Search - consideration

In the same month, JDI acquired the PCE from IOL for $120 million (claiming that amount in CCA thereon for 2002), and agreed to operate the PCE in consideration for “throughput fees” and cost reimbursements payable to it by IPPL pursuant to “Operating and Services Agreements” (“OSAs”) governed by New Brunswick law. ... In particular, although the OSAs provided that the taxpayer (and then IRF) was to operate the PCE, the taxpayer delegated to IPPL, in consideration for fees, the performance of all the such operating services, so that nothing had changed “on the ground.” ...

Expense- Current expense vs. capital acquisition lump sum payments made to lock-up doctors at medical centres effectively controlled by the payer were capital expenditures A subsidiary (“Idameneo”) of an Australian public company provided medical centre facilities and services to doctors in consideration for 50% of the fees generated by them. In order to induce a doctor to join one of the medical centres operated by it, it would typically pay a lump sum in the range of $300,000 to $500,000 to the doctor in consideration for the doctor’s promise to conduct his or her practice from the medical centre for a specified period of around five years, along with an exclusivity covenant. ...

However, there was “an indirect transfer from the Appellant’s mother to the Appellant by means of a trust for no consideration at a time that her mother owed tax” (para. 84) for s. 160(1) purposes respecting not only the transfer to her of her share of the residue of the trust but also regarding the transfer to her of other funds out of the trust funds including the payment out of such funds of legal fees relating to this tax dispute (which Graham J regarded as a personal rather than an estate expense) – so that the taxpayer was liable under s. 160(1) for such amounts. There was not such liability regarding the payment to her of $4.500 in executor’s fees, which were consideration for her services. ...

This amount can reasonably be considered to be part of the consideration for the disposition of property (the Building) of the taxpayers (the Appellants), and the remainder of this amount can reasonably be considered to be part of the consideration for the disposition of the property of 9118, namely the goodwill and other moveable property of the SR. ...

This explains why a similar provision in federal legislation has been commented on as follows: such a provision "does not have the effect of deeming the consideration received by the seller to be equal to the fair market value of property sold in a transaction between related persons if this consideration is greater than the market value" [citing Colubriale at para. 28]. ...

CRA had incorrectly accepted the computation of GST in the statements of adjustment as being 6/106 of the agreed consideration for the purchase plus the new housing rebate amount that was assigned by the buyer to the appellant, rather than only 6/106 of the agreed consideration. ...

He assigned the other ½ of his shares to her in consideration for a promissory note of approximately $1M, and elected out of the application of s. 73(1), so that he realized a capital gain of approximately $1M and her ACB increased by this amount. ... Regarding whether these transactions included a tax avoidance transaction, Favreau J noted that the taxpayer could have proceeded by way of direct sale of his shares, and then donating a portion of the cash proceeds to his wife, but stated (at para. 46, TaxInterpretations translation): Although the choice to proceed by donation rather than by another method was probably made on the basis of tax considerations, it is reasonable to believe that the main purpose of the donation was really to offer a contribution to Ms. ...

Agence du revenu du Québec, 2024 QCCQ 1195-- summary under Subsection 152(9) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 152- Subsection 152(9) ARQ request to change the sales tax provision on which its assessment was founded was rejected After speaking with counsel for the ARQ about three weeks before the scheduled trial date, the ARQ auditor concluded that Autonun should have been assessed pursuant to QSTA s. 318 (similar to ETA s. 182, regarding amounts forfeited to a taxable supplier being deemed to be inclusive of tax), rather than pursuant to QSTA s. 92 (similar to ETA s. 168(9), regarding deposits not being taxable consideration until applied as consideration) on which the assessment of Autonun had been based. ...

This was accomplished by transferring their co-ownership interests on a s. 85(1) rollover basis to respective Newcos (“HP Newco”, in the case of Harvard Properties) in consideration inter alia for voting and non-voting shares, followed by a sale of those voting shares to an Abacus subsidiary (NH Properties) for promissory notes for under half of the sale price. ... Furthermore, Boyle J considered that the reasonable way in the circumstances to deny the tax benefit was to treat s. 160 as applying to the extent of the shortfall in consideration given on the transfer (para. 208). ...

He further found that charges made by DTI at the end of each trip to the drivers of $0.76 per mile for fuel and $0.08 per mile for vehicular maintenance were consideration for an on-supply by DTI to the drivers of fuel and maintenance services. ... Thus, the respondent Crown is mistaken that the taxable supplies of diesel that DTI made to the contract truckers occurred in Canada, at the end of the respective haulage trips, when the consideration for such supplies, being the chargebacks, were calculated and paid at DTI’s Ontario location These (re)supplies of diesel from DTI to the contract truckers cannot sensibly be said to have occurred at any later time…. ...