Search - considered

28 June 2017 External T.I. 2016-0653921E5 F- Beneficiary/person beneficially interested-- summary under Subsection 248(25) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 248- Subsection 248(25) testamentary trust could be considered to have a right as beneficiary in estate S. 70(3) provides that the rights and things election under s. 70(2) is unavailable if the rights or things (the “Property”) have been distributed by the estate before the deadline for making the election has expired to beneficiaries or other persons beneficially interested in the estate. In the situation where the will bequeathed the Property to a testamentary trust, CRA considered that: To the extent that the testamentary trust is, under applicable private law, a beneficiary of the estate at the time of the transfer or distribution of the Property by the estate, the testamentary trust could be considered a beneficiary or a person beneficially interested in the estate of the deceased individual for the purposes of subsection 70(3). ...

" After a review of jurisprudence on the phrase, CRA stated: [W]hile there are several elements to be considered in determining the existence of a conjugal relationship, it is not necessary that all of the elements be present in a particular situation. Furthermore, as emphasized by the Supreme Court of Canada justices, the weight to be given to each of the elements to be considered may vary from one situation to another. For example, two persons not living in the same household may be considered, for the purposes of the Act, to be living in a conjugal relationship based on their own circumstances. ...

25 October 1994 External T.I. 9417505- LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY (HAA 4093-U5-100-4)-- summary under Article 4 Summary Under Tax Topics- Treaties- Income Tax Conventions- Article 4 If any limited liability company is treated as a partnership for purposes of the Internal Revenue Code such that the shareholders rather than the limited liability company are liable to tax under the Code on the income of the limited liability company, the limited liability company will not be considered to be a resident of the U.S. under Article IV, paragraph 1, of the Canada-U.S. ... Where the mind and management of the limited liability company is situate in the U.S., it will be considered resident in the U.S. for Canadian tax purposes, but will not be considered a resident of either contracting state under the Convention. ...

20 October 1993 External T.I. 9323775 F- Capital Account and Life Insurance Proceeds in Trust-- summary under Capital Dividend Account Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 89- Subsection 89(1)- Capital Dividend Account In order for life insurance proceeds to be included in the capital dividend account of a corporation, the proceeds must be considered to be received by the corporation. If the amounts are received by a trust, other than a bare trust, and then distributed to the corporation, they are not considered to have been so received. A corporation can be considered to have received the proceeds of a life insurance policy which it owned and on which it paid the premiums where it directed the payments to a third party provided the corporation was the beneficiary under the policy. ...

11 December 1995 Internal T.I. 9518687- MEALS AND BEVERAGE-- summary under Paragraph 67.1(2)(e) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 67.1- Subsection 67.1(2)- Paragraph 67.1(2)(e) The 'place of business' refers to the location where these employees are considered to be employed, i.e., the employee's normal place of employment and not where the food is being served or at a temporary work location albeit a place of business of the employer.... In the case of professional athletes such as baseball or hockey players, in our view, they would be considered to be employed at the home office of the Club rather than being employed at each and every facility in which they play. Similarly, in the case of actors or film producing employees, each and every filming site may be a place of business but not necessarily the place to which these individuals are considered to be employed. ...

"When it is considered appropriate, the obligations of the counterparty under the Forward Contract will be guaranteed by another person who may or may not be resident in Canada...." The Agency ruled that the forward contracts will not be considered to be foreign property because they will be settled in Canadian dollars, and do not give a right to receive units of the Underlying Funds, would not otherwise be considered to be foreign property based on the situs of the contracts and do not involve indebtedness of a non-resident person. ...

What are CRA’s views of what is an habitual abode of an individual and what factors are considered? CRA indicated that length of stays, and the nature of the activities, of the individual in each jurisdiction would have to be considered, to determine whether the individual usually lives in one state as compared to the other, and that the relevance of particular lengths of time would need to be considered in the circumstances: no set periods of time were applied as tests. ...

7 July 2000 External T.I. 2000-0015455 F- Allocation de retraite-- summary under Retiring Allowance Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 248- Subsection 248(1)- Retiring Allowance the principal shareholder continues as an officer, he is not considered to have retired, even if the corporation's business has been sold Can the principal shareholder be considered to have retired when the corporation has sold all its assets, but the shareholder wishes to retain the corporation in order that it can carry on another business on an occasional basis? ... However, where the principal shareholder continues as an officer, he is not considered to have retired, even if the corporation's business has been sold. ...

DSI of Opco considered to be transferred to Holdco 2: $170- $98= $72. 3. ... DSI of Holdco 2 after reorg: (DSI of Holdco 2 prior to reorg ($10) + $72 DSI considered to have been received from Opco per 2 above) x net cost amount of assets considered retained by Holdco 2 ($37 per 3 above, plus the $20 cost of other assets, totaling $57) / (net cost amount of assets of Holdco 2 “prior to” [sic] reorg ($57) + net cost amount of assets considered to have been received from Opco ($100 cost of Property 1)) = 82 x 57/157 = $30. 5. DSI of Holdco 2 considered to be transferred to Holdco 1: $82 – $30 = $52. 6. ...

Y would be considered to arise directly or indirectly from a related business (the former Opco business) in respect of Ms. ... However, the dividend would not be considered to arise, directly or indirectly, from a related business in respect of Ms. ... Y from Investco would not be considered to be derived directly or indirectly from a related business in respect of Ms. ...