenses related to the file as well as for honoraria adjusted as a function of the capacity of the client to pay and … her primary goal was to exercise her profession in a conscientious and professional manner without necessarily making money. … [T]here is no doubt that the law practice of the appellant, when the relevant circumstances are considered in their entirety, certainly qualifies as having a personal aspect. ...

Following the realization shortly thereafter by Newco of a taxable capital gain and recapture of depreciation on a sale of the building, Newco increased the adjusted cost base to Holdco of its shares by effecting a series of s. 84(1) dividends (including a capital dividend) – following which the individual sold his shares of Holdco to a third party for a sale price based on the amount of cash sitting in Newco. In connection with finding that the safe income of Newco was reduced by the amount of corporate income tax ultimately payable by it on its gain on the building sale, notwithstanding that at the time of sale, no income taxes had yet become payable, Webb JA first stated (at para. 39): I agree with … Deuce Holdings that it would only be logical that any arm’s length third party purchaser of shares would take into account any existing tax liability of the corporation, even though such liability may not be payable until a later date. He then stated (at para. 52): Both the fair market value of the shares and the portion of the resulting capital gain that would be attributable to the income earned or realized would reflect the tax liability that, although not payable immediately, would eventually have to be paid. … ...

., “the capital investments by the Loblaw group [,] were not part of Glenhuron’s conduct of business” Woods JA stated (at paras. 82, 84-85): For purposes of the ITA, the term “business” generally means “something occupying the time and attention and labour of a man for the purpose of profit” …. ... [T]his approach is consistent with long-standing jurisprudence which draws a distinction between “capital to enable [people] to conduct their enterprises” and “the activities by which they earn their income” …. ...

Eisbrenner’s submission, … he only had to raise a prima facie case, which he submitted was a lower standard than the balance of probabilities. Therefore, … even though Mr. Eisbrenner had pled the fact that he owned the pharmaceuticals, he was not required to prove this fact on a balance of probabilities. ... Likewise, … Mr. Morrison…. ...

Burke was entitled to none of the benefits, she stated (at paras. 116-117): This, as well as other factors identified … at paragraph 142 of Vavilov such as concerns about delay, fairness to the parties, costs to the parties and the efficient use of public resources, support a finding that the matter should not be remitted to the Appeal Division for redetermination. … Declining to remit a matter to the administrative decision maker may also be appropriate where it becomes evident to the Court that a particular outcome is inevitable …. ...

Rothstein J.A. stated (at pp. 19-20, 24-25): It is wrong to assume … that the fair market value of a group of items is necessarily the aggregate of the price that could be obtained for individual items in the group. … For example, if items are sold in large volumes in a wholesale market, the fair market value of the volumes sold in that market will be less than the aggregate of the values of the items considered individually that make up those volumes. … When a court is required to determine the fair market value of an asset for which there is no market that permits a direct comparison, it may be necessary to consider the transactions in some other market, subject to such adjustments as may be appropriate to the case, such as a blockage or volume discount. ...

. … [I]n light of ADC’s near-total economic dependence on Seawind Corp., the fact that the owner of the latter company dictated (and was able to dictate) the terms of the relationship between the two companies is a very relevant factor in determining whether the two were dealing at arm’s length. ... Silva’s ability to make the two companies disregard the terms of the development agreement – as he decided to do when he unilaterally decided that the 5% mark-up [under the Development Agreement] would not be paid to ADC. …[I]t would be difficult to imagine a stronger indicator of a non-arm’s length relationship than the fact that a company is allowed to operate out of another’s facility for free, without a lease. … ...

Miller J had required the Minister to disclose a draft proposal letter in the audit file, as well as a memo dated March 8, 2004 from Income Tax Rulings Directorate Finance’s Director General, Tax Legislation (excepting portions thereof that identified another taxpayer) in which the Directorate expressed concerns regarding the scope of the restrictions on the deductibility of non-capital losses under s. 111(5) and requested an amendment to “deem an acquisition of control to occur where a person or group of persons acquire, as part of a series of transactions, a certain level of equity in a corporation […] and one of the main purposes of the series of transactions is to avoid any limitation of the deductibility of non-capital losses”. ... However, Gleason JA stated (para. 28): [T]he documents in issue are of limited relevance and likely inadmissible at trial as, under the GAAR analysis, the question of the policy in the ITA that the taxpayer is alleged to have avoided is ultimately a question of law. … Thus, while it may well be incumbent on the Minister to set out the disputed policy in the Minister’s pleadings as a matter of fairness … it does not follow that evidence on the policy will be admissible at trial as matters of law are for a court to determine. ...

., 2019 FCA 183-- summary under Paragraph 135(2)(a) Summary Under Tax Topics- Other Legislation/Constitution- Federal- Excise Act, 2001- Section 135- Subsection 135(2)- Paragraph 135(2)(a) all-ingredients test applied to each alcoholic component – not to all components The respondent (Mark Anthony) produced fortified fermented ciders made from apples grown and fermented in Canada, to which was added certain other ingredients before the products were packaged, including spirits not fermented in Canada and apple juice concentrate which was not made from Canadian apples. ... Before finding that the exemption applied except (as acknowledged by Mark Anthony), in the case of the beverages that included the imported spirits, did not qualify for the exemption, Webb JA first rejected the position of the Crown that the “all ingredients” test was to be applied at the packaging rather than earlier fermentation stage, Webb JA stated (at para. 28): The Crown’s interpretation … [is] that all ingredients that are included in the packaged product must be agricultural or plant products grown in Canada, except those that are permitted to be added by the CRA, on the basis that they are “incidental”. This would result in a delegation of authority to the CRA to decide what wine will qualify for the exemption. … [I]t would not have been the intent of Parliament to implicitly delegate this authority to the CRA. ...

Following the realization shortly thereafter by Newco of a taxable capital gain and recapture of depreciation on a sale of the building, Newco increased the adjusted cost base to Holdco of its shares by effecting a series of s. 84(1) dividends (including a capital dividend) – following which the individual sold his shares of Holdco to a third party for a sale price based on the amount of cash sitting in Newco. ... Respecting the mechanics of how the pre-April 20, 2015 version of s. 55(2) operated to generate a capital gain as a result of the denial of safe income, he stated (at para. 74): Paragraph 55(2)(a) … provides that the amount in issue is deemed to not be a dividend. As a result, there is no addition to the adjusted cost base of the shares for this amount under paragraph 53(1)(b) …. ...