Search - 深圳居住证 办理条件 最新政策

Consequently, paragraph 8(1)(b) does not apply to allow the deduction … of legal costs that have been paid to recover such an amount. [Respecting the recovery regarding the Coverage] … we suggest that a deduction be allowed for the amount of the legal fees that were paid to recover the damages for the Coverage. … You stated that the Dismissal Amount is a taxable amount as a wage or salary or retiring allowance. Thus, we are of the view that the amount paid as a legal expense attributable thereto is deductible in computing the Objectors' income under paragraph 8(1)(b) or 60(o.1) …depending on the circumstances. … [T]here is no rule in the Act for the allocation of legal fees. … [I]t is reasonable to consider that legal fees should be allocated among the various components. ...

Respecting Scenario 1, the Directorate stated: Individual A and Individual B form a related group that controls the Employer and are both related to the Employer pursuant to paragraph 251(2)(b) … [so that] the definition of IPP … is satisfied. Respecting Scenario 2: [A]s is apparent from Duha, the determination of whether a person exercises de jure control … must also take into consideration whether any specific or unique limitation on a shareholder’s power to control the election of the board or the board’s power to manage the business and affairs of the company, is manifested in either the constating documents of the corporation, or any unanimous shareholder agreement. Therefore, it is possible that … Individual A or Individual B could … possess de jure control of the Employer and be related to the Employer under subparagraph 251(2)(b)(i). … If Individual A or Individual B possessed a right such that the individual would be deemed to own sufficient shares to control the Employer under paragraph 251(5)(b), then the individual would be related to the Employer under subparagraph 251(2)(b)(i). ...

X …. The Residence would therefore have been disposed of by [them to] Mrs. X …. Regarding the verbal agreement … it is up to the taxpayer to demonstrate the existence of such an agreement whose effect is to transfer the ownership of the Residence at a particular time other than on XXXXXXXXXX. If the taxpayers can provide evidence to you of that verbal agreement, you should consult … Legal Services …. ...

23 June 2010 Internal T.I. 2010-0368161I7 F- 84.1-- summary under Paragraph 84.1(2)(b) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 84.1- Subsection 84.1(2)- Paragraph 84.1(2)(b) s. 84.1(2)(b) inapplicable to individual’s transfer of ½ of Opco to Holdco (owned by 3 unrelated individuals) for note and non-voting pref Three individuals (A, B, and C) each held 1/3 of the shares of Holdco, and Holdco and another individual, D, each held ½ of the shares of Opco. ... [Thereafter] … the Purchaser … is controlled by a group of 4 persons consisting of A, B, C and D (the Final Group). ... Consequently, the deeming provision in paragraph 84.1(2)(b) could not apply …. ...

Before noting that the distinction would cease to matter as a result of a proposed retroactive amendment to s. 14(1.01), the Directorate accepted that the agreements represented goodwill stating: [A] private institution under contract must also sign an operating agreement with the MSSS [Quebec Ministry] under which the institution undertakes to provide services as a CHSLD [care facility] …. In return, the MSSS provides the necessary funding for the operation of the institution. … [T]he operating agreements constitute goodwill … since the acquisition of one or more operating agreements by a purchaser can only be made if the Minister … has approved the assignment of the underlying licence. ... Thus, since the transfer of the operating agreements cannot be made without the transfer of the business to the new purchaser, we are of the view that the operating agreements constitute goodwill …. ...

9 May 2022 Internal T.I. 2018-0790251I7- 45(2) election and beneficial ownership-- summary under Ownership Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Ownership a spouse could be the beneficial owner even though she did not contribute to the property's purchase / owner means beneficial owner S. 45(2) permits a taxpayer to elect to avoid a deemed disposition from a conversion of “property of the taxpayer” from personal to income-producing use. ... A person who has beneficial ownership but not legal ownership can enforce their ownership rights against the holder of legal title. … There is generally a presumption that the holder of legal title of a property is also the beneficial owner of the property, unless the facts support otherwise. It concluded: [I]f both spouses are considered to have beneficial ownership … they would both be required to file the election …. ...

8 January 2008 Internal T.I. 2007-0254881I7 F- Amortissement d'une aire de camping-- summary under Subsection 1100(17) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Regulations- Regulation 1100- Subsection 1100(17) campground, if a business, not subject to leasing property restriction rule In finding that a campground generally would not be subject to the rental property restriction rules, the Directorate stated: [P]aragraph 7 of [IT-434R] … states that “The operation of a trailer court or campground where all services are provided, e.g., laundromat, cafeteria, swimming pool, showers, playgrounds, etc. … would be a business, but not a rental business due to the magnitude of services provided.” … [I]f a taxpayer's operation of a campground constitutes a business … it is the CRA's view that the taxpayer carrying on such a business is not restricted in the amount of the CCA deduction. ...

It is arguable that the acquisition of the … MRPS is not considered part of the ordinary course of business carried on by [Canco 2], but rather the acquisition may be considered an isolated and special transaction that is not part of a course of conduct that involves repeated dealings of a similar nature. … [I]t is also important to consider whether the arrangement in the current case, at its core, more closely resembles a debt financing arrangement or a capital investment. …[W]e are more inclined to conclude that the arrangement more closely resembles a capital investment. … [Canco 2] is not in the business of lending money to the general public or to any disinterested third parties and the loans it made were limited to its foreign related corporations. All of the proceeds from the issue of the … MRPS were used by Luxco 1 to make loans to … US foreign affiliates for their US operations. … ...

The Excise and GST/HST Rulings Directorate queried the view in 2014-0530691E5, respecting language, similar to that quoted above, appearing in ITA s. 8(1)(i)(i), that: a professional status would generally have to be acknowledged in the statute itself to satisfy the “recognized by statute” condition in subparagraph 8(1)(i)(i) …. After stating that Montgomery: clarified that the phrase “recognized by statute” should be afforded a broad interpretation, and that “recognized by statute” does not necessarily mean that a professional status was incorporated, created, or regulated by a particular statute and noting that 2014-0530691E5 was somewhat inconsistent with 2012-0444181M4, the Income Tax Rulings Directorate concluded: [W]e would agree with your views that for purposes of the meaning of the phrase “professional status recognized by statute” … applying a textual, contextual and purposive analysis, a “professional status” can be “recognized by a statute” for purposes of subparagraph 8(1)(i)(i) … even if it is only recognized in the supporting regulations of an act. However … where a “professional status” is only acknowledged in an organization’s bylaws, the “professional status” would not likely be considered “recognized by statute” …. ...

. … The fact that the wife did not contribute financially towards the purchase of the Home is not necessarily indicative of whether or not she holds a beneficial interest in the property. ... As such … the taxpayer referred to [in s. 45] would typically be the beneficial owner of the property, whether such ownership is jointly held with another person or otherwise. Therefore, if both spouses are considered to have beneficial ownership … they would both be required to file the election …. ...