Search - 水晶光电 行业地位 发展趋势

12 June 2019- 11:46pm Lin – Federal Court rejects a CRA request for an information-request compliance order because it was unclear which entities were covered Email this Content Three individuals whom CRA suspected of not disclosing offshore assets received letters requesting the filing of T1135s and requesting information, which CRA considered to be within its powers to request information under s. 231.1(1). ... Because it is not at all clear whether the Letter was directed to the Respondents individually or their connected entities, the first requirement of section 231.7 … for obtaining a compliance order has not been satisfied …. ...

16 June 2019- 9:38pm CRA indicates that subjecting dividend income paid to a preferred beneficiary to TOSI accords with tax policy – but that it’s easy to avoid the designation Email this Content As noted re Q.13, CRA considers that the exclusion from para. ... Summary of 7 June 2019 STEP CRA Roundtable, Q.14 under s. 120.4(1) – split income – s. ...

19 June 2019- 12:00am 3087-1883 Québec – Federal Court finds that a determination of CRA not to reassess a taxpayer is a reviewable decision Email this Content Two co-owners paid a portion of the expropriation proceeds received for one of their properties to their affiliated tenant of that property. ... Walker J found that the refusal of CRA to reassess was a decision that could be subject to judicial review (e.g., if the decision was unreasonable) – although, of course, the substantive question of whether the requested adjustment was correct could not be reviewed by her. ... In any event, CRA had no legal obligation to issue a reassessment notice following the taxpayer request – that was a decision that was within its discretion (s. 152(4) used the word “may”). ...

10 July 2019- 12:01am National Car Parks – Court of Appeal of England and Wales finds that car park machines that did not refund coin payments thereby received extra consideration for VAT purposes Email this Content A customer pays for parking in a car park by going to the ticket machine which, on its tariff board, displays a price for one hour of £1.40 – but also states that change is not given. ... Summary of National Car Parks Ltd v Revenue and Customs [2019] EWCA Civ 854 under ETA s. 123(1) – consideration. ...

18 July 2019- 12:07am Retfalvi – U.S. 4th Circuit finds that Art. 26A of the Canada-U.S. ... Article 26A does not levy taxes. … We agree with the government that Article 26A merely facilitates collection of an already existing debt. ... USA, No. 18-2158 (U.S.C.A., 4 th Circuit, 16 July 2019) under Treaties – Income Tax Conventions- Art. 26A. ...

11 August 2019- 11:42pm Royer – Court of Quebec finds that the principal residence did not include the portion thereof occupied by the grandmother performing an essential care function Email this Content Similarly to the federal principal residence exemption, the Quebec exemption requires that “the housing unit is ordinarily inhabited in the year by the individual, his spouse or former spouse or his child.” ... Agence du revenu du Québec, 2019 QCCQ 4163 under s. 54(1) – principal residence- (a) and s. 248(1) – disposition. ...

10 September 2019- 11:44pm Mark Anthony – Federal Court of Appeal finds that an exemption provision should not be interpreted to give CRA discretion as to its scope Email this Content An excise duty exemption applied to Canadian cider if it could be said that it was “produced in Canada and composed wholly of agricultural or plant product grown in Canada.” ... In rejecting the CRA position in this regard, Webb JA stated: 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. ...

16 September 2019- 12:21am Robinson – Tax Court of Canada finds that costs of investigating and developing opportunities for drop down to a corporation were capital expenditures Email this Content The taxpayer (with modest success) sought to follow a pattern of first developing assets (e.g., a patent portfolio) and then contributing them to a corporation (one for each such venture) for an equity interest therein. Monaghan J first indicated that these personal-level activities had “more of the hallmarks of seeking an investment opportunity to earn income from property than business” – but did not pursue this point, as the Crown had not suggested that the source was not a business. ... The Queen, 2019 TCC 181 under s. 18(1)(b) – start-up expenditures and s. 3(a). ...

20 September 2019- 2:02am SPE Valeur – Tax Court of Canada finds that criminally seized documents could be used in a subsequent civil reassessment under s. 163(2) Email this Content The Criminal Investigations Directorate seized records of taxpayers in connection with its investigation, but ultimately returned the file to the audit branch based on a cost-benefit analysis. ... In finding that there had been no infringement of the taxpayer’s s. 8 Charter rights, so that the seized documents were admissible and not excluded under s. 24(2) of the Charter, D’Auray J noted that “ Brown [2013 FCA 111] … determined that documents seized in a criminal search could be admitted into evidence on the appeal of an assessment,” and that the taxpayers had no reasonable expectation of privacy respecting the seized documents. ...

29 September 2019- 10:13pm Wardlaw – Tax Court of Canada notes that the effective s. 163(2) penalty rate can exceed 50% where there has been a loss carryback Email this Content The taxpayer claimed a fictitious business loss of over $357,000, and requested that the excess of the claimed loss over what he could use in the current year be carried back to the prior three years. ... The Appellant may wish to consider making an application for a reduction of the penalty and interest under … subsection 220(3.1) …. ...