Search - consideration

Coutu explained that the situation described in paragraph 20 of the Amended Notice of Appeal, which states that the consideration payable by Advisers to Sun Life was less than the consideration payable by Sun Life to its landlords, reflected the fact that Sun Life may not achieve full recovery of the effective cost of the space rented to Advisers but that “significantly all” of that cost is recovered. [2] [11]         A chart at paragraph 32. p) of the Reply, with which Mr. ... There is no consideration received for this space from the advisors. Therefore this are [sic] has been fully allocated to management. ... The Respondent’s position is simply that the method chosen by Sun Life is not a “fair and reasonable” method for determining the extent to which the acquisition of the Leased Space was for the purpose of making taxable supplies for consideration. ...

Different considerations might well have arisen if the purchase and sale had not been culminated. ... On April 4, 1973, the option was extended for a further period of six months from May 18, 1973 in consideration of $5,000. ... The contention on behalf of the Minister was that the consideration for the options formed part of the purchase price and that the total consideration received as consideration for the extension of the option beyond May 18, 1973 to the exercise or expiry of the option. ...

Subsection 165(1) provides that every taxable supply attracts 100% tax on the consideration for the supply. ... There is nothing extraordinary about this case which calls for any different consideration.   ... The value of the consideration in itself did not change the GST status of what the parties were doing ...

They maintain that where partial consideration for a transfer of property is given, the value in excess of the consideration may still qualify as a gift under both common law and in the civil law of Quebec. ... The question to be decided by the Court was whether the transferee spouse had given any consideration for the transfer. ... After that date, certain transfers of property that were made without donative intent may still qualify as gifts despite the receipt of consideration by the transferor for the transfer, provided that the consideration received does not exceed 80% of the fair market value of the property that is transferred. ...

., effective today, to André Gagnon, for the sum of $50,000 and other consideration, payable as follows:              1.    ... (Signature) JACQUES GAGNON, "Seller"     (Signature) ANDRÉ GAGNON, "Purchaser"   [5]       While this agreement refers to $50,000 in consideration and a $50,000 loan to the Appellant, the Appellant clearly told the Court that he owed nothing to his brother and had received the $100,000 in consideration of his equity in the bar. ... By this new agreement, the Appellant would be considered not to have received $100,000 from his brother in consideration of his equity in the bar. ...

On further consideration, I have come to the conclusion that the statement is erroneous in several respects and ought to be corrected. ... Of course, the overriding consideration is the fact that the data and information in tax matters is peculiarly within the knowledge of the taxpayer. ... Abromeit by counsel for the plaintiff and the reply was: “‘Yes, that was certainly in the ballpark of our consideration. ’ The agreements were entered into for good business reasons and to produce a profit. ...

The agreement reads as follows: WHEREAS the Controlling Shareholder is the father of John and of Pat and has informed them of his intention to incorporate a company under the provisions of The Companies Act of Canada with the name of Lakroc Investments Limited, or such other name as the Secretary of State of Canada may permit (herein called “the Company”), with an authorized capital of $50,000.00 divided into 5,000 Class “A” shares of the par value of $1.00 each and 45,000 Class “B” shares of the par value of $1.00 each; AND WHEREAS the Letters Patent incorporating the Company will provide in effect, in part, as follows: (a) The Class “A” shares will carry a fixed cumulative annual dividend of 5¢ a share but will not otherwise be entitled to any dividends; (b) The Class “B” shares shall be entitled to receive as dividends when declared all the other earnings or income of the Company; provided, however, that no dividends shall be paid out of profits or gains arising from the sale of investments or other capital assets of the Company; (c) On the dissolution or winding up of the Company or the liquidation of its business or assets or on any division of capital amongst its shareholders, and after the payment of any dividends due to the Class “A” shareholders and the payment to the Class “B” shareholders of any accumulated net earnings as defined above and the par value of the said Class “B” shares outstanding, the balance of the assets of the Company shall be divided pro rata among the holders of the Class “A” shares; AND WHEREAS the Controlling Shareholder has represented that he will subscribe and pay for 1,997 Class “B” shares of the Company, which with the three incorporators’ shares will result in 2,000 of the said Class “B” shares being outstanding; AND WHEREAS the Controlling Shareholder has requested John and Pat each to subscribe and pay for 12 Class “A” shares of the capital stock of the Company at $1.00 a share and the said John and Pat have agreed so to do upon the representation of the Controlling Shareholder that he will make adequate provision in his Will for the distribution of the assets of the Company amongst its shareholders and the surrender of its Letters Patent as soon as conveniently may be after his death; NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the premises, the parties hereto agree each with the other as follows: 1. ... It will be time enough after considering the effect of the words in the statute under consideration by themselves to look at decisions under earlier statutes to see if they indicate some intent in the statute under consideration that did not appear from a consideration of the words of the statute by themselves. ... The following portions of the Act seem to me to have some relevance to the problem before me. 2. (1) An estate tax shall be paid as hereinafter required upon the aggregate taxable value of all property passing on the death, at any time after the coming into force of this Act, of every person domiciled in Canada at the time of his death. (2) The aggregate taxable value of the property passing on the death of a person is the aggregate net value of that property computed in accordance with Division B minus the deductions permitted by Division C. 3. (1) There shall be included in computing the aggregate net value of the property passing on the death of a person the value of all property, wherever situated, passing on the death of such person, including, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, (c) property disposed of by the deceased under a disposition operating or purporting to operate as an immediate gift inter vivos, whether by transfer, delivery, declaration of trust or otherwise, made within three years prior to his death; (i) property transferred to or acquired by a purchaser or transferee under the terms of an agreement made by the deceased at any time providing for the transfer or acquisition of such property on or after his death, to the extent that the value of such property exceeds the value of the consideration, if any, in money or money’s worth paid to the deceased thereunder at any time prior to his death; (3) For the purposes of paragraph (c) of subsection (1), (a) the artificial creation by a person or with his consent during his lifetime of a debt or other right enforceable against him personally or against property of which he was or might be competent to dispose, or to charge or burden for his own benefit, shall be deemed to be a disposition by that person operating as an immediate gift inter vivos made by him at the time of the creation of the debt or right, and, in relation to any such disposition, the expression “property” in this Act includes the benefit conferred by the creation of such debt or right; 4. (1) Notwithstanding section 3, there shall not be included in computing the aggregate net value of the property passing on the death of a person the value of any such property acquired pursuant to a bona fide purchase made from the deceased for a consideration in money or money’s worth paid or agreed to be paid to the deceased. for his own use or benefit, unless such purchase was made otherwise than for full consideration in money or money’s worth paid or agreed to be paid as hereinbefore described, in which case there shall be included in computing the aggregate net value of the property passing on the death of the deceased in respect of the property so acquired only the amount by which the value of the property so acquired computed as of the date of its acquisition exceeds the amount of the consideration actually so paid or agreed to be paid. 5. (1) There may be deducted in computing the aggregate net value of the property passing on the death of a person (a) the value of (i) any debts incurred by the deceased, and (ii) any encumbrances created by him, bona fide and for full consideration paid or agreed to be paid to the deceased for his own use or benefit, to the extent that such debts and encumbrances were outstanding immediately prior to his death; and (b) reasonable funeral expenses and surrogate, probate and other like court fees in respect of the death of the deceased (but not including solicitors’ charges or the expenses of administering property or executing any trust created by the deceased). (2) For the purposes of this section, a debt or other obligation of the deceased that was created or imposed by or under the authority of a statute shall, to the extent that such debt or obligation was outstanding immediately prior to his death, be deemed to be a debt incurred by the deceased as described in paragraph (a) of subsection (1). 58. (1) In this Act, (o) “property” means property of every description whatever, whether real or personal, movable or immovable, or corporeal or incorporeal, and without restricting the generality of the foregoing, includes any estate or interest in any such property, a right of any kind whatever and a chose in action; (s) “value”, (i) in relation to any income right, annuity, term of years, life or other similar estate or interest in expectancy, means the fair market value thereof ascertained by such means and in accordance with such rules and standards, including standards as to mortality and interest, as are prescribed by the regulations, and (ii) in relation to any other property, means the fair market value of such property, computed in each case as of the date of the death of the deceased in respect of whose death such value is relevant or as of such other date as is specified in this Act, without regard to any increase or decrease in such value after that date for any reason. ...

Lastly, he argues that the payment of dividends cannot be considered as a transfer without consideration for the purposes of section 160 of the Act since the work performed by each of the appellants for Gestion, which constitutes valuable consideration for the transfer, must be taken into account ...   [31]    As to the argument that the payment of dividends does not constitute a transfer of property without consideration for the purposes of section 160 of the Act on the ground that the appellant's work constituted valuable consideration, we need only refer on that point to the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Newman v. ... This approach ignores the fundamental nature of dividends; a dividend is a payment which is related by way of entitlement to one's capital or share interest in the corporation and not to any other consideration. ...

In the alternative, the Respondent submits that the Appellant was enriched by these money transfers and therefore did not provide consideration equal to the fair market value of the amounts transferred.   ... At first instance, the judge had stated that "domestic obligations, however, cannot be 'consideration' within the meaning of section 160" (Raphael v. ... Biron's payments on this hypothec represented a part of his support contribution, for which, in light of the decision in Ducharme, consideration was given ...

The Ministère's position is that the amounts of money paid by the health care and social services institutions in consideration of supplies of immovable property made to them by Corélo Inc. by way of lease cannot be considered to be government funding. [3]      The respondent replied by stating that she had assumed the following facts in support of the assessment: [TRANSLATION] (a)         the appellant is a GST registrant; (b)         the appellant was incorporated under Part III of the Companies Act (R.S.Q., c. ... Its argument is worded as follows: [TRANSLATION] When an institution pays an amount of money to Corélo in consideration of immovable property and Corélo makes the property available for use by the institution through exempt supplies, the institution is merely giving Corélo an amount of money that the North Shore R.H.S.S.B. has entrusted to it for that purpose. That amount of money (rent paid by the institution) would therefore be government funding of the particular person (Corélo) by reason of paragraph (a) if the amount were paid by the grantor (the North Shore R.H.S.S.B. or the Ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux) directly to the particular person. [26]     In answer to the respondent's arguments, the appellant went even further: [TRANSLATION] The consideration received by Corélo for the supply of its immovable property is not rent in the usual sense of that word, since that rent is based on the amortization of the mortgage loan used to finance the purchase or construction of the property. ...