Search - considered

Although his reasoning is somewhat unclear, it appears that he considered that because the previous proprietorship was dissolved, therefore she was no longer a registrant because the proprietorship respecting which she had registered no longer existed. ...

In that case, if s. 12(1)(x) rather than s. 9 is considered to govern, there is a deemed receipt of government assistance on that date, so that the s. 12(1)(x) inclusion will fall into the subsequent taxation year. ...

He considered that being more generous in this regard accorded with the policy of encouraging settlement offers to be made at least 90 days before the hearing even in circumstances where substantial legal costs had already been incurred. ...

When asked as to whether it considered this decision to be portable to the situation where a non-resident person with a branch in Canada wishes that branch to be treated as resident in Canada for purposes of the ETA s. 156 election (presumably to be made with a Canadian corporate affiliate), CRA responded that it was considering the decision’s “impact on section 132,” but that: Subsection 132(2) deems a non-resident person with a permanent establishment in Canada to be resident in Canada “in respect of, but only in respect of activities of the person carried on through that establishment”. ...

It added: [T]he CRA took a similar approach in … 2016-0628181R3 by adding an opinion that any dividend … paid … on the shares of … the private corporation (Holdco) to the foundation (Foundation), which had previously acquired the shares as a result of the transfer of the shares by the testamentary spousal trust for the spouse of the deceased following the death of the spouse, would be considered not to be a taxable dividend, with the result that subsection 129(1. 2) would apply …. ...

Before intimating that s. 83(2.1) likely would not apply to such streaming of the CDA to DCO because it was one of the original shareholders, CRA stated: For the purposes of applying subsection 83(2.1), the CRA has traditionally considered that it is the main purpose of the original acquisition of the shares that must be taken into account when they are exchanged for shares of another class upon reclassification of the capital stock of the corporation. ...

CRA intimated that it generally would not consider various amounts received by the partnership to be gross REIT revenue for REIT-test purposes where the amounts “would not be considered ‘revenue’ within the ordinary meaning of the term nor under the well-accepted business and accounting practices.” ...

CRA stated, in the context of an employee who also was the controlling shareholder of the eligible entity, that “where salary and wages are only reflected by journal entry as an expense by the employer with a corresponding credit to a due to shareholder loan account, such salary and wages are not considered eligible remuneration paid to an eligible employee.” ...

In determining whether something constitutes a reasonable return, the CRA does not intend to generally substitute its judgment about what would be considered a reasonable amount where the taxpayer has made a good faith attempt to do so based on the reasonableness factors set out in the definition of “reasonable return. ...

CRA went on to note that it had not considered whether s. 248(1) – “disposition” – (f) or s. 107.4(3) could accord rollover treatment. ...