Search - considered

As a general rule, a taxpayer who takes commodity futures positions in, or who has transactions in, a commodity connected with his business, is considered to be trading as part of his business operations and the comments in paragraph 3 above apply. ... As an example, a jeweller who buys 100 ounces of gold for his business (a normal amount for his business) and also makes additional purchases of 1600 ounces of gold, or of futures contracts representing 1600 ounces of gold, as a speculation for his own account, may be viewed as a speculator with respect to the additional purchases when all the facts of the situation are considered. ... In J Camille Hare/ v DMR of the Province of Québec, 77 DTC 5438, the Supreme Court sanctioned the application of an administrative policy, but as the Court emphasized, the case was one where the said administrative policy did not conflict with the Act and where the Act itself is ambiguous. 5.5 In applying the usual principles, the Board concluded that the profit in question resulted from “an adventure or concern in the nature of trade” and was therefore to be considered a business-related profit. ...

Minister of National Revenue, [1980] CTC 2471, 80 DTC 1418 D E Taylor:—These are appeals heard on common evidence on March 21, 1980 at the City of Edmonton, Alberta, and are against tax assessments for the year 1974 in which the Minister of National Revenue allowed an amount of $37,216 to each of the appellants as a capital loss, but denied their claim that it be considered as a business loss. ... The question of the relationship between paragraphs 18(1)(a) and 18(1)(b) has been considered by the Courts on many occasions, but I would make specific reference to the precedent-setting judgment in British Columbia Electric Railway Company Limited v MNR, [1958] CTC 21; 58 DTC 1022. ... Since, however, that question does not arise if they fall within the prohibition of s 12(1)(b), this question should be first considered. ...

He argues that the amendments are to be considered effective as of the dates of the First Order and Second Order. With respect to the amount of $3,979.86 in the 1992 year, which comprised arrears of mortgage payments, the Appellant submits that it should be considered as regular maintenance. ... Submissions of the Respondent Counsel for the Respondent submits that only the First Order and Second Order are to be considered. ...

He also rejected the submission that the Gallivan letter could not be a decision subject to judicial review because it did not affect Iris’s legal rights, which flowed solely from section 229 of the Excise Tax Act. [28] The motion judge next considered the Minister’s submission that the prothonotary erred in failing to take into account the previous decisions of the Federal Court and this Court in this proceeding, in which Iris had sought interim mandatory relief. ... “This reading,” he continued, “supports a conclusion that the Application challenges a decision, albeit not expressly referenced, which is comparable to the expressly referenced decision related to the previous withholding.” [30] The motion judge also considered the scope of the prothonotary’s order, but this element of the order was not raised before us and is no longer in issue. ... I have considered the submissions provided by the parties on rule 301 in response to the Court’s direction in coming to the disposition of the appeal that I propose. ...

If such income is to be considered as income from property, then of course the appellant is entitled to the deduction abatement for provincial taxes permitted by section 33 of the Income Tax Act reproduced supra which here would be $25,278 or 47% X $53,784 (ie, the basic tax, $49,937, obtained by applying $45,070 on the first $90,000 and 65% on the remaining $7,487.47). ... She can only do so if she establishes that such income must be considered as “income earned in a province” within the meaning of the Act and the above Regulations bearing in mind that income from property, even if such property is outside the province, is deemed to be income earned in the province. ... The question, therefore, is whether the benefits received by the appellant under the agreement simply represent a return on capital irrespective of whether such return is based on risk capital or use of capital and should be considered as being essentially and factually passive investment income or whether such benefits must be considered as business income as the source of such income flows from a business operation. ...

In our view, Beatriz’s proposal is logical, since the full amount in question would be available for Maia’s maintenance rather than being reduced by the amount of tax that Beatriz would have to pay if the income were considered hers. t seems fair to us, since it is in no way prejudicial to Roberto. ... The following passage from that agreement leaves room for doubt about the true intention of each party on signing the agreement: [TRANSLATION] In our view, Beatriz’s proposal is logical, since the full amount in question would be available for Maia’s maintenance rather than being reduced by the amount of tax that Beatriz would have to pay if the income were considered hers. ... When a child is emancipated and leaves the custody of the spouse, the problem addressed by Parliament in allowing the deduction of amounts paid for the benefit of the child ceases to exist: from that point on, the former spouse no longer has a duty of care deriving from his or her right of custody, and the support can no longer be considered to be owing or paid on account of that duty. ...

Moreover, the taxpayer purchased this property in order to diversify his investments, and had always considered property to be the safest security (Va/c/air, p 469, line 7). ... It is on the basis of this statement and his testimony in general that the circumstances surrounding the purchase and sale of the asset in question should be considered. ... Mr J Alzire Tardif would certainly not have considered purchasing property for the first time in his life at his age in an area with which he was not at all familiar had it not been for Gérard Tardif’s influence. ...

He still had income of about $1,000 a month from the sale of the Mill Bay property and his wife was teaching school so he considered that they had sufficient income to complete the building, doing some of the work himself. ... In 1972 he had also bought a house on Prior Street which he considered to be a bargain and intended to fix it up to live in. ... While profits from some of his other real estate dealings were therefore quite properly declared by him and taxed as profits resulting from adventures in the nature of trade, the profits arising from the sale of the subject property should be considered as resulting from the sale of an investment and be considered as capital gains. ...

The resulting profit will then have to be considered income and not a capital gain. 3.13. ... Moreover, titles should not be considered part of the Act. The Board considers that the description of the cash method provided in the aforementioned sections is, in practice, the description of a principle which is already generally recognized in accounting. ... As an obiter dictum, however, in view of the evidence submitted concerning the herds (particularly the fact that the cost of purchasing the cattle was not treated as a current expense), the Board concludes that the subsequent profit on the sale of the cattle should be considered a capital gain. 6. ...

(my emphasis) Appeal Book at Tab 1-12 [11] The human rights officer then considered whether the facts set out by Mr. ... On this, she considered Canada (Canadian Human Rights Commission) v. Canada (Attorney General), 2018 SCC 31, [2018] 2 S.C.R. 230, which was directly on point and binding (the CHRC case). ... The rationale of that case, as found by the Court, is that the Commission only has jurisdiction over discriminatory practices, whereas the adoption of legislation cannot be considered to be a “service” and so could not give rise to a discriminatory practice. ...