Search - consideration

Section 4 defining income from a business or property as ‘‘the profit therefrom’’ would appear to negate the consideration of losses. ... However, aceording to Maxwell (On Interpretation of Statutes, 11th ed., p. 37): Where a part of an Act has been repealed, it may, although not of operative force, still be taken into consideration in construing the rest, for it is part of the history of the new Act. ... It was obviously drawn up with great care and special consideration was given to the fiscal consequences of the provisions for payments to a withdrawing partner or to the estate of a deceased partner. ...

Sections 11(1) (g), 76(1), 79C(l)(a) and (b), 137(1) and 139(1) (ahh) of the Act read as follows: 11. (1) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a), (b) and (h) of subsection (1) of section 12, the following amounts may be deducted in computing the income of a taxpayer for a taxation year: (g) an amount paid by the taxpayer in the year or within 120 days from the end of the year to or under a registered pension fund or plan in respect of services rendered by employees of the taxpayer in the year, subject, however, as follows: (i) in any case where the amount so paid is the aggregate of amounts each of which is identifiable as a specified amount in respect of an individual employee of the taxpayer, the amount deductible under this paragraph in respect of any one such individual employee is the lesser of the amount so specified in respect of that employee or $1,500, and (ii) in any other case, the amount deductible under this paragraph is the lesser of the amount so paid or an amount determined in prescribed manner, not exceeding, however, $1,500 multiplied by the number of employees of the taxpayer in respect of whom the amount so paid by the taxpayer was paid by him, plus such amount as may be deducted as a special contribution under section 76; 76. (1) Where a taxpayer is an employer and has made a special payment in a taxation year on account of an employees superannuation or pension fund or plan in respect of past services of employees pursuant to a recommendation by a qualified actuary in whose opinion the resources of the fund or plan required to be augmented by an amount not less than the amount of the special payment to ensure that all the obligations of the fund or plan to the employees may be discharged in full and has made the payment so that it is irrevocably vested in or for the fund or plan and the payment has been approved by the Minister on the advice of the Superintendent of Insurance, there may be deducted in computing the income of the taxpayer for the taxation year the amount of the special payment. 79C. (1) In this Act, (a) “deferred profit sharing plan" means a profit sharing plan accepted by the Minister for registration for the purposes of this Act, upon application therefor in prescribed manner by a trustee under the plan and an employer of employees who are beneficiaries under the plan, as complying with the requirements of this section; and (b) “profit sharing plan” means an arrangement under which payments computed by reference to his profits from his business or by reference to his profits from his business and the profits, if any, from the business of a corporation with whom he does not deal at arm’s length are or have been made by an employer to a trustee in trust for the benefit of employees of that employer or employees of any other employer, whether or not payments are or have been also made to the trustee by the employees. 137. (1) In computing income for the purposes of this Act no deduction may be made in respect of a disbursement or expense made or incurred in respect of a transaction or operation that, if allowed, would unduly or artificially reduce the income. 139. (1) In this Act, (ahh) “registered pension fund or plan” means an employees’ superannuation or pension fund or plan accepted by the Minister for registration for the purposes of this Act in respect of its constitution and operations for the taxation year under consideration; Certain by-laws and minutes of meetings of the appellant’s directors and shareholders and other books and records were introduced in evidence in one form or another and, in addition, Joseph Lebovic gave evidence as to what took place and as to events in issue. ... Coming now to consideration of the question of the character of the transaction or arrangements by which the payments in question were made, it is well settled that in considering whether a particular transaction brings a party within the terms of the Income Tax Act its substance rather than its form is to be regarded, and also that the intention with which a transaction is entered into is an important matter under the Act and the whole sum of the relevant circumstances must be taken into account.* Consequently I must endeavour as best I can to ascertain the real character and substance of the transaction or arrangements by which the payments in question were made and in doing so I must consider individually and collectively the agreements that were entered into and the surrounding circumstances and the course that was followed. ... An annuity or other periodical payment made, esp. by a government, a company, or an employer of labour, in consideration of past services... ...

. (…) (emphasis added) [30] In two recent decisions from the Tax Court of Canada, references were made to Canada Trustco: [51] Additionally, the Supreme Court of Canada in Celgene Corp affirmed Canada Trustco Mortgage Co. at paragraph 21: [S]tatutory interpretation involves a consideration of the ordinary meaning of the words used and the statutory context in which they are found …. ... The financial consideration of the complete operation and the legal context governing the rights of the parties involved must be considered in order to reach a reasonable interpretation of the text. [56] Finally, Mr. ... Canada, [1995] 3 S.C.R. 103 at para 59-60 [Friesen]. [4] Shell Canada Ltd. v Canada, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 622 [Shell Canada]. [5] FU2 Productions Ltd. v The King, 2022 TCC 148. [6] Wallster v The King, 2022 TCC 124. [7] Hunt v The Queen, 2022 TCC 67 [Hunt]. [8] Inter alia, Lucie Champagne and Gael Melville, "Credit Where It's Due: Tax Credits for Elder-Care Expenses and Other Tax Considerations," in "Personal Tax Planning" (2018), 66:4 Canadian Tax Journal, 1013-1040; Jamie Golombek, Debbie Pearl-Weinberg, and Tess Francis, "Tuition Expenses and Tutoring Fees as Medical Expenses," Personal Tax Planning feature (2015) 63:2 Canadian Tax Journal 543-564 and Hélène Marquis, Collection APFF – Impôt et taxes: Planifier pour les familles ayant des besoins spéciaux- 01 septembre 2017 – No. 3. [9] The Medical Expenses Guide RC4065(E) Rev.21 was introduced by the Appellant at the hearing. ...

</p>] 20 The wording of the Income Tax Act provision in Smith was certainly narrower than that of the provision of the Act under consideration in this case. ... On receipt of Ford Canada's application, the evidence before me indicates that it was given full and fair consideration on behalf of the Minister. ... Here, if the plaintiff establishes that its manufacturing activities fall within the definition in s.2(1)(f), then it will be entitled to the consideration provided in s.26.1 for “similar goods”. ...

Steinberg's prime consideration was to continue to benefit from Mr. ... While there is little evidence on this point, a potential investor may well have expected, absent the Dividend Policy and the tax and other considerations particular to Justinian, that the major portion of the gains from fixed income securities would be distributed to the shareholders annually. ... The nationality, residence, share and tax considerations and, consequently, the dividend policies of these two funds were substantially different. ...

Farkas and Gaty in consideration of the transfer from a company called Crosstown Realties of its goodwill to Crosstown Realties (Mtl) Inc. ... This is borne out by Exhibit P-4 in which there is an acknowledgment that he had discharged his obligation, as appears by Exhibit P-4, which, in part, states: “THE PRESENT SALE is thus made for and in consideration of the price and sum of THIRTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($35,000), on account and in deduction whereof the Vendor acknowledges to have well and truly received of and from the Purchaser herein, the sum of eighteen thousand seven hundred and fifty dollars ($18,750), and whereof quit for so much.’’ ... PRICE THE PRESENT SALE is thus made for and in consideration of the price and sum of SIXTY-THOUSAND DOLLARS ($61,000.00), on account and in deduction whereof the Vendor acknowledges to have well and truly received, of and from the Purchaser herein, the sum of forty-four thousand seven hundred and fifty dollars ($44,750.00), and whereof quit for so much. ...

C.R. 318 at 320, 321, 322; [1961] C.T.C. 211 at 214, where he says: “After giving the matter the most careful consideration, I have come to the conclusion that in every appeal, whether to the Tax Appeal Board or to this Court, regarding a re-assess- ment made after the statutory period of limitation has expired and which is based on fraud or misrepresentation, the burden of proof lies on the Minister to first establish to the satisfaction of the Court that the taxpayer has made any misrepresentation or committed any fraud in filing the return or in supplying any information under this Act...”? ... The Committee, at page 88, puts the difference as follows: A quasi-judicial decision differs from a judicial decision in that it is governed, not by a statutory direction to the Minister to apply the law of the land to the facts and act accordingly, but by a statutory direction or permission to use his administrative discretion and to be guided by considerations of public policy, after he has ascertained the facts, and, it may be, the bearing of the law on the facts so ascertained. ’ ’ The learned President was then discussing the discretional allowance or disallowance of operating expenses by the Commissioner of. Income Tax under Section 6(2) of the Income War Tax Act; on pp. 481, 180, the report continues thus: 11 The Minister’s discretionary determination, so far as it is an administrative act, and apart from whether it is quasi-legisla- tive, may involve duties of a quasi-judicial nature to be discharged in the manner prescribed by law, but at most such duties relate to matters antecedent, ancillary or incidental to the determination, and when the Minister actually makes his determination he passes from the position of a quasi-judge to that of an administrator and his determination is an administrative act based on consideration of public policy with no judicial or even quasi-judicial aspects.” ...

That question is to be answered by a consideration of all the facts and a determination as to whether the appellant’s wife or himself were the real parties to the transactions which gave rise to the realized profits. ... Bina Sukiennik, wherein it is stated that the parties are separate as to property, is dated December 23, 1948, and comprises inter alia clauses 6-1 and 2 which read as follows: “(6) In consideration of the foregoing stipulations, and of the love and affection which the Party of the First Part (the husband) has for the Party of the Second Part (the wife), he does hereby settle upon, give and grant by way of donation ‘inter vivos’ and irrevocably unto the Party of the Second Part (the wife) thereof accepting: 1. ... Indeed, there are many other facts which must also be taken into consideration i in determining the real party interested in this transaction. ...

In re-assessing the appellant, however, the Minister took into consideration that expenses had been incurred of $1,982.50 for 1954; $1,013 for 1955; $986.86 for 1956; $1,236.93 for 1957 and $778.80 for 1958 and the sole question in the appeal is whether certain profits made by the appellant in the sale of a number of lots situated on Lake Huron, Township of Huron, in the County of Bruce, are taxable profits or whether, as the appellant contends, they are capital appreciations as it was agreed that the following amounts added by the Minister’s assessments to the appellant’s revenue for the following years had been properly computed: Year 1954 $ 4,351.43 1955 8,194.99 1956 10,356.50 1957 11,473.37 1958............................. 10,475.16 At the hearing, counsel for the respondent admitted that the appeal for the year 1954 should be admitted, the re-assessment of September 30, 1959, being made beyond the four-year limit of Section 46(4) of the Income Tax Act, as the original assessment for the year 1954 was made in May 1955. ... Vendor and Year Property Property Consideration 1. Smeltzer Part of Lot 11 Concession $450.00 and 1930 A, Township of Huron legal expenses 600 ft. x 132 ft. 2. ... Grantor and Year Property Consideration 1. Sam Nesbitt 5 acres in North 14 of $2,000.00 1954 Westerly Part of Lot Deed #17144 13 “immediately East (1954) of Nesbitt farm’’ 2. ...

I now come to my findings of fact and my conclusion as to the true nature of the transaction under consideration. ... He spoke as if the same consideration, namely, the fear of inflation, had motivated the purchase of the three types of property held by the Company, namely, the timber licence, the apartment block and the common shares, and sought to convey the impression that they were basically the same. ... The fact that a man does not mean to hold an investment may be an item of evidence tending to show whether he is carrying on a trade or concern in the nature of trade in respect of his investments, but per se it leads to no conclusion whatever. ’ ’ And then Lord Carmont stated, at page 392: “I do not wish, however, to read this passage out of its context and without regard to the facts then under consideration, and I draw attention to Lord Dunedin’s language being used with reference to ‘an investment’, meaning thereby, as I think, the purchase of something normally used to produce an annual return on such lands, houses, or stocks and shares. ...