Search - 江苏苏美达轻纺国际贸易有限公司 关税政策 最新动态

26 November 2020 STEP Roundtable Q. 13, 2020-0847201C6- GRE & section 216 election-- summary under Subsection 216(1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 216- Subsection 216(1) a non-resident estate (using GRE graduated rates), then its residuary beneficiaries, could file under s. 216 respecting a Canadian rental property A non-resident individual owning a Canadian rental property had filed T1 returns pursuant to the s. 216 rules. ... While the Estate is a GRE, the Estate will be taxed at the graduated rates in respect of the net rental income.... … Provided that the section 216 requirements are satisfied, from the time they acquire beneficial ownership of the property, Y and Z could elect to file under Part I pursuant to section 216 in respect of their share of income derived from the rental property. … ...

3 December 2024 CTF Roundtable Q. 11, 2024-1038241C6- Global Minimum Tax Act – Interpretation and Application of OECD Agreed Administrative Guidance-- summary under Subsection 17(6) Summary Under Tax Topics- Other Legislation/Constitution- Federal- Global Minimum Tax Act- Section 17- Subsection 17(6) CRA will administer s. 17(6) to push down taxes paid by indirect owner of reverse hybrid CE on income of the CE allocated to it, to the CE CRA indicated that as new OECD administrative guidance is released, the DST and Global Tax Section of CRA will consult with the Department of Finance to determine, on a case-by-case basis, how such guidance should be handled – whether there is a pending amendment to the Global Minimum Tax Act (GMTA) or whether CRA will apply the new guidance to inform its interpretation of the existing GMTA provisions. ... CRA indicated that it has consulted with Finance and, in light of likely further amendments, it will administer the provisions of the GMTA to achieve what the OECD administrative guidance clarifies should be the outcome – that is, the constituent entity covered taxes paid by the upper-tier entity being pushed down to the CE. ...

6 October 2017 APFF Financial Strategies and Instruments Roundtable Q. 16, 2017-0705181C6 F- Hedging & George Weston Limited-- summary under Futures/Forwards/Hedges Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 9- Capital Gain vs. Profit- Futures/Forwards/Hedges CRA is considering changing its policy re what is capital hedge After noting that “the CRA has already stated that it accepts the decision … in George Weston,” CRA noted, however, that: The approach taken by the TCC in [MacDonald] respecting, inter alia, the linkage principle appears to be irreconcilable with previous jurisprudence, including George Weston Limited.... ...

5 October 2018 APFF Financial Strategies and Instruments Roundtable Q. 10, 2018-0761551C6 F- Attribution rules and promissory note-- summary under Payment & Receipt Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Payment & Receipt promissory note could not be issued as payment in context of income attribution rules Where a loan is made to a spouse at the prescribed interest rate, s. 74.5(2) requires that each year’s interest be “paid” by January 30 of the following year. ...

14 May 2019 CLHIA Roundtable Q. 3, 2019-0799111C6- 2019 CLHIA Q3- 3rd party RRSP contributions-- summary under Payment & Receipt Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Payment & Receipt payment at direction of annuitant is payment by annuitant CRA indicated that it is acceptable for an RRSP contribution to be received from a third party (i.e., drawn on a bank account other than the annuitant’s) “provided that the payment is made at the direction or with the concurrence of the annuitant of the RRSP,” so that the RRSP receipt should be issued by the financial institution to the annuitant. ...

14 May 2015 CLHIA Roundtable, 2015-0573841C6- 2015 CLHIA Roundtable – Winding-up and ACB-- summary under Subsection 148(7) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 148- Subsection 148(7) s. 69(5) generally prevails over s. 148(7) At the 2005 CALU Roundtable (2005-0116631C6), the CRA indicated that s. 69(5) would likely take precedence over s. 148(7) on the wind-up of a corporation under s. 88(2), so that a distributed interest in a life insurance policy would be disposed of at fair market value rather than cash surrender value. In confirming that this position "remains unchanged," CRA stated: [T]he general rule is that where two provisions in the same statute conflict, the more specific provision should take precedence. … While we would generally expect subsection 69(5) to take precedence over subsection 148(7)… this approach is subject to a review of the particular facts and circumstances of an actual case…. ...

14 May 2015 CLHIA Roundtable, 2015-0573841C6- 2015 CLHIA Roundtable – Winding-up and ACB-- summary under Subsection 69(5) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 69- Subsection 69(5) s. 69(5) generally prevails over s. 148(7) At the 2005 CALU Roundtable (2005-0116631C6), the CRA indicated that s. 69(5) would likely take precedence over s. 148(7) on the wind-up of a corporation under s. 88(2), so that a distributed interest in a life insurance policy would be disposed of at fair market value rather than cash surrender value. In confirming that this position "remains unchanged," CRA stated: [T]he general rule is that where two provisions in the same statute conflict, the more specific provision should take precedence. … While we would generally expect subsection 69(5) to take precedence over subsection 148(7)… this approach is subject to a review of the particular facts and circumstances of an actual case…. ...

25 November 2012 Roundtable, 2013-0479401C6 F- Employés et Achat Ltée – commentaires panel ARC-- summary under Paragraph 84.1(1)(b) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 84.1- Subsection 84.1(1)- Paragraph 84.1(1)(b) generally a deemed dividend on repurchase of departing employees’ shares by employer-funded Buyco In order to facilitate the disposition of shares of departing employees who had purchased their shares under an employee share ownership plan, Opco forms and injects funds into a new company (Buyco), which uses those funds to purchase the employee’s Opco shares. In finding that there generally would be a resulting deemed dividend under s. 84.1, CRA stated: Given the nature of the arrangements offered to resigning employees by Buyco and the absence of separate interests of the participating parties, it is logical to consider that employees and Buyco are generally not dealing at arm's length. … As a result, for advance ruling requests considered in 2012, we refused to confirm that resigning employees would not be deemed, under section 84.1, to have received a dividend from Buyco on the disposition of their Opco shares. ...

26 November 2013 Annual CTF Roundtable, 2013-0509061C6- Part XIII Tax & Standard Convertible Debentures-- summary under Participating debt interest Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 212- Subsection 212(3)- Participating debt interest interest and premium on standard convertible debenture not participating [R]egular periodic interest payments made by public corporations pursuant to the terms and conditions of standard convertible debentures do not generally constitute "participating debt interest"…. [T]he deemed payment of interest on standard convertible debentures under subsection 214(7) of the ITA that arises because of a transfer or assignment of standard convertible debentures by a non-resident person to a person resident in Canada (including the issuer of the debenture), does not generally constitute "participating debt interest". … CRA is not inclined at this time to take the position that standard convertible debentures would in general constitute "excluded debt obligations" pursuant to paragraph 214(8)(c) of the ITA. ...

7 June 2019 STEP Roundtable Q. 4, 2019-0799911C6- TOSI & Meaning of Excluded Business-- summary under Paragraph 120.4(1.1)(a) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 120.4- Subsection 120.4(1.1)- Paragraph 120.4(1.1)(a) spouse on achieving 20-hour threshold could receive large dividends as excluded amounts The spouse (the “Spouse”) of a professional (the “Individual”) owns non-voting preferred shares of his professional corporation (“XCo”) and works at least 20 hours per week as a part-time receptionist. ... CRA indicated that if Spouse works for XCo at least 20 hours per week throughout the portion of the year that the business operates, that would satisfy s. 120.4(1.1)(a), and the dividend income received by Spouse would be considered to be an excluded amount because it is derived from an excluded business – so that it would not be subject to the tax on split income. ...