Search - consideration

In view of the fact that the Minister had the wrong work before him for consideration, clearly he was unable to give proper consideration to how her duties were controlled and supervised. ... She also said that whilst she was away her house was broken into and vandalised. [33] Item 4(m) reads: "(m) the purported engagement of the Appellant by the Payor during the relevant period allowed the Appellant to qualify for unemployment insurance benefits, rather than being based on any business consideration or need;" I have already dealt with the words “purported engagement”. ...

Beaudry never received consideration for guaranteeing a loan for a corporation or anyone else. ... An advance or outlay made by a shareholder to or on behalf of the corporation is also generally considered to be on capital account. [7] The same considerations, wrote Robertson, J.A. in Easton et al. v. ... As already stated, I am of the opinion that this taxpayer, after consideration of the various factors known at that time or foreseeable in the immediate future, did reach an honest and reasonable conclusion that $3,190.17 of his accounts receivable were bad debts on the date of the sale of his sole proprietorship business to the new company. ...

(ii) a loss from the disposition of a debt or other right to receive an amount, unless the debt or right, as the case may be, was acquired by the taxpayer for the purpose of gaining or producing income from a business or property (other than exempt income) or as consideration for the disposition of capital property to a person with whom the taxpayer was dealing at arm's length,... is nil;... 50 (1) For the purposes of this subdivision, where (a) a debt owing to a taxpayer at the end of a taxation year... is established by the taxpayer to have become a bad debt in the year, or (b) a share... the taxpayer shall be deemed to have disposed of the debt or the share, as the case may be, at the end of the year for proceeds equal to nil and to have reacquired it immediately thereafter at a cost equal to nil. [14] The following extracts from the relevant Interpretation Bulletins are helpful. ... Interest expense on money borrowed to be loaned at a reasonable rate of interest, or to honour a guarantee which had been given for adequate consideration, is generally deductible. ... In conclusion, I have no doubt that the amounts advanced to the corporations (although representing monies advanced by CIBC on the Appellant's personal line of credit) were advanced to the corporations for purposes of earning income and were properly deductible. [16] As to the ABILs claimed, the Appellant did not convey the debts to a third party for nil or minimal consideration nor did he forgive the debt or exhaust all legal remedies to get paid. ...

The terms "recipient," "supply" and "taxable supply" in material part are defined in subsection 123(1) of the Act as follows:   123(1)  "recipient" of a supply of property or a service means               (a)  where consideration for the supply is payable under an agreement for the supply, the person who is liable under the agreement to pay that consideration,               [...]   ... There is no dispute about how disbursements should be treated in either situation.   13  In the former situation, the lawyer is not the recipient of the supply as defined by subsection 123(1) of the Act so long as the lawyer is not the entity liable to pay the consideration owing under the agreement with the third-party supplier. ...

Tremblay also took into consideration, in her alternative method, certain loans from members of the appellant’s family and, when supporting documentation was submitted to her, she granted the amount and reduced accordingly the amount of the unexplained deposits ...   [28]         If I take into consideration the loans obtained from his brothers, the overlap of the deposits in several accounts, the net worth established and the appellant’s testimony, it is possible to rather substantially reduce the amount indicated under the heading [T ranslation] “other income,” except that the reduction would be purely arbitrary ...   [31]         Given the nature of the appellant’s business activities, but taking into consideration the fact that the Excise Tax Act taxes more business activities than it does not tax, I find that 80% of the income I have determined is taxable under the ETA ...

In the year 2007 without a consideration of CCA, there would have been a profit.   ... Analysis and Decision   [50]          It was clear from the evidence and argument of the Appellants that because of an article he had read he believed that R.E.O.P. had no place in the consideration as to whether he was entitled to claim the input tax credit which he seeks. ...   [52]          In any event, the Court is satisfied that the Moldowan principle is still good law and that R.E.O.P. as discussed in that case is a proper consideration when considering the right of the Appellants here to an input tax credit under the provisions of the Excise Tax Act ...

She held as follows:   [18]  Given the clear intent of Parliament that the Minister may waive or extend the notification requirement, the Minister should have given consideration to this before making the determination to disallow the benefits in their entirety ...   [27]     I am sending this back to the Minister to consider the appropriateness of exercising the discretion afforded him by the various provisions of the Act that help ensure reasonable access to a just and fair consideration of a taxpayer’s objections. This is a case that warrants such consideration and as underlined in Guest, the Minister has a responsibility, not an option, to do so. ...

But such refusal would not necessarily eliminate her from future consideration and he or she could also work for competitors of the Appellant. ... No exhaustive list has been compiled and perhaps no exhaustive list can be compiled of considerations which are relevant in determining that question, nor can strict rules be laid down as to the relative weight which the various considerations should carry in particular cases. ...

the following rules apply: (d)            the transferee and transferor are jointly and severally liable to pay a part of the transferor's tax...for each taxation year equal to the amount by which the tax for the year is greater than it would have been if it were not for the [transfer to the spouse], in respect of any income from...the property so transferred...and (e)            the transferee and transferor are jointly and severally liable to pay under this Act an amount equal to the lesser of (i)             the amount, if any, by which the fair market value of the property at the time it was transferred exceeds the fair market value at that time of the consideration given for the property, and (ii)            the total of all amounts each of which is an amount that the transferor is liable to pay under this Act in or in respect of the taxation year in which the property was transferred or any preceding taxation year, but nothing in this subsection shall be deemed to limit the liability of the transferor under any other provision of this Act. [13]          Subsection 160(1) makes it clear that joint and several liability arises for the tax owing by a taxpayer's spouse as a result of a transfer of property from the spouse to the taxpayer. ... EXTENT OF THE APPELLANT'S LIABILITY [27]          Paragraph 160(1)(e) means that the amount for which the taxpayer is liable is equal to the lesser of: (i)             the amount, if any, by which the fair market value of the property at the time it was transferred exceeds the fair market value at that time of the consideration given for the property, and (ii)            the total of all amounts each of which is an amount that the transferor is liable to pay under this Act in or in respect of the taxation year in which the property was transferred or any preceding taxation year, [28]          In this case, the property in question was the contributions to the spousal RRSP. There was no consideration paid for this transfer. Therefore the fair market value of the property transferred was the dollar amount of the actual contributions. [29]          Dr. ...

The key consideration for determining whether particular legislation is discriminatory is whether it offends the Appellant's human dignity. ... Does the differential treatment discriminate, by imposing a burden upon or withholding a benefit from the claimant in a manner which reflects the stereotypical application of presumed group or personal characteristics, or which otherwise has the effect of perpetuating or promoting the view that the individual is less capable or worthy of recognition or value as a human being or as a member of Canadian society, equally deserving of concern, respect, and consideration? ... It may be said that the purpose of s. 15(1) is to prevent the violation of essential human dignity and freedom through the imposition of disadvantage, stereotyping, or political or social prejudice, and to promote a society in which all persons enjoy equal recognition at law as human beings or as members of Canadian society, equally capable and equally deserving of concern, respect and consideration.... [19]          The purpose of the deduction in section 60 is to allow a certain amount of income splitting between a separated or divorced couple so that the standard of living of the recipient (of the payments) and the children would not drop sharply from the standard of living which they all shared when the couple were still together. ...