Search - considered

In such circumstances the departing spouse would not be considered to have severed his residential ties with Canada. ... " Paragraph 8 "If married individual leaves Canada, but his spouse or dependants remain in Canada, the individual will generally be considered to remain a resident of Canada during his absence. ... In such a situation the resident spouse could, for the purpose of computing his eligibility for the CTC, be considered to be residing with his non-resident spouse. ...

Is an employee considered to have established a self- contained domestic establishment (SCDE) if he can only do so by means of the employer-provided housing? If the answer to the first question is that a place cannot be considered remote because the employee could establish a SCDE by means of an employer-provided dwelling, would the place then be considered remote for a single employee who does not qualify for employer- provided housing but is placed in a bunkhouse instead? ... We are unable to provide a checklist of services required that would be considered a minimum level of services. ...

Is an employee considered to have established a self-contained domestic establishment (SCDE) if he can only do so by means of the employer-provided housing? If the answer to the first question is that a place cannot be considered remote because the employee could establish a SCDE by means of an employer-provided dwelling, would the place then be considered remote for a single employee who does not qualify for employer-provided housing but is placed in a bunkhouse instead? ... We are unable to provide a checklist of services required that would be considered a minimum level of services. ...

You are concerned that paragraph 2 of Article 4 ("Article 4(2)") of the Convention may preclude a Society from being considered a resident of Australia. In our opinion the negotiators of the Convention intended that exempt organizations, such as a Society, be considered resident in the country in which they were organized.  Accordingly, we are of the view that Article 4(2) of the Convention would not preclude a Society from being considered resident in Australia for purposes of the Convention. ...

Will Canco or the lender be considered to have received a taxable benefit from the parent? ... DEPARTMENT'S POSITION Neither Canco nor the lender would be considered to have received a benefit from the parent. ... However, if Canco's borrowing of funds or the giving of a guarantee by the parent can be considered part of a series of transactions, which series, would result in a tax benefit and may reasonably be considered to have been undertaken or arranged primarily to obtain the tax benefit, the transaction may nevertheless be subject to subsection 245(2) of the Act. ...

Reasons: A mineral right is generally considered an intangible property. ... Finally, we opined that a mineral right of a reporting entity would be considered a tangible property and therefore, a specified foreign property pursuant to paragraph (b) of that defined term in subsection 233.3(1) of the Act. ... In addition, we wish to clarify that a mineral right would likely be considered an intangible property. ...

The investment activities are such that, either under ordinary income tax principles or pursuant to section 253 of the Act, the insurer would be considered to be carrying on business in Canada. ... The business the insurer is carrying on (or deemed to be carrying on) would not be considered an insurance business carried on in Canada by the insurer for purposes of the Act. ... It does not carry on any activities that in Canada would result in it being considered to carry on an insurance business for purposes of the Insurance Companies Act (Canada) or similar provincial legislation. ...

Position: No Reasons: Where contract is entered into by annuitant for services to be provided to annuitant then considered expenses of annuitant not RRSP or RRIF trust. 963958 XXXXXXXXXX M.P. ... If this is the case, then the fees pertaining to the investment strategies relating to the self-directed RRSP or RRIF could not be considered premiums or gifts contributed to the particular plan or fund. The determination of whether investment counsel fees or a portion thereof would be considered expenses of a RRSP or RRIF trust is a question of fact that can only be determined after a review of all of the facts pertaining to each particular situation. ...

Our Comments Subsection 252(4) of the Act is used to determine whether a couple living together in a common-law relationship are considered as spouses in respect of each other and when that spousal relationship is considered to begin or end. ... At any particular time prior to these two criteria being met both the individual and the taxpayer would be considered unmarried (or single) with respect to that relationship. ... Consequently, to specifically answer your questions; in the first situation, the marital status of the couple will not be considered to have changed until the date of birth of their child in common, and in the second situation, the marital status of the couple will not be considered to have changed until June 1, 1993. ...

In accordance with Interpretation Bulletin IT-392, a Kentucky LLC is considered to have capital stock consisting of 100 issued shares and each owner of a beneficial interest in the Kentucky LLC is then considered to own a number of shares proportionate to his beneficial interest in the Kentucky LLC. Each amount distributed on account of profits by the Kentucky LLC to its owners will be considered dividends for the purpose of the Act and the Regulations made thereunder. Where the mind and management of the Kentucky LLC is situated in the U.S., the Kentucky LLC will be considered resident in the United States for purposes of the Act. ...