Search - considered

27 May 2009 Internal T.I. 2009-0310751I7 F- Usufruit d'un immeuble avant 1991-- summary under Subsection 248(3) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 248- Subsection 248(3) re a usufruct created prior to 1991, the usufructuary was considered to continue as the beneficial owner In 1985, an individual sold a building to his children on which he had reserved for himself, under the deed of sale, the right of usufruct or right of habitation. Should the individual be considered to have continued to be the property’s owner at the time of his death in 2007 despite the transfer to the children? ... However, as stated in paragraph 3 of the former version of Interpretation Bulletin IT-437 dated September 10, 1979, a person who is usufructuary in respect of real property by virtue of the former version of subsection 248(3), is considered to be the beneficial owner of real property. ...

Before concluding that the Association would likely be considered a trade union, so that annual dues paid to maintain membership in the Association likely would be deductible, CRA stated that under its established position: [A]n association does not have to be certified trade union in order to be considered a trade union for purposes of subparagraph 8(1)(i)(iv)…. Generally, an association whose primary purpose is to collectively negotiate with an employer to further the working conditions of its members is considered to be a trade union for purposes of subparagraph 8(1)(i)(iv). ...

CRA stated: [Under] Article IV(6)... dividends paid by the ULC... would be considered as being paid to USCo1 and USCo2. Nevertheless, since the ULC is treated as fiscally transparent under the laws of the U.S., pursuant to Article IV(7)(b) of the Treaty, amounts of dividends paid by the ULC shall be considered not to be paid to or derived by a person who is a resident of the U.S. because, by reason of the ULC being treated as fiscally transparent under the laws of the U.S., the treatment of the amount under the taxation law of the U.S. ... Therefore, pursuant to the application of Article IV(7)(b) of the Treaty, dividends paid by the ULC to LLC1 and LLC2 would be considered not to be paid to or derived by a U.S. resident. ...

21 November 2017 CTF Roundtable Q. 15, 2017-0724091C6- Conversion from a US LP to an LLC-- summary under Paragraph 95(2)(f) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 95- Subsection 95(2)- Paragraph 95(2)(f) an LLC resulting from a conversion from a US LLC has high inside and outside basis Where a U.S. limited partnership (USLP) is converted into a U.S. limited liability company (LLC), CRA has commented that the USLP is considered to have disposed of its assets at fair market value (FMV) and the holder of a partnership interest is also considered to have disposed of its interest at FMV. ... The above comments should be considered whenever there is a conversion … to U.S. limited liability partnerships or U.S. limited liability limited partnerships…. … The CRA remains open to … an advance income tax ruling request…. ...

This would have de-suspended the loss but for s. 40(3.5)(c)(i), which applies if the particular corporation which, in fact, disappeared (FA) would be considered to have been “merged or combined” with another corporation (Subco) to “form” a corporation. CRA considered that the loss continued to be suspended: “Merged or combined” encompasses a winding-up or liquidation given inter alia the exclusion, in various provisions listed by it, of a winding up or liquidation from a “merger;” and “Formed” includes an entity in place after a reorganization (for example, a s. 86(1) reorganization), even though no new entity may be formed in the traditional sense- so that Subco was considered to have been “formed” on its s. 88(3) winding-up of FA under a “QLAD.” ...

26 September 2018 External T.I. 2018-0770911E5- Revised income sprinkling rules-- summary under Paragraph 120.4(1.1)(a) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 120.4- Subsection 120.4(1.1)- Paragraph 120.4(1.1)(a) parental leave need not detract from satisfying the regular, “continuous” and substantial TOSI test Would the correspondent’s spouse, who normally works, on average, more than 20 hours per week in the business of the correspondent’s corporation for the year, but who is currently on leave due to the birth or adoption of a child, still be considered to have been “actively engaged on a regular, continuous and substantial basis” in the activities of the business for that year? ... CRA stated: Based on the above, there are certain situations where the average work commitment could be considered as being “regular, continuous and substantial” even if the bright-line deeming rule is not met. Accordingly, the fact that an individual was unable to work for a portion of a year in which the business operated due solely to the adoption or birth of a child would not, in and by itself, mean that the individual was not otherwise considered to meet the regular, continuous and substantial requirement for that year. ...

30 May 2003 Internal T.I. 2003-0000117 F- ALLOCATION AUTOMOBLE VERSÉE-- summary under Paragraph 96(1)(a) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 96- Subsection 96(1)- Paragraph 96(1)(a) fees, and usually "loan" interest, paid to a partner will be treated as draws rather than deductible expenses Where payments such as interest payments on a loan, management fees or bonuses are paid by a partnership to a partner, should they be considered a distribution (reducing the ACB of the partner’s interest) or as income to the partner? ... Such payments are considered as distributions to the partners. The partners will therefore be required to make an adjustment to the ACB of their interest pursuant to subparagraph 53(2)(c)(v). … [I]nterest paid to a partner … will generally receive the same tax treatment as management fees or bonuses. However, there may be special circumstances where such a payment would be considered an expense of the partnership, meaning that the interest would relate to a debt to the partner and not a contribution of capital. ...

B is, to a large extent, intended to compensate her for the care given to the child, the total amount will be considered to be remuneration for attendant care. However, if this is not the case, the global amount charged will be considered as an amount paid for the child's room and board (with all services included) and not as an amount paid to Ms. ... B charged a detailed amount for all the services provided, i.e. a specific amount for room and board and a specific amount for the care she provides to the child, the amount charged specifically for care would be considered as remuneration for the attendant care. ...

. … The amount of sales taxes paid by the charity need not be considered … nor should the amount of tips be considered. … [I]f the value of the free items given to all participants in the golf tournament, for each ticket sold, does not exceed the lesser of $75 and 10% of the ticket price, this amount will not be considered an advantage …. ...

4 December 2018 External T.I. 2016-0670851E5- Regular Places of Employment and Personal Travel-- summary under Paragraph 6(1)(b) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 6- Subsection 6(1)- Paragraph 6(1)(b) scope of “regular place of employment" Respecting requested clarification as to when a particular work location is considered a regular place of employment for an employee, CRA stated: [T]ravel between an employee’s home, including a home office, and a regular place of employment (RPE) is generally considered personal travel …. ... For example, a work location may be considered to be a RPE for an employee even though the employee may only report to work at that particular location on a periodic basis (e.g., once or twice a month) during the year. ...