Search - 2002年 抽纸品牌 质量排名

Results 61 - 70 of 275 for 2002年 抽纸品牌 质量排名
Technical Interpretation - Internal summary

5 December 2002 Internal T.I. 2002-0155667 F - DEDUCTIBILITE DES INTERETS CAPITALISEES -- summary under Subparagraph 20(1)(c)(i)

5 December 2002 Internal T.I. 2002-0155667 F- DEDUCTIBILITE DES INTERETS CAPITALISEES-- summary under Subparagraph 20(1)(c)(i) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 20- Subsection 20(1)- Paragraph 20(1)(c)- Subparagraph 20(1)(c)(i) capitalized simple interest on loan to acquire common shares was deductible if reasonable expectation of dividends An employee of a CCPC was lent money by the corporation to acquire common shares of the corporation. ...
Technical Interpretation - External summary

25 January 2002 External T.I. 2001-0112985 - EBP -- summary under Paragraph 7(3)(b)

25 January 2002 External T.I. 2001-0112985- EBP-- summary under Paragraph 7(3)(b) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 7- Subsection 7(3)- Paragraph 7(3)(b) EBP purchasing treasury shares of related corp Would s. 7 apply to an employee benefit plan ("EBP") thatacquires treasury shares of a corporation that is related to the employer who contributes to the EBP? ...
FCA (summary)

Canada v. Société des alcools du Québec, 2002 FCA 69 -- summary under Regulations/Statutory Delegation

Société des alcools du Québec, 2002 FCA 69-- summary under Regulations/Statutory Delegation Summary Under Tax Topics- Statutory Interpretation- Regulations/Statutory Delegation Reg. providing a partial rebate for FST included in transitional inventory improperly failed to provide a full refund according to legislative intent to avoid double taxation The respondent, which was the Quebec liquor marketing board, sought a full refund of the federal sales tax (imposed at a 19% rate) that was included in the cost of its alcoholic-products inventory on January 1, 1991, but instead was allowed only a rebate equalling the factor of 8.1% applied to the value of that inventory. ... After stating (at para. 34) that “the undisputed purpose of the Act was to avoid double taxation by refunding the tax that had been paid under the former Act” and (at para. 37) that Parliament, in authorizing a prescribed method “entrusted the Minister of Finance with the task of identifying the amount of the tax paid under the former Act as accurately as possible, so that it could be refunded,” and before finding (at para. 45) that “subsection 3(h) is ultra vires in so far as it applies to alcoholic beverages,” Noël J.A stated (at paras. 42, 44): The provinces' liquor boards handle the sale of those goods, from start to finish of the marketing process, with the exception of corner stores and grocery stores in Quebec …. In the circumstances, the extent of the tax paid on those goods should, as a rule, have been equivalent to the rate of tax paid under the former Act, without the discount incorporated by the general factor, to take account of the market level. [T]he Minister of Finance[‘s] discretion, no matter how broad, certainly did not allow the Minister to establish the amount of rebates as he saw fit, or to favour certain goods at the expense of others. ...
Technical Interpretation - Internal summary

25 February 2002 Internal T.I. 2001-0114167 F - DOMMAGES - DISCRIMINATION -- summary under Paragraph 3(a)

25 February 2002 Internal T.I. 2001-0114167 F- DOMMAGES- DISCRIMINATION-- summary under Paragraph 3(a) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 3- Paragraph 3(a) awards by human rights tribunals for pain and suffering re wrongful termination often are under $5,000 Regarding what portion a settlement of a claim made under the Canadian Human Rights Act should be treated as compensation for pain and suffering, CCRA indicated that it had not examined the awards pattern of the federal Human Rights Tribunal in this regard, but noted: Although the maximum amount provided for in paragraph 53(2)(e) is $20,000, it is possible that, in similar cases, the Tribunal may award only a relatively small amount compared to this maximum. …[W]e have asked for information concerning human rights at the provincial level. We found that human rights tribunals in several provinces (some of which had a maximum limit for general damages of less than $20,000 and some of which had no maximum limit at all) generally only awarded amounts below the maximum limit for general damages. ...
Technical Interpretation - External summary

20 March 2002 External T.I. 2001-0113815 F - TVQ SUR PRIMES D'ASSURANCE - SALAIRE -- summary under Paragraph 6(1)(f)

20 March 2002 External T.I. 2001-0113815 F- TVQ SUR PRIMES D'ASSURANCE- SALAIRE-- summary under Paragraph 6(1)(f) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 6- Subsection 6(1)- Paragraph 6(1)(f) employee would not be credited with a contribution on paying Quebec sales tax on wage loss plan premiums/ the employer paying them would not be a contribution Would the benefits under a wage-loss insurance plan whose premiums are paid in full by the employees remain non-taxable where the employer pays the 9% Quebec sales tax on those premiums and, if the employees pay the tax, would this represent a contribution? ... CCRA responded: [T]he insurance premium paid by the employee does not constitute a contribution paid by the employee under the wage-loss replacement plan. Consequently, the amount of sales tax would not reduce the amount received from this plan, which is otherwise taxable. [T]he payment of sales tax on wage-loss insurance premiums by the employer [would not] represent a contribution by the employer under the wage-loss insurance plan for the purposes of determining whether a wage-loss insurance plan is a plan to which an employer has contributed for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(f). [I]f the employee has a contractual or legal obligation to pay all wage-loss insurance premiums, the employer's payment of sales tax on such premiums would not make the benefits from the wage-loss insurance plan taxable. However the employer's payment of sales tax on insurance premiums [is] a taxable benefit to the employee pursuant to paragraph 6(1)(a) …. ...
Technical Interpretation - External summary

2 December 2002 External T.I. 2002-0151325 F - FRAIS DEPLACEMENT -- summary under Paragraph 8(1)(h.1)

2 December 2002 External T.I. 2002-0151325 F- FRAIS DEPLACEMENT-- summary under Paragraph 8(1)(h.1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 8- Subsection 8(1)- Paragraph 8(1)(h.1) tacit requirement could not be invoked where the collective agreement explicitly assigned responsibility for travel expenses to the employer (who refused to pay) Although the collective agreement required the employer to pay the employees’ travel expenses, it refused to do so, so that the employees incurred travel expenses to get from the employer's place of business to the various worksites and from one worksite to another. ... Nevertheless, since it is clearly established in the collective agreement that travel expenses are to be paid by the employer, it is not possible to invoke the concept of tacit or implicit agreement as invoked in Moore and Betz... [which] determined that travel was implicitly required as part of the taxpayers' employment in order to properly perform their duties and obtain a favourable performance appraisal. ...
Technical Interpretation - Internal summary

21 March 2002 Internal T.I. 2001-010133A F - VALIDITE D'UN JUGEMENT - PENSION ALIMENTAIRE -- summary under Support Amount

21 March 2002 Internal T.I. 2001-010133A F- VALIDITE D'UN JUGEMENT- PENSION ALIMENTAIRE-- summary under Support Amount Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 56.1- Subsection 56.1(4)- Support Amount where couple reconcile and then separate a second time, child custody thereafter paid will not qualify as support amounts if no new agreement or judgment Monsieur and Madame separated and Monsieur started paying child support to Madame pursuant to a judgment rendered by the Quebec Superior Court. ... M.L., 1996 J.Q. no. 5103 established that support and custody judgments lose all effect when the parents resume living together [and] that these judgments would not take effect if the parents subsequently separated again. Since the amounts were paid under a new agreement, which was only a verbal agreement between the parties, that arose following the second separation, the amounts paid by Monsieur do not meet the definition of "support amount" in subsection 56.1(4) …. ...
Technical Interpretation - External summary

4 April 2002 External T.I. 2001-0103735 F - Fiducie exclusive au conjoint et ass.-vie -- summary under Paragraph 110.6(15)(a)

4 April 2002 External T.I. 2001-0103735 F- Fiducie exclusive au conjoint et ass. ... Consequently the shares of Opco owned by the Trust are deemed to be beneficially owned by Ms. A for the purposes of the Act …. ...
Technical Interpretation - External summary

4 April 2002 External T.I. 2001-0103735 F - Fiducie exclusive au conjoint et ass.-vie -- summary under Paragraph 248(3)(e)

4 April 2002 External T.I. 2001-0103735 F- Fiducie exclusive au conjoint et ass. ... Consequently the shares of Opco owned by the Trust are deemed to be beneficially owned by Ms. A for the purposes of the Act …. ...
Technical Interpretation - External summary

14 August 2002 External T.I. 2001-0116385 F - PARTAGE DE COMMISSIONS -- summary under Subsection 56(2)

14 August 2002 External T.I. 2001-0116385 F- PARTAGE DE COMMISSIONS-- summary under Subsection 56(2) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 56- Subsection 56(2) a reasonable portion of mutual fund commissions received by a firm should be allocated to its representative who made the sales Where Mr. ... X as stated in Income Tax Technical News No. 22. Mr. X cannot represent Firm A without being remunerated for the services he renders to that firm. ... X must be assessed in a manner that is reasonable in the circumstances. [A]n amount of commissions received by Firm A could be allocated to Firm B as compensation for services rendered by Firm B to Firm A such as, for example, the use of Firm B's client network. ...

Pages