Search - 微信撤回和删除的区别 官方

Agence du revenu du Québec, 2021 QCCQ 12822-- summary under Paragraph 2900(2)(b) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Regulations- Regulation 2900- Subsection 2900(2)- Paragraph 2900(2)(b) the applicable salaries of employees engaged in SR&ED but who did not record their time could not be recognized Although the ARQ accepted that the taxpayer was carrying on SR&ED, the taxpayer had failed to establish with any convincing evidence what proportion of the remuneration of its employees qualified under Regulation 230R1 (s. 230)(b) – equivalent to federal Reg. 2900(2)(b)) as being amounts that could reasonably be considered to be in respect of the prosecution of such SR&ED. ... He concluded (at paras. 109-110): While the fisc conceded that the taxpayer performed activities that qualified as SR&ED … it denied almost all expenditures for salaries of employees who performed tasks that could reasonably be expected to be related to SR&ED. ... Hubmar had the burden of persuasion …. He had also noted (at para. 45) that: The criteria mentioned in the [CRA] SR&ED Salary or Wages Policy guide the taxpayer in this task since the tax authorities state, in a manner, how they will apply the Regulations when processing a tax credit claim. ...

. … [A] document is relevant to the issues in dispute when it contains information that may, directly or indirectly, enable the party requesting disclosure either to plead its own case or to prejudice that of its adversary, or to initiate an investigation. The … Memorandum, deals in large part with the transactions at issue; it followed the agreement concerning the sale of RBP, which contained a clause on [minimization of] taxation and … the parties followed what was provided for in the Memorandum. ...

. … Just before the sale of the Unit in October 2019 [the shareholders] retroceded the building to 9154-6093, which collected and remitted the GST and QST [on the sale] … to Revenu Québec. She further stated (at para. 129) that in light of this reporting of the 2019 sale: [A]llowing Revenu Québec to recover QST on the 2009 transaction means that 9154-6093 is remitting QST twice on the same housing unit. … [T]his runs counter to both Revenu Québec's role and tax policy in this regard. ...

. … Just before the sale of the Unit in October 2019 [the shareholders] retroceded the building to 9154-6093, which collected and remitted the GST and QST [on the sale] … to Revenu Québec. She further stated (at para. 129) that in light of this reporting of the 2019 sale: [A]llowing Revenu Québec to recover QST on the 2009 transaction means that 9154-6093 is remitting QST twice on the same housing unit. … [T]his runs counter to both Revenu Québec's role and tax policy in this regard. ...

. … The fact that there was no certainty that the Oxxio business would be sold does not make the expenditure revenue in nature. … Indeed, expenditure on an abortive capital disposal transaction is capital expenditure nonetheless and is the paradigm case of a situation in which there is uncertainty as to whether a transaction will go ahead …. ...

Regarding QSTA s. 199(c) (similar to ETA s. 169(1) – B(c)), St-Joseph argued based on QSTA s. 42.5 (similar to ETA s. 141.1(3)(a)) that it had incurred the costs “in connection with the … termination of a commercial activity” of it, so that such costs were deemed to have been incurred in the course of its commercial activity. In rejecting this submission, and in confirming the denial of the ITRs, Lachapelle JCQ stated (at paras. 93, 103, TaxInterpretations translation): [T]he intention of St-Joseph was that the work carried out on the first and second floors of the Building was to adapt the Building for the residential or lodging use of individuals. … The Court concludes that the concept of the cessation of an activity does not include the transformation of the activity. ...

Lachapelle JCQ found that St-Joseph was not entitled to input tax refunds (ITRs) pursuant to QSTA s. 199(b) (similar to ETA s. 169(1) – B(b)) as there was no evidence of improvements (i.e., additions to the ACB) of the portion of the building used in commercial activities of St-Joseph. Turning to QSTA s. 199(c) (similar to ETA s. 169(1) – B(c)), she went on to reject an argument of St-Joseph based on QSTA s. 42.5 (similar to ETA s. 141.1(3)(a)) that it had incurred the costs “in connection with the … termination of a commercial activity” of it, so that such costs were deemed to have been incurred in the course of its commercial activity. ...

St-Joseph argued based on the QSTA equivalent of ETA s. 141.1(3)(a) that it had incurred the costs “in connection with the … termination of a commercial activity” of it, so that such costs were deemed to have been incurred in the course of its commercial activity. ... " In rejecting this position and before dismissing St-Joseph’s appeal, the Court stated (at paras. 4-5): [Its] argument … fails to explain how the transformation aimed at a new activity is, in itself, related to the termination of the previous activity. … [T]he expenses for the renovation and transformation into an RSR were not related to the termination of the commercial rental activity, and the judge's conclusion that they could not be linked to it is free of error. ...

. … There is some Canadian authority [citing Bowater and Wacky Wheatley's] to the effect that expenditure on a capital project which does not result in the acquisition of a capital asset is deductible. ... Obtaining the consents thus represented tangible progress towards their completion. … [H]owever...expenditure associated with early stage feasibility assessments may be deductible. Such assessments can be seen as a normal incident of business. … Expenditure which is not directed towards a specific project or which is so preliminary as not to be directed towards the advancement of such a project is likely to be seen as being on revenue account. ...

ACN 154 520 199 Pty Ltd (in liquidation) v Commissioner of Taxation, [2020] FCAFC 190-- summary under Precious Metal Summary Under Tax Topics- Excise Tax Act- Section 123- Subsection 123(1)- Precious Metal market criteria for gold to be in investment form An Australian GST provision effectively zero-rated a supply of “precious metal” (relevantly defined as gold, in an investment form, of at least 99.5% fineness) if it was the “first supply of that precious metal after its refining by … the supplier”. ... That document stated at [29]: … for gold, silver or platinum to be in an investment form for the purposes of the GST Act, it must be in a form that: is capable of being traded on the international bullion market, that is, it must be a bar, wafer or coin; bears a mark or characteristic accepted as identifying and guaranteeing its fineness and quality; and is usually traded at a price that is determined by reference to the spot price of the metal it contains. It was common ground before the Tribunal that the above view of what constitutes “investment form” was generally accepted; the parties also agreed that, absent a recognised mark and indication of fineness, a gold bar will not be “precious metal” irrespective of its degree of metallic purity …. ...