Search - considered

The Queen, 2021 TCC 5 (Informal Procedure)-- summary under Business Source/Reasonable Expectation of Profit Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 3- Paragraph 3(a)- Business Source/Reasonable Expectation of Profit rental unit was a source of income even when not rentable due to on-going renovations In rejecting the Crown’s submission that the repair expenditures were not deductible because the rental unit at issue was not rented out during the year in question because it was being reconditioned, and then took a while to rent out at a substantially increased rent, Masse DJ noted (at para. 23) that “a property does not need to be generating income at every stage of operation in order to be considered a source of income.” ...

., [1997] 1 CTC 13, 96 DTC 6355, [1996] 3 CTC 14-- summary under Sham Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Sham no sham if docs reflect legal reality Before finding that the taxpayer had failed to accomplish a tax-motivated plan because it had failed, in law, to establish a partnership with two other parties, Linden J.A. quoted a statement of the Tax Court Judge that "if the legal reality that underlies the ostensible legal relationship is the same as that which appears on the surface, there is no sham", and then stated (at p. 6359): "Absent the essential component of deceit, the present transaction cannot be considered a sham according to current Canadian law. ...

., [1997] 1 CTC 13, 96 DTC 6355, [1996] 3 CTC 14-- summary under Tax Avoidance Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Tax Avoidance no sham if docs reflect legal reality Before finding that the taxpayer had failed to accomplish a tax-motivated plan because it had failed, in law, to establish a partnership with two other parties, Linden J.A. quoted a statement of the Tax Court Judge that "if the legal reality that underlies the ostensible legal relationship is the same as that which appears on the surface, there is no sham", and then stated (at p. 6359): "Absent the essential component of deceit, the present transaction cannot be considered a sham according to current Canadian law. ...

Swantje, 94 DTC 6633, [1994] 2 CTC 382 (FCA), briefly aff'd [1996] 1 S.C.R. 73, 96 DTC 6310-- summary under Resolving Ambiguity Summary Under Tax Topics- Statutory Interpretation- Resolving Ambiguity In finding that the inclusion of pension income in the formula under s. 180.2(1) should not be regarded as subjecting such pension income to tax, Marceau J.A. stated that (p. 6635): The proper approach must be a functional one, and the scheme must be considered as a whole, taking into account the intent of the legislation, its object and spirit and what it actually accomplishes. ...

The King, 2025 TCC 16-- summary under Subsection 248(26) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 248- Subsection 248(26) deeming of taxpayer liability to be an obligation Before going on to find that advances made to an employee as a performance award constituted loans and after paraphrasing s. 248(26), Ouimet J stated (at para. 35): Consequently, for a taxpayer who either becomes liable to repay money they borrowed or becomes liable to pay an amount (other than interest) as consideration for any property they acquired, the liability shall be considered to be an “obligation” for the purposes of applying the relevant provisions of the ITA. ...

., 94 DTC 6125, [1994] 1 CTC 244 (FCA)-- summary under Certainty Summary Under Tax Topics- Statutory Interpretation- Certainty preferred interpretation should meet a minimum level of cetainty In finding that a federal sales tax refund should not be considered to have been receivable by the taxpayer until the Minister had given some public irrevocable indication thereof, Hugessen J.A. stated (p. 6128): "The decision creates rights and starts time running and it is as much in the public interest as in that of those immediately concerned that there be a basic minimum of certainty as to when it is made and what it is. ...

Miller J: “had concluded that a reassessment will be considered valid if the intention of the Minister at the time of [its] making…was to pursue verification;” and had found that that “there is no law…to the effect that a protective assessment is invalid if issued for the sole purpose of leaving the door open to conduct or continue an audit” (- and she went on to indicate that Karda was similiar); and noted (at para. 129) that it was necessary to issue the reassessments in order to implement the accord with RTA respecting its directly incurred SR&ED expenditures. ... Miller J. … explained that in the Anchor Pointe decision the Federal Court of Appeal considered the correctness of the assessment as the product of the examination, and not the validity of the assessment as the process. … Accordingly, the reassessments were valid. ...

In also rejecting Elfe’s submission that the Court should simply annul the interest itself, he noted that the ARQ had not even considered whether it was appropriate in the particular circumstances to annul interest below the 4% level, and had not been informed of the MNP advice, and stated (at para. 40): Given the breadth of issues that could be considered by the Agency and its jurisdiction in this matter, the Court will not exercise the discretionary power of the Agency. ...

She then found (also at para. 49) that although “The development agreement undoubtedly does constitute such an arrangement,” the Tax Court had gone beyond this and thus committed two errors (paras 50 and 51): … [First] the Tax Court went well beyond relying on the terms of the development agreement in considering what circumstances gave rise to de facto control and instead considered such issues as ADC’s financial position, the other shareholders’ dependence on the viability of ADC and representations made by Mr. ... She stated (at paras 58 and 59): …Under paragraph 251(1)(c) of the ITA, the requisite inquiry is entirely factual, and the ability to set the terms of the supply agreement must accordingly be considered in context. … [I]n light of ADC’s near-total economic dependence on Seawind Corp., the fact that the owner of the latter company dictated (and was able to dictate) the terms of the relationship between the two companies is a very relevant factor in determining whether the two were dealing at arm’s length. ...

He would have been considered to have a services permanent establishment in Canada under the Canada-U.S. ... After noting (at para. 19) that “Neither party argued that Wolfbend LLC was not carrying on any business,” Webb JA stated (at para. 22): [I]f, for Canadian tax purposes, any enterprise being carried on by Wolfbend LLC is considered to only be carried on by it (and, therefore, any revenue that it generates from carrying on that enterprise is treated as its revenue from that enterprise), any enterprise of Wolfbend LLC, as a separate person for Canadian tax purposes, would not be the enterprise of Lawrence Wolf. ...