Search - considered

The Queen, 2018 TCC 85-- summary under Subsection 104(1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- 101-110- Section 104- Subsection 104(1) Quebec trusts are considered to be owners of their property for ITA purposes The taxpayers, in connection with arguing (at para. 62) that the reference in the preamble to s. 256(1.2)(f)(ii) to “shares … owned.. by a trust” should be interpreted as referring only to shares that had been earmarked under the deed of trust for the beneficiaries, went on to argue (para. 1261) that, having regard to Art. 1261 of the Civil Code, a Quebec trust was not the owner of the property in its patrimony. ...

The taxpayer considered that there was no significant distinction between the third policy (replacing lost income) and the first two policies (covering business expenses). ...

. … The Supreme Court has endorsed the principle that the underlying purpose of an expense must be considered in the context of the taxpayer’s business. ...

Krumm, IAC and its agents could each be considered to be a tax shelter “promoter”, as defined in subsection 237.1(1) …. ...

The Queen, 2020 TCC 16-- summary under Section 21 Summary Under Tax Topics- Other Legislation/Constitution- Federal- Tax Court of Canada Act- Section 21 appeal is not launched until Notice of Appeal is filed Similarly to the corresponding provision of the OBCA considered in 1455257 Ontario, s. 219(2)(a) of the Corporations Act of Manitoba provides that a proceeding commenced by a corporation before its dissolution can be continued as if it had not been dissolved. ...

The Queen, 2020 TCC 11 (Informal Procedure)-- summary under Judicial Comity Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Judicial Comity principle of judicial comity applicable to previous Tax Court decision on the same donation program The taxpayer participated in the same “Global Learning” charitable tax credit arrangement as had been considered in Mariano. ...

Wong J first stated (at para. 11) that “where a person pays 100 percent of their disability insurance premiums, both the court and the Minister have treated the resulting benefits as not taxable [citing Béliveau],” but then went on to find that exemption on this basis had not been established by the taxpayer, given that: she was “unable to conclude that the Aegon plan was a disability insurance plan” as she could “only see that it was a plan which paid her an annuity and that the insurer deducted the wages tax, which is considered income tax under the treaty” (para. 14); and there was “no objective third-party evidence to show the court that she paid 100% of the premiums.” ...

The Minister considered that substantial renovation of the particular building was “substantially completed” no later than October 16, 2013, but the taxpayer claimed a December 15, 2015 substantial completion date. ...

She brought this motion pursuant to s. 86 of the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure) to compel the Financial and Consumer Affairs Authority of Saskatchewan (“FCAA”) to turn over certain documents that she considered to be relevant to her appeal. ...

(It is not at all apparent what difference this would have made even if he had considered those clauses.) ...