Search - considered

Had he considered these answers, he could only have concluded that Mrs. ... Paulette's First Nation; he ought to have also considered the fact that Mr. ... Had the Judge properly considered this evidence and had he applied his own standard to Mr. ...

Any material prepared or considered by the Minister or the [CRA] in relation to the decisions to issue to the [NIR] and to publish this notice in the Canada Gazette; and 3. ... As noted most recently by the Supreme Court, the Minister’s “decision must be considered reasonable if its conclusions fall within a ‘range of possible, acceptable outcomes which are defensible in respect of the facts and law’” (Mouvement laïque québécois v. ... According to the Appellant, the “complete record” consists of all documents and materials available to the Appeals Directorate and all documents and materials actually considered by the Appeals Directorate in making the Confirmation Decision under appeal. ...

Indeed, if the scheme considered in the Duke of Westminister was used in Canada today it "would probably be caught" by GAAR: Peter W. ... This inquiry involves taking two smaller steps. [36]       First, a court must determine "if it may reasonably be considered that the transaction would not result directly or indirectly in a misuse" of the provisions of the Act. ... " [40]       Thus, if the scheme may reasonably be considered not to result directly or indirectly in a misuse or an abuse, GAAR does not apply: in effect, the taxpayer is given the benefit of any doubt. ...

Canada, 2008 FCA 327, at paragraph 7, the Assessment Officer stated the following regarding an assessment of costs being considered an interlocutory proceeding: 7. ... I have considered disbursements in these Bills of Costs in a manner consistent with these various decisions. ... This being considered, I am not convinced that the Appellant should be required to reimburse the Respondent for the entire claim for Item 21(a), as the direction letter was not pursued by the Respondent. ...

Introduction [2]                 The issue to be decided turns on the income tax notion of safe income as it arises under subsection 55(2): 55(2) Where a corporation resident in Canada has after April 21, 1980 received a taxable dividend in respect of which it is entitled to a deduction under subsection 112(1) or 138(6) as part of a transaction or event or a series of transactions or events (other than as part of a series of transactions or events that commenced before April 22, 1980), one of the purposes of which (or, in the case of a dividend under subsection 84(3), one of the results of which) was to effect a significant reduction in the portion of the capital gain that, but for the dividend, would have been realized on a disposition at fair market value of any share of capital stock immediately before the dividend and that could reasonably be considered to be attributable to anything other than income earned or realized by any corporation after 1971 and before the transaction or event or the commencement of the series of transactions or events referred to in paragraph (3)(a), notwithstanding any other section of this Act, the amount of the dividend (other than the portion thereof, if any, subject to tax under Part IV that is not refunded as a consequence of the payment of a dividend to a corporation where the payment is part of the series of transactions or events) (a) shall be deemed not to be a dividend received by the corporation; (b) where a corporation has disposed of the share, shall be deemed to be proceeds of disposition of the share except to the extent that it is otherwise included in computing such proceeds; and 55(2) Lorsqu'une corporation résidant au Canada a reçu, après le 21 avril 1980, un dividende imposable à l'égard duquel elle a droit à une déduction en vertu du paragraphe 112(1) ou 138(6), comme partie d'une opération ou d'un événement ou d'une série d'opérations ou d'événements (sauf comme partie d'une série d'opérations ou d'événements qui ont commencé avant le 22 avril 1980) dont l'un des objets (ou, dans le cas d'un dividende visé au paragraphe 84(3), dont l'un des résultats) a été de diminuer sensiblement la partie du gain en capital qui, sans le dividende, aurait été réalisée lors d'une disposition d'une action du capital-actions à la juste valeur marchande, immédiatement avant le dividende et qui pourrait raisonnablement être considérée comme étant attribuable à quoi que ce soit qui n'est pas du revenu gagné ou réalisé par une corporation après 1971 et avant l'opération ou l'événement ou le début de la série d'opérations ou d'événements visés à l'alinéa (3)a), nonobstant tout autre article de la présente loi, le montant du dividende (à l'exclusion de la partie de celui-ci, si partie il y a, qui est assujettie à l'impôt en vertu de la Partie IV qui n'est pas remboursé en raison du paiement d'un dividende à une corporation lorsqu'un tel paiement fait partie de la série d'opérations ou d'événements) a) est réputé ne pas être un dividende reçu par la corporation; b) lorsqu'une corporation a disposé de l'action, est réputé être le produit de disposition de l'action, sauf dans la mesure où il est inclus par ailleurs dans le calcul de ce produit; et (c) where a corporation has not disposed of the share, shall be deemed to be a gain of the corporation for the year in which the dividend was received from the disposition of a capital property. c) lorsqu'une corporation n'a pas disposé de l'action, est réputé être un gain de la corporation pour l'année au cours de laquelle le dividende a été reçu de la disposition d'un bien en immobilisation. ... At the same time, Parliament did not want to impede the tax-free flow of dividends that were attributable to income which had already been taxed. [33]            One of the options considered by Parliament was to exhaustively define an earnings account by reference to control periods, which would have allowed for the actual measurement of the capital gain inherent in the shares that was attributable to anything but income whenever a dividend was paid. [34]            However, this approach was thought to be complex and overly onerous. ... Conceptually, this approach captures the tax applicable to the portion of the notional gain attributable to an increase in value of the underlying assets while maintaining the tax-free treatment of that part of this gain attributable to "income earned or realized" since 1971. [36]            What is of significance for our purposes is that, in making this apportionment, "income earned or realized" is "deemed" to be income otherwise computed (under the Act), subject only to the two exceptions mentioned in paragraph 55(5)(c) (in the case of a private corporation). [37]            The starting point for the subsection 55(2) apportionment was thus fixed by way of a deeming provision, leaving as the only other exercise the determination of that part of the notional capital gain which can "reasonably be considered to be attributable to anything other than" this income. [38]            There can be no doubt that this exercise calls for an inquiry as to whether "the income earned or realized" was kept on hand or remained disposable to fund the payment of the dividend. ...

. […] [9] This particular statement convinces me of the importance and complexity of the issues considered by the FC. ... I have reviewed the parties’ submissions and considered factors such as: (a) the result of the proceeding was in favour of the Appellant; and (c) the importance and complexity of the issues discussed during the hearing, and have determined the 3 units claimed under Column III to be reasonable (Rules 400(3) and 409). [14] Turning to the duration of the hearing, the Appellant claimed 2 hours for the hearing held on June 24, 2019. ... LAVALLEE, DONALD WORME, RODNEY BRASS, ANGELA DESJARLAIS, SIDNEY KESHANE AND GLEN O'SOUP MATTER CONSIDERED AT OTTAWA, ONTARIO WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT BY: STÉPHANIE ST-PIERRE BABIN, Assessment Officer DATED: January 12, 2023 WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY: Lynda K. ...

The relevant sections provide: 118.3 Credit for mental or physical impairment (1) Where (a) an individual has a severe and prolonged mental or physical impairment, (a.1) the effects of the impairment are such that the individual's ability to perform a basic activity of daily living is markedly restricted, (a.2) a medical doctor, or where the impairment is an impairment of sight, a medical doctor or an optometrist, has certified in prescribed form that the individual has a severe and prolonged mental or physical impairment the effects of which are such that the individuals's ability to perform a basic activity of daily living is markedly restricted, (b) the individual has filed for a taxation year with the Minister the certificate described in paragraph (a.2), and 118.3 Crédit d'impôt pour déficience mentale ou physique (1) Le produit de la multiplication de 4118 $ par le taux de base pour l'année est déductible dans le calcul de l'impôt payable par un particulier en vertu de la présente partie pour une année d'imposition, si les conditions suivantes sont réunies: a) le particulier a une déficience mentale ou physique grave et prolongée; a.1) les effets de la déficience sont tels que la capacité du particulier d'accomplir une activité courante de la vie quotidienne est limitée de façon marquée; a.2) un médecin en titre ou, s'il s'agit d'une déficience visuelle, un médecin en titre ou un optométriste atteste, sur formulaire prescrit, que le particulier a une déficience mentale ou physique grave et prolongée dont les effets sont tels que sa capacité d'accomplir une activité courante de la vie quotidienne est limitée de façon marquée; (c) no amount in respect of remuneration for an attendant or care in a nursing home, in respect of the individual, is included in calculating a deduction under section 118.2 (otherwise than because of paragraph 118.2(2)(b.1) for the year by the individual or by any other person, for the purposes of computing the tax payable under this Part by the individual for the year, there may be deducted an amount determined by the formula                            A x $4,118 where A is the appropriate percentage for the year...... b) le particulier présente au ministre l'attestation visée à l'alinéa a.2) pour une année d'impostion; c) aucun montant représentant soit une rémunération versée à un préposé aux soins du particulier, soit des frais de séjour du particulier dans une maison de santé ou de repos, n'est inclus par le particulier ou par une autre personne dans le calcul d'une déduction en application de l'article 118.2 pour l'année (autrement que par application de l'alinéa 118.2(2)(bl1). 118.4(1) For the purposes of subsection 6(16), sections 118.2 and 118.3 and this subsection, (a) an impairment is prolonged where it has lasted, or can reasonably be expected to last, for a continuous period of at least 12 months; (b) an individual's ability to perform a basic activity of daily living is markedly restricted only where all or substantially all of the time, even with therapy and the use of appropriate devices and medication, the individual is blind or is unable (or requires an inordinate amount of time) to perform a basic activity of daily living; (c) a basic activity of daily living in relation to an individual means               (i) perceiving, thinking and remembering,      (ii) feeding and dressing oneself,      (iii) speaking so as to be understood, in a quiet setting, by another person familiar with the individual,      (iv) hearing so as to understand, in a quiet setting, another person familiar with the individual,      (v) eliminating (bowel or bladder functions), or 118.4(1) Pour l'application du paragraphe 6(16), des articles 118.2 et 118.3 et du présent paragraphe: a) une déficience est prolongée si elle dure au moins 12 mois d'affilée ou s'il est raisonnable de s'attendre à ce qu'elle dure au moins 12 mois d'affilée; b) la capacité d'un particulier d'accomplir une activité courante de la vie quotidienne est limitée de façon marquée seulement si, même avec des soins thérapeutiques et l'aide des appareils et des médicaments indiqués, il est toujours ou presque toujours aveugle ou incapable d'accomplir une activité courante de la vie quotidienne sans y consacrer un temps excessif; c) sont des activités courantes de la vie quotidienne pour un particulier;      (i) la perception, la réflexion et la mémoire,      (ii) le fait de s'alimenter et de s'habiller,      (iii) le fait de parler de façon à se faire comprendre, dans un endroit calme, par une personne de sa connaissance,      (iv) le fait d'entendre de façon à comprendre, dans un endroit calme, une personne de sa connaissance,      (v) les fonctions d"évacuation intestinale ou vésicale,      (vi) walking; and (d) for greater certainty, no other activity, including working, housekeeping or a social or recreational activity shall be considered as a basic activity of daily living.      ...

I have considered disbursements in these Bills of Costs in a manner consistent with these various decisions. ... The parties’ submissions have raised the issue of the complexity of the appeal proceeding, which is a factor that can be considered in my determination of costs pursuant to Rule 400(3)(1)(c) of the FCR. ... CHEEMA MATTER CONSIDERED AT TORONTO, ONTARIO WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT BY: GARNET MORGAN, Assessment Officer DATED: august 24, 2021 WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY: Marilyn Vardy For The Appellant   Jagmohan S. ...

One week of insurable employment is considered to represent 35 hours of insurable employment. ... " 25 If a "final and binding" privative clause is considered weak, then a "final" privative clause must be weaker still. ... The section states that a "week of insurable employment shall be considered to represent 35 hours of insurable employment" and, so the argument ran, the Umpire erred when he used the actual hours worked by the respondent to determine her insured employment in 1996. [23]      The respondent answers these submissions in two ways. ...

., one of the purposes of which... was to effect a significant reduction in the portion of the capital gain that, but for the dividend, would have been realized on a disposition at fair market value of any share of capital stock immediately before the dividend and that could reasonably be considered to be attributable to anything other than income earned or realized by any corporation after 1971 and before the transaction or event or the commencement of the series of transactions or events referred to in paragraph (3)(a), notwithstanding any other section of this Act, the amount of the dividend... 55 (2) Lorsqu'une société résidant au Canada a reçu... un dividende imposable à l'égard duquel elle a droit à une déduction en vertu du paragraphe 112(1)..., comme partie d'une opération ou d'un événement ou d'une série d'opérations ou d'événements... dont l'un des objets... a été de diminuer sensiblement la partie du gain en capital qui, sans le dividende, aurait été réalisé lors d'une disposition d'une action du capital-actions à la juste valeur marchande, immédiatement avant le dividende et qu'il serait raisonnable de considérer comme étant attribuable à autre chose qu'un revenu gagné ou réalisé par une société après 1971 et avant l'opération ou l'événement ou le début de la série d'opérations ou d'événements visés à l'alinéa (3) a), malgré tout autre article de la présente loi, le montant du dividende... ... If it is reasonable to expect that any of the income earned or realized in a stub period will be offset by losses in the remainder of the year, then the calculation of the safe income on hand for the stub period should reflect the anticipated losses, since that income could not reasonably be considered to be reflected in the inherent gain in the shares. ... Rather, as I read the reasons (particularly footnote 17 at paragraph 65), the Judge concluded that the stock dividend reduced the hypothetical capital gain by an amount that, in the context of the case, was so small that it could not be considered significant. [48]            Counsel for VIH did not defend the Judge's conclusion as to the purpose of the stock dividend, but indicated that VIH could make a "designation" under paragraph 55(5)(f) of the Income Tax Act, the effect of which would be to limit the application of subsection 55(2) to $45,570 of the stock dividend. ...