Search - considered

., the work and energy that the individual devotes to the business and the nature of the business itself – so that, the more an individual is involved in the management and/or current activities of the business, the more likely it is that the individual will be considered to be actively engaged. After further noting that the facts here were similar to Example 9 of CRA’s split-income guidelines, CRA indicated that in the current scenario, both the husband and wife could be considered to be actively engaged in the business, even though neither of them reaches the 20-hour threshold in s. 120.4(1.1)(a). It was a question of fact whether the husband and wife could be considered to satisfy the excluded business test for a particular year or continue to meet such test thereafter, as consideration must be given to the ongoing nature and labour requirements of the corporation’s business. ...

In such a situation, the “principal purpose” of the trading business would generally not be to derive income from property and it would not be considered to be a “specified investment business.” As a result, the trading business may be considered an “active business” and any gains or losses from the trading business, as well as any interest or dividend income pertaining to or incident to that business, may be considered “income of the corporation for the year from an active business” under subsection 125(7) of the Act. ...

Although the agreement does not attribute any amount of consideration to the acquisition of the purchase option, pursuant to section 68, the sum of the part of the periodic payment amounts of consideration that can reasonably be considered to relate to the acquisition of the purchase option will be deemed to be the proceeds of disposition of that option to the Lessor and the amount paid to acquire that option by the Lessee. The sum of the other part of the periodic payment amounts of the consideration will therefore relate to the amount paid by the Lessee for the use of the property, which may be considered to be in the nature of rent. ... By contrast, the portion of the periodic amounts of the consideration relating to the acquisition of a purchase option on the Vehicle should be considered as expenditures of a capital nature for the acquisition of a capital property. … To the extent that Aco exercises its purchase option … Aco's cost of the Vehicle pursuant to subsection 49(3) will be the sum … paid in accordance with the exercise price … plus the adjusted cost base of the option, which will be the portion of the consideration paid that is attributable to the acquisition of that option. ...

Is Father not considered to have made a contribution because the loan qualified as an arm’s length transfer on the basis that “it is reasonable to conclude that none of the reasons … for the transfer is the acquisition at any time by any person or partnership of an interest as a beneficiary under a non-resident trust”.? CRA indicated the quoted words did not establish a test that the beneficiary’s interest must be acquired as a result of the particular transfer being considered and that the definition instead seeks to ensure that there is no connection between the transfer, and the person or partnership that already has an interest in the non-resident trust, or would have such an interest in the future. ... Such a conclusion would be highly unlikely given his relationship to them – so that he would be considered to have made a contribution to the trust, he would be a resident contributor and the trust would be deemed to be resident for the purposes listed in s. 94(3)(a). ...

This loan will not be considered to be a contribution by him (so that it will not cause the trust to be resident for various purposes under s. 94(3)(a)) if it is an “arm’s length transfer,” whose definition relevantly requires that it reasonably be considered “that none of the reasons … for the transfer is the acquisition at any time by any person or partnership of an interest as a beneficiary under a non-resident trust.” ... CRA indicated that such a conclusion would be highly unlikely given his relationship to them – so that his loan would be considered to be a contribution to the trust causing him to be a resident contributor and the trust to come within s. 94(3)(a). ...

Would the Other Assets be considered in ascertaining whether the Division Assets met the all or substantially all test in s. 125.7(4.1)(b)(i)? After noting that, under Ensite, “[i]f the withdrawal of the property would have a decidedly destabilizing effect on the corporate operations, the property would generally be considered to be used in the course of carrying on a business,” CRA stated: [W]here the Other Assets were employed and risked in BCo’s business such that their withdrawal would have a decidedly destabilizing effect on BCo’s operations, such assets must be considered when ascertaining whether, immediately prior to the acquisition by ACo, the fair market value of the Division Assets constituted all or substantially all of the fair market value of the property of BCo used in the course of carrying on business under subparagraph 125.7(4.1)(b)(i). ...

The Directorate stated: [B]oth are considered corporations for the purpose of the Act. … In such case, the CRA would generally rely on the relevant foreign corporate or company law and the details of the plan of conversion to determine whether there is a continuity of existence on the Conversion. Under the relevant provisions of [the two statutes] the Conversion is not deemed to constitute a wind-up or dissolution of [the company, and it] is considered to be the same entity as and a continuation of [the other]. Provided that the plan of conversion does not provide for [it] to cease to exist, it is our view that, for the purposes of the Act, [it] is considered to be the same entity that it was prior to the Conversion. ...

Subsection 83(2.1) could be considered applicable in certain reorganizations or conversions carried out to allow shareholders to receive capital dividends. However, subsection 83(2.1) is generally not considered applicable in situations where the objective is to pay capital dividends to taxpayers who were already shareholders. Thus, the payment of the capital dividend account to certain shareholders would generally not be considered abusive for the purposes of subsection 245(2) if subsection 83(2.1) did not otherwise apply. ...

(Tax Window, No. 1, p. 9, ¶1166)-- summary under Article 5 Summary Under Tax Topics- Treaties- Income Tax Conventions- Article 5 Because the taxpayer's activities in Canada must be considered in relation to its business activities elsewhere, a U.S. resident will not be precluded from being considered to have a permanent establishment in Canada by virtue only of the Canadian activities having no expectation of profit. ...

5 January 2011 External T.I. 2008-0305252E5- Taxation of Post-Doctoral Fellowships-- summary under Subsection 5(1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 5- Subsection 5(1) Income from a post-doctoral fellowship generally is considered to flow from a period of paid training, i.e., post-doctoral students generally are analogous to articling students or medical residents, so that they are considered to be employees rather than students. ...