Search - considered

Results 461 - 470 of 656 for considered

The Canadian securitization markets have largely settled on a preferred structure for each type of securitized instrument

However, principal business partnership status may be in question if the lease originator retains some leased equipment and this is considered to be a business separate from its leasing business carried on “through” the LP. ...

101139810 Saskatchewan – Tax Court of Canada decision discloses that CRA assessed only a single level of corporate taxation on a bad butterfly

As one might expect, CRA initially assessed both 8231, and TC1 and TC2, to convert their s. 84(3) deemed dividends realized on the cross-redemption of the shareholdings between them which had arisen under the butterfly mechanics, into capital gains (subject to a deductions in the case of TC1 and TC2 for the safe income of 8231 considered to be received by them.) ...

CRA finds that a highly contingent secondary call right of a non-resident on shares of minority residents undercuts for CCPC purposes their USA right to appoint half the board

CRA considered that s. 251(5)(b)(ii) would apply because the non-resident would have the right to require Opco to redeem the shares if Opco did not fulfill its obligation to do so automatically. ...

St-Pierre – Tax Court of Canada finds that the judicial nullification rather than rectification of a premature capital dividend declaration gave rise to a s. 15(2) income inclusion

Although he did not consider that the court-declared obligation of the individual to effect restitution to the corporation of the dividend amounts had retroactive effect so as to give rise to indebtedness at the time of the s. 15(2) assessment, he considered that the dividend payments gave rise to indebtedness of the individual to the corporation under the unjust enrichment principle. ...

Zheng – Tax Court of Canada finds that an HST rebate form was signed and completed in the name of an individual who was acting as agent

This may imply that Qun was considered to have also appealed as agent. ...

Development Securities – U.K. First-Tier Tribunal finds that a Jersey sub, whose Jersey board approved a decision contrary to the sub’s interests, resided in the U.K.

., Morgan J stated: Unlike Wood v Holden … this was not a case where the board considered a proposal and, having taken appropriate advice, decided that it was in the best interests of the companies to enter into it. ...

Iberdrola - ECJ (1st Chamber) finds that a developer was entitled to VAT credits for reconstructing a sewage plant for free, as this advanced its own project

It might be considered that Iberdrola was not incurring the pumping-station reconstruction costs for the purpose of or in the course of making a free supply to the municipality but, rather, as inputs to its own apartment project. ...

9199-3899 Québec – Quebec Court of Appeal finds that using the investment allowance to generate a capital tax savings abused its purpose of merely avoiding double taxation

Univar, where Webb JA indicated that funding an inbound purchase with a Canadian Buyco with high outside capital was such an obvious surplus-stripping stripping technique that it could not be considered an abuse of s. 212.1- so that doing something more complicated to accomplish the same thing also was not abusive.) ...

Scott – Tax Court of Canada finds that compensation to former Nortel employees for loss of life insurance was non-taxable

Although it could easily be considered to be a benefit that arose out of her previous employment, he applied the Savage principle of interpretation that: where, in addition to the general provision in paragraph 6(1)(a), there is “a specific [statutory provision] containing detailed conditions for the inclusion of an amount in income that would not otherwise be income” … the general provision cannot be used “to fill in all the gaps left by” the specific provision [viz. s. 6(4)]. ...

CRA provides examples on the operation of the proposed split-income rules

CRA states that in determining whether a payment is a reasonable return, it “does not intend to generally substitute its judgment of what would be considered a reasonable amount unless there has not been a good faith attempt to determine a reasonable amount.” ...

You are here