Search - 水晶光电 行业地位 发展趋势

28 January 2024- 11:40pm Parent – Court of Quebec finds that building repair work that matched the cost of the whole building was currently deductible Email this Content The taxpayer acquired a rental property in run-down condition for $275,000 and then incurred $290,074 in expenditures in order to restore the building. ... …What needed to be replaced was done, and without extravagance, only the minimum. … [T]he work done … was in the nature of repairs. ... Agence du revenu du Québec, 2023 QCCQ 10440 under s. 18(1)(b) – capital expenditure v. expense – improvements v. repairs. ...

Art. 23 of the China- New Zealand Double Taxation Agreement provided in relevant part that “Chinese tax paid … in respect of income derived by a resident of New Zealand from sources in the [PRC] … shall be allowed as a credit against New Zealand tax payable in respect of that income,” and that for such purposes, such Chinese tax “shall be deemed to include any amount which would have been payable as Chinese tax for any year but for an exemption from, or reduction of tax granted for that year … under [specified] provisions of Chinese law.” ... Lin, [2018] NZCA 38 under Treaties – Income Tax Conventions – Art. 24 and of Brian J. Arnold, “The Relationship between Controlled Foreign Corporation Rules and Tax Sparing Provisions in Tax Treaties: A New Zealand Case,” Bulletin for International Taxation July 2018, p. 430 under Treaties – Income Tax Conventions – Art. 24. ...

The presumption that a reasonableness review should be applied can be rebutted where there is a statutory appeal mechanism in place (thereby entailing application of a standard of correctness to questions of law) – however, the Court made it clear that this did not include provisions, such as ss. 18 to 18.2, 18.4 and 28 of the Federal Courts Act – so that this aspect does not appear to apply to reviews of CRA decisions (other than assessments). ... Reasons that “simply repeat statutory language, summarize arguments made, and then state a peremptory conclusion” will rarely assist a reviewing court in understanding the rationale underlying a decision and “are no substitute for statements of fact, analysis, inference and judgment” …. ... Rather than confirming a meaningful presumption of deference for administrative decision-makers … the majority’s reasons strip away deference from hundreds of administrative actors subject to statutory rights of appeal; rather than following the consistent path of this Court’s jurisprudence in understanding legislative intent as being the intention to leave legal questions within their mandate to specialized decision-makers with expertise, the majority removes expertise from the equation entirely and reformulates legislative intent as an overriding intention to provide — or not provide — appeal routes; and rather than clarifying the role of reasons and how to review them, the majority revives the kind of search for errors that dominated the pre- C.U.P.E. era. ...

But the purchase price was a once-and-for-all payment for the acquisition of an asset of enduring advantage – the 18 GMEs – which once acquired formed part of the profit-earning structure of the Trustee's business. ... Summaries of Commissioner of Taxation v Sharpcan Pty Ltd [2019] HCA 36 (High Court of Australia) under s. 18(1)(b) – Capital Expenditure v. Expense – Contract Purchases and Concessions and Licences, and s. 13(34)(b). ...

2 June 2021- 11:26pm CIBC – Federal Court of Appeal finds that fees paid by CIBC to Aeroplan were for promotional services, but was not averse to viewing Aeroplan Miles as gift certificates Email this Content The appellant (CIBC) was charged by Aeroplan for the number of Aeroplan Miles that were credited to the cards of CIBC cardholders. ... This may be a boon for cunning drafters and their bag of tricks. … [T]he element that gives the supply commercial efficacy—the predominant element of the supply—is the right to allocate Miles. ... Canada, 2021 FCA 96 under ETA s. 123(1) – supply, s. 181.2, s. 309(1) and Federal Courts Act, s. 27(1.3). ...

The transitional provision indicated that the reduced rate applied inter alia “to any supply … made on or after January 1, 2008.” ... In any event, ETA s. 133 (which, in approximate terms, deems supplies of property to occur when the agreement for their supply is entered into) deemed the agreements to be supplies of the condos, with D’Arcy J. noting in this regard that “[t]he application of section 133 is also not contingent on the existence of the Condo Units at the time the parties entered into the … Agreements ….” ... The Queen, 2022 TCC 56 under ETA s. 133 and s. 225(1) – A(a). ...

She completed the sale of all the shares to the purchaser and used ½ the proceeds to repay the note. ... Favreau J found that the sale of ½ of the taxpayer’s shares to his wife for a note clearly was a tax avoidance transaction: [T]he proceeds from the sale of the shares she purchased were used in full to repay the note.... ... Accordingly, the s. 245(2) assessment of the taxpayer to include all (rather than ½) of the taxable capital gains in his hands was confirmed. ...

In essence, it means ownership for the benefit of the person in question …. ... There was no evidence to suggest that Houmet could have used the funds received for any other purpose [other than to pay for the assignment to it], or that it could benefit from them in any other manner. … Further, Houmet's involvement was entirely ephemeral …. ... Summary of Hargreaves Property Holdings Ltd v Revenue And Customs [2024] EWCA Civ 365 under General Concepts – Ownership. ...

The corporation then sold this middle lot to an individual purchaser coupled with a covenant that it would demolish this structure – which, however, it did not do until 45 days after closing. ... This would be contrary to the “part thereof” language in section 123(1) …. ... Lucia Pessoa Park, 2018 ONSC 4218 under ETA s. 123(1) – residential complex, s. 194 and s. 224. ...

31 May 2019- 1:05am Connolly – Federal Court of Appeal finds that the CRA internal guidelines on waiving the RRSP over-contribution tax were inherently unreasonable Email this Content S. 204.1(4) provides that the tax imposed on RRSP contributions may be waived by the Minister if she is satisfied that the over-contribution “arose as a consequence of reasonable error, and reasonable steps are being taken to eliminate the excess.” ... Gleason JA found that these guidelines were unreasonable, stating: The delegate’s interpretation of subsection 204.1(4) of the ITA (as well as the interpretation set out in the internal CRA guideline, on which the delegate relied) thwarts the subsection’s remedial purpose as it virtually extinguishes the Minister’s discretion …. Nearly every error a taxpayer might make in over-contributing to his or her RRSP (other than a simple arithmetical error) will be caused by a misunderstanding of the applicable limits – an error of law. … Similarly, the fact that the error might have been made by a third party advisor or as a result of erroneous advice given by such advisor does not automatically mean that the error cannot be reasonable. … [Furthermore] the requirements to take reasonable steps to withdraw an RRSP over-contribution cannot be equated with immediacy or with the two-month timeframe mentioned in CRA’s internal “Guidelines for waiving tax – 19(23)7.23”. ...