Search - 报销 发票日期 消费日期不一致

12 June 2009 External T.I. 2009-0316511E5 F- Charges sociales et autres retenues France-- summary under Non-Business-Income Tax Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 126- Subsection 126(7)- Non-Business-Income Tax social security contributions do not qualify as income taxes – but French "contribution sociale généralisée" and "contribution pour le remboursement de la dette sociale" so qualify Can the following deductions made by France from the salary of an individual who has been resident in Canada for less than 60 months qualify as a non-business income tax for s. 126 purposes: CSG ("contribution sociale généralisée" ["general social contribution"]) CRDS ("contribution pour le remboursement de la dette sociale " [contribution for the repayment of the social debt]) Sécurité sociale vieillesse [old age social security] (retirement) Pole emploi (similar, in your opinion, to Employment Insurance) Retraite complémentaire [supplementary pension] (according to you, mandatory)? CRA responded: By virtue of paragraph 1 of Article XV of the Convention, salaries, wages and other similar remuneration derived by a resident of a Contracting State in respect of an employment shall be taxable only in that State unless the employment is exercised in the other Contracting State. … If the employee performs employment in France while resident in Canada, France may tax the employee to the extent provided in Article XV of the Convention and Canada may allow a foreign tax credit for non-business income taxes paid by the employee to France. … 2002-0169607 states that the "contribution sociale généralisée" and the "contribution pour le remboursement de la dette sociale" qualify as a non-business income tax … since these contributions have the legal characteristics of a tax (levied without direct consideration) as opposed to social contributions which, in turn, confer on those who pay them a right to benefits. … [S]ocial security contributions generally do not qualify as income or profits taxes because they are not really taxes at all, within the judicially accepted meaning of that term. ... This exception, however, does not seem to apply in the situation presented …. ...

If this benefit is provided to the incorporated employee in the incorporated employee’s capacity as an employee … the cost of the benefit comprises the personal use portion of the automobile lease costs. Consequently, these expenses would be deductible in computing the income of the PSB corporation by virtue of subparagraph 18(1)(p)(ii) to the extent that such leasing costs would otherwise be deductible if the corporation's income were from a business other than a PSB. … If this benefit is provided to the incorporated employee in the incorporated employee’s capacity as a shareholder, the cost of the benefit is not deductible in computing the income of the PSB corporation … since it would not, if the corporation's income were from a business other than a PSB, be deductible in computing its income. ... Respecting CCA claims, CRA stated: [A] capital cost allowance amount is not the cost of a benefit …[and] is not deductible in computing the income of a PSB corporation under subparagraph 18(1)(p)(ii). … However … capital cost allowance may be deducted in computing the income of the PSB corporation by virtue of subparagraph 18(1)(p)(iii) where such an amount would otherwise have been deductible by virtue of paragraphs 8(1)(f) and 8(1)(j)(ii), having regard to subsections 8(4), 8(10) and 8(13) …. ...

Ruling that the transfers from the Direct Subtrusts to Trust A in 2 will not be considered a "disposition" by virtue of s. 248(1) – disposition, (f)(v), and Trust A will be deemed, to be the same trust as, and a continuation of, each of the Direct Subtrusts by virtue of s. 248(25.1); therefore the ACB of Taxpayer's interest in Trust A will be equal to the aggregate ACB of Taxpayer's interests in the Direct Subtrusts before the transfer. See detailed summary under s. 132.2 – qualifying exchange. ...

In finding that the fees were not deductible under s. 8(1)(i)(i), CRA stated: IT-158R2, [para. 1(c) … states that professional status must be recognized by a Canadian, provincial or foreign statute. ... [T]he facts described … do not support the conclusion that those conditions are satisfied. ...

. … … [W]here the transaction is not commercially reasonable, the borrowed money does not meet the test in paragraph 20(1)(c) of being used for the purpose of earning income. ...

10 October 2014 APFF Roundtable Q. 20, 2014-0534671C6 F- D&D Livestock-- summary under Subsection 245(4) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 245- Subsection 245(4) unjustified duplication of fiscal attributes is abusive What is the CRA position on D & D Livestock? ... However, the CRA would not hesitate to invoke the GAAR in similar files. … The CRA considers among other things that transactions or series of transactions permitting the double utilization of the same amount of safe income in order to reduce a capital gain realized on an ultimate disposition of shares of a corporation are abusive and go against the object of subsection 55(2). ...

10 October 2014 APFF Roundtable Q. 20, 2014-0534671C6 F- D&D Livestock-- summary under Subparagraph 55(2.1)(b)(i) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 55- Subsection 55(2.1)- Paragraph 55(2.1)(b)- Subparagraph 55(2.1)(b)(i) CRA is concerned by planining that can result in an unjustified duplication of fiscal attributes including ACB What is the CRA position on D & D Livestock? ... However, the CRA would not hesitate to invoke the GAAR in similar files. … The CRA considers among other things that transactions or series of transactions permitting the double utilization of the same amount of safe income in order to reduce a capital gain realized on an ultimate disposition of shares of a corporation are abusive and go against the object of subsection 55(2). ...

After noting a current GAAR review by Aggressive Tax Planning, the Directorate stated that LeCavalier " supports the application of GAAR… where the debt parking rules … were considered to have been misused or abused. ...

After noting that “ Redclay [indicated that] ‘ was payable’ requires any GST/HST or PST actually paid pursuant to a vehicle purchase or lease contract to be included in the definition of cost for the purposes of subsection 6(2),” CRA indicated that under ETA s. 153(4)(c) “the GST/HST paid is not reduced because of an exemption [as referred to in s. 6(7)] but is reduced because of a calculation of the GST/HST base,” and the same analysis appeared to apply in the PST provinces. ...

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. ...