Search - 深圳居住证 办理条件 最新政策

The documentary evidence … does not give any indication that Mr. Chad … intended, in conducting the FX Activities, to achieve a profit/loss amount great enough to offset the $240,000 fee, which was a significant expense …. Thus … the intention of Mr. Chad … in implementing the Trades, was not to earn a profit …. ... The King, 2024 TCC 142 under s. 3(1) – business, and General Concepts- Sham. ...

Leggatt LJ stated: Counsel for Mr Jimenez … relied on a distinction … adopted … [by Rossiter CJ] in Oroville Reman & Reload … between documents of notice that merely involve the supply of information with no threat of penalties in the event of non-compliance and documents involving a compulsory process or containing a command. ... Such a measure does not involve the performance of any official act within the territory of another state – as would, for example, sending an officer of Revenue and Customs to enter the person's business premises in a foreign state and inspect business documents that are on the premises …. [T]he imposition of a civil penalty … for failure to comply with such a taxpayer notice would [not] involve an exercise of enforcement jurisdiction … provided that no steps are taken to seek to enforce the penalty in a foreign state. ...

In fact, another public company (“Inco” – the 25% minority shareholder) made a subsequent offer that was accepted by DFR, thereby triggering the payment by it of the break fee. ... Falconbridge was carrying on its business when it negotiated the Merger … Agreement[s], … which provided for the fees in dispute. … The … Fees were ancillary business income received by Falconbridge in the course of earning income from business. ... The Queen, 2021 TCC 63 under s. 9 – compensation payments. ...

31 January 2021- 11:01pm Prairies Tubulars – Federal Court finds that requiring payment of duties before they could be appealed was not unconstitutional Email this Content Prairies Tubulars challenged the constitutionality of provisions of the Special Import Measures Act (the “Appeal Payment Provisions”) which required it to pay all outstanding duties before proceeding with the SIMA’s appeal procedure. ... Before dismissing the application, Ahmed J stated: [L]egislation may be inconsistent with section 96 … if it creates financial obstacles that impose undue hardship on potential litigants …. However, in light of the Applicant’s gross earnings … I am not persuaded … that the Appeal Payment Provisions cause it undue hardship. … Trial Lawyers is distinguishable … because the Appeal Payment Provisions are remedial, not punitive. ...

6 July 2021- 11:14pm Adélard Soucy – Quebec Court of Appeal finds that a movable structure for warming a soldering operation was not Class 29 property Email this Content The taxpayer custom-fabricated pieces of heavy specialized equipment at the northern mining site of one of its mining customers. ... …. The respondent's Econox serves primarily … to shelter the respondent's operations from the weather …. ... Adélard Soucy (1975) Inc., 2021 QCCA 1050 under Schedule II – Class 8. ...

3 September 2019- 11:53pm Yellow Point – Tax Court of Canada finds that an ecological gift was made in the year before it was certified as such Email this Content A taxpayer, who donated an interest in ecologically sensitive land to two qualified donees in 2008, unsuccessfully argued that the gift was not made until 2009 for purposes of computing the five-year (now 10-year) carryforward period described in s. 110.1(1)(d)(iii), because it was not until 2009 that he received certification from the Minister of the Environment as to the lands’ ecologically sensitive nature. Visser, J stated: [A] gift has been made … when a donor legally effects a voluntary transfer of property to a donee …. … [T]he certificates are necessary to claim a deduction under paragraph 110.1(1)(d) … but not to determine if a gift of land has been “made” for the purpose of paragraph 110.1(1)(d). ...

After agreeing with Pamel J below that such documents were part of the court file and thus accessible to the public under Rule 26 unless a confidentiality order was obtained, Montigny JA went on to reject the taxpayer’s submission (in reliance on Gernhart) that making the certified record public as a matter of course violated section 8 of the Charter, stating: Anyone engaging the courts in an action … must expect that large parts of his or her private life will become publicly accessible. … Far from transmitting confidential information without his consent and without informing him, it was rather at Mr. Rémillard's own request that the Minister transmitted the relevant documents to the Court Registry. … … Mr. Rémillard could have … requested the Court to issue an order to protect the confidentiality of certain information contained in the documents transmitted. ...

26 June 2017- 1:02am Mady – Tax Court of Canada finds that the series of transactions can inform whether an included property transfer has a bad s. 74.5(11) purpose, and that the taxpayer is not responsible under s. 163(2) for the unbeknownst sharp practice of his tax advisor Email this Content As a result of Dental College requirements, the common shares of the professional corporation through which the taxpayer carried on his dental practice (“MDPC“) had to be transferred from a family trust to him. ... Hogan J stated: While [the tax advisor] acted imprudently in failing to disclose the pending sale of MDPC to his colleague, I do not believe that the Appellant can be held accountable for his actions. … It is well established that a taxpayer is responsible for the actions of his agent only where the taxpayer is privy to the gross negligence of that agent or wilfully blind…. ... The Queen, 2017 TCC 112 under s. 74.5(11), General Concepts – FMV – Shares, General Concepts – Ownership, s. 86(2), s. 163(2) and General Concepts – Price Adjustment Clause. ...

10 November 2020- 10:55pm MDA Systems – Court of Quebec finds payments made by the federal government under a contract where it mostly had the risks and benefits were SR&ED “contract payments” Email this Content MDA contracted with the Government of Canada to provide computer systems engineering work on a satellite system to perform radar imaging from space. The ARQ denied tax credits for the wages cost of work performed on the contracts by MDA on the basis that the consideration received by MDA from the Government was “contract payments” – whose definition (similarly to the federal definition in ITA s. 127(9)) relevantly referred to “an amount in respect of an expenditure of a current nature … of a taxpayer … payable by the Government of Canada … or other public authority … for scientific research and experimental development to be performed for the authority.” Before agreeing with the ARQ position, Bourgeois JCQ found that: “the SR&ED work was carried out because of the requirements in the contracts between the Government of Canada and MDA” “the Government of Canada bore the major risks of the … Program” “the intellectual property developed by MDA in the space component of this project was transferred from MDA to the Government of Canada” it was a contract for services rather than for the sale of goods (although Bourgeois JCQ agreed with a CRA Policy Statement that “a contract for the sale of a good does not necessarily mean that the SR&ED work was not being performed on behalf of the payer”) More generally, “[a]lthough the contracts were not drafted specifically for doing SR&ED work, analysis of the contract terms tends to show that ultimately the SR&ED work was undertaken on behalf of the Government of Canada.” ...

20 June 2022- 11:30pm Marino – Federal Court of Appeal confirms the Oceanspan principle that a non-resident who does not compute income from any source for ITA purposes does not have a taxation year Email this Content An individual with no connection to Canada paid significant tuition fees while in attendance at U.S. universities prior to 2012 then, on immigrating to Canada, claimed his “unused” tuition tax credits as a deduction from Canadian tax. ... In the Court of Appeal, Stratas JA stated (at para. 3) that “ Oceanspan is … directly on point … [and] binds us, just as it bound the Tax Court,” and further rejected the taxpayer’s argument- that s. 250.1 supersedes Oceanspan and has the effect of deeming every non-resident person to have a taxation year in Canada – and expressed agreement here as well with the Tax Court’s reasons. ... Canada, 2022 FCA 115 under s. 248(1) – taxation year, and s. 250.1(a). ...