Search - connection

(iv)             Factors to consider in determining residency are connections in Canada regarding property, investments, employment, family, business, cultural, social- a non-exhaustive list ... From 1985 to 1992, he was involved in litigation with the Northland Bank, in connection with the financing of this property, resulting ultimately in losing the property. ...   [30]          With respect to family ties, I conclude that this is not a neutral factor, but shows some degree of ongoing connection to Canada.   ...

Although no such distinction was made, it seems clear that with respect to non-resident corporations, the obligation to file could only extend to those that had some connection with Canada. To construe the provision as applying in the absence of any connection with Canada would give it a reach that could not have been intended. To this extent, I respectfully disagree with the Tax Court Judge when she says (Reasons, para. 15):   Prior to these amendments, all corporations were required to file income tax returns in Canada, regardless of whether they were resident in Canada or had any connection to Canada. …   [Emphasis added] [24]            Subsection 150(1) was amended in 1998 to expressly require corporations to file a tax return when, in a given taxation year, they reside in Canada, carry on business in Canada, have a taxable capital gain or dispose of Canadian taxable property. ...

Vegh earned his living and supported his family were carried on in China where he chose to live with little Canadian connection whatsoever ... Vegh ceased to be a resident of Canada when he first left Canada as a single person leaving little behind in Canada with no demonstrated intention to return, and leaving few maintained connections to Canada of a personal, social, or economic nature. ... These do not demonstrate a sufficient connection of Mr. Vegh’s personal status and the general mode of his life to establish that he became a Canadian resident once again. ...

The matter of ties. within the jurisdiction asserting residence and elsewhere runs the gamut of an individual’s connections and commitments: property and investment, employment, family, business, cultural and social are examples, again not purporting to be exhaustive. ... He testified that one of his accounts was to cover bills in connection with the house, furnishings, and renovation of it, and he would have money transferred from New York for this. ... Undoubtedly he spent a great deal of time there in connection with his work for Doyle, but even this employment was of a relatively transient nature lasting only from 1955 until near the end of 1957, and involved frequent trips abroad which in his examination for discovery he indicated occupied about the same time as the time he spent in New York, although he altered this evidence at trial saying he only visited Europe three to five times a year staying a week or 10 days at a time. ...

Care was taken to ensure that all persons who had occasion to deal with the law firm in connection with its administrative activities were informed that henceforth all such activities would be performed by the company. ... The well established test in this connection is: was the expenditure laid out as part of the process of profit-earning? ... It is not a condition of the deductibility of an expenditure that it should result in any particular income or that any income should be traceable to the expenditure and it is not necessary to show a causal connection between an expenditure and a receipt. ...

[Emphasis added.] [9]                In the next paragraph of JP Morgan, not surprised by a high failure rate for applications for judicial review in the area of tax, the Federal Court of Appeal referred further and as follows to harsh comments in doctrine, comments that touch the factual background underlying the application: [32]      Almost always, applications for judicial review of administrative actions by the Minister in connection with assessments fail, especially in this Court. ... Insofar as they are relevant, the facts are as follows: a)         ColasCanada Inc. is a Canadian resident corporation incorporated under the Canada Business Corporations Act, which acts as a holding corporation. b)                  ColasCanada holds the shares of all the Canadian operating corporations of the Colas group, headed by Colas S.A., a French public corporation. c)                  The business of the Canadian operating corporations is road construction and the sale of related products. d)                 Colas S.A. provides technical assistance to its subsidiaries in connection with, inter alia, intellectual property, scientific research and development, legal, insurance, financial, audit, information technology, human resources, continuing education, equipment, communications, purchasing and environmental issues. e)                  ColasCanada pays a fee to Colas S.A., purportedly in respect of those services. f)                   In 2010, the Minister of National Revenue commenced an audit of ColasCanada’s 2004 to 2007 taxation years. g)                  On July 12, 2013, in the course of a meeting held with representatives of ColasCanada, the Minister provided ColasCanada with draft assessments in respect of its 2005 to 2007 taxation years. 1 h)                  In the draft assessments, the Minister proposed to disallow deductions claimed in respect of the technical assistance fees, assess Part XIII tax on payments made to Colas S.A. and apply transfer pricing penalties pursuant to subsection 247(3) of the Income tax Act. 2 4.         ... The grounds for the Application are: Introduction (a)                 This Notice of Application relates to the abusive exercise by the CRA of its assessing powers in connection with an audit of ColasCanada, in the course of which (i) relevant information provided to the CRA by the Applicant in support of its position has been deliberately ignored by the CRA and (ii) the CRA has proposed various arbitrary grounds of reassessment of the Applicant and its affiliates; (b)                As will be demonstrated in the next paragraphs, (i) it would have been impossible to reach the Decision in good faith had the information provided to the CRA as part of the audit been properly and impartially reviewed and taken into account in the decisional process and (ii) the CRA’s approach to the audit of ColasCanada has been to seek to maximize the amount of the reassessment even in the absence of legal grounds;... ...

Subsection 178(2) of the Income Tax Act now in force reads: 178. (2) Where, on an appeal by the Minister other than by way of crossappeal, from a decision of the Tax Review Board, the amount of tax that s In controversy does not exceed $2,500, the Federal Court, in delivering judgment disposing of the appeal, shall order the Minister to pay all reasonable and proper costs of the taxpayer in connection therewith. lt follows that, regardless of the success of this appeal, there shall be an order directing the Minister to pay all reasonable and proper costs of the defendant. ... Paragraph (b) includes as income all amounts received by the taxpayer in the taxation year as an allowance for personal or living expenses or as an allowance for any other purpose except, and I here quote subparagraph (b)(vii): 5. (1) Income for a taxation year from an office or employment {s the salary, wages and other remuneration, including gratuities, received by the taxpayer in the year plus (b) all amounts received by him In the year as an allowance for personal or living expenses or as an allowance for any other purpose except (vii) allowances (not in excess of reasonable amounts) for travelling expenses received by an officer or employee (other than an employee employed in connection with the selling of property or negotiating of contracts for his employer) from his employer if they were computed by reference to time actually spent by the officer or employee travelling away from (A) the municipality where the employer’s establishment at which the officer or employee ordinarily worked or to which he ordinarily made his reports was located, and (B) the metropolitan area, if there is one, where that establishment was located, in the performance of the duties of his office or employment, or section 5 goes on to preclude any deduction from a taxpayer’s income as defined in the section save what is expressly permitted by certain particular subsections of section 11 of the Income Tax Act. ... All of the administrative work in connection with his practice was carried on at his home. ...

Male, [1891] 2 Q.B. 1, the taxpayer had loaned not as a permanent investment but, as stated in paragraph 6 of the statement of facts, ‘‘only in connection with the current dealings and transactions of the customer with the’’ taxpayer. ... Why, then, should the outlays in connexion with the present transactions, compendiously described as ‘refunding operations’, not also fall within the same category? ... In this connection it is important to observe that Ruling Number 15 is not a statutory provision, but rather a circular to provide direction and assistance to the officials of the Department. ...

Firstly, she contends that there is no legal connection between the creditor of the debt for $115,369.33 and defendant, and so the latter was under no obligation to pay the said amount. ... Let us now return to plaintiff’s first proposition, namely that there is no legal connection between the creditor of the debt for $115,369.33 and defendant, so that the latter was under no obligation to pay the amount, since the sum of $115,369.33 was a personal debt of F H Jones, not of his company, and so it cannot be considered as an outlay or expense made or incurred by defendant for the purpose of gaining or producing income from its business. ... Further, this document might have disappeared when the tax inspectors took certain documents in connection with an excise matter involving La Société des Tabacs Québec Inc. ...

C.R. 77 at 81; [1947] C.T.C. 63, I expressed the opinion that it was not a condition of the deductibility of a disbursement or expense that it should result in any particular income or that any income should be traceable to it and that it was never necessary to show a causal connection between an expenditure and a receipt. ... The discussion of this point in the present case is, in a sense, academic, for even if it were necessary to show a causal connection between an expenditure and income it could be done in the present case. ... Moreover, the connection between the appellant’s gain or production of income from its business and the payments made by it was not remote in any sense of the term. ...