Search - considered

Principal Issues: Whether a corporate partner can be considered not to deal at arm's length with a corporation that is controlled by the partnership. Whether business profits of a partnership can be considered the business profits of the partners. ... Therefore, the controlling partner of a partnership that controls the employer will be considered to control the employer and thus will be considered not to deal at arm's length with the employer. ...

A grandparent can be considered a "parent" of an individual because of the extended definition of "child" in paragraph 70(10)(a) of the Act, which applies for purposes of section 110.6 of the Act. 5-961876 XXXXXXXXXX C. ... In your view, the land would be "qualified farm property" if the grandparent were considered to be the parent of the grandchild. ... Accordingly, a grandparent can be considered a "parent" of an individual because of the extended definition of "child" in paragraph 70(10)(a) of the Act, which applies for purposes of section 110.6 of the Act. ...

Principal Issues: Whether or not a Kazakh Limited Liabilities Partnership is considered to be a corporation for puroses of the Income Tax Act Position: Would be considered to be a corporation Reasons: A review of the legislation indicates that a Limited Liabilities Partnership would be a separate legal entity in line with the comments in IT-343 XXXXXXXXXX 962459 XXXXXXXXXX David R. ... Where a LLP is considered to be a corporation, our administrative position set out in IT-392 (Meaning of the Term "Share") would apply. As such, a LLP would be viewed as having capital stock of 100 issued shares and each owner of a beneficial interest in the LLP will be considered to own a number of shares proportionate to his beneficial interest in the LLP. ...

Principal Issues: whether a unit in a money market fund can be considered cash for the purpose of 108(2)(b), 204.4(2)(a) and the def'n of pooled fund trust in ss 5000(7) of the Regs Position: no Reasons: while admittedly very liquid, this type of investment cannot be used in lieu of legal tender and does not fall within the ordinary meaning of cash- a deposit with a bank, on the other hand, will qualify as cash when no restrictions are placed on the depositor with respect to withdrawals-while a bank account may not strictly be considered cash, jurisprudence exists in which the amount left on deposit with a bank has been considered as cash A. ... However, recognizing that a unit in a money market fund which cannot be easily traded is not a marketable security, you ask whether a unit in a money market fund trust can be considered as cash. ... In our view, a unit in a money market fund cannot be considered to be cash. ...

In our view theXXXXXXXXXX could be considered a structure or building and could be included in class 39. ... Subsection 13(27) establishes for purposes of subsection 13(26) the earliest time that the property (other than a building or part thereof) is considered to have become available for use. Subsection 13(28) establishes the earliest time that a building or part thereof is considered to be available for use by the taxpayer for purposes of subsection 13(26). ...

BUSINESS INCOME IS CONSIDERED EARNED INCOME UNDER THE ACT WHEREAS BENEFITS OF THIS NATURE RECEIVED BY EMPLOYEES IS NOT. ... NCARP benefits reported by self-employed fisherperson, on the other hand, are considered earned income for the annual $500 working income supplement. ... However, the benefits are considered to be earned income for self- employed fisherpersons. ...

Reasons FOR POSITION TAKEN: The Department considers that a property is a replacement for a former property where it can reasonably be considered to have been substituted for the use of that former property. ... In this particular case, since the former land and former buildings were replaced with the same type of property, namely land and buildings, and since land is not considered to bear the same physical description as a building, the buildings cannot reasonably be considered to have been substituted for the land, nor can the land be considered to have been replaced with the buildings. ... We have considered the calculation on page 6 of the taxpayer's submission and cannot agree with the taxpayer's method of determining the deferred capital gain. ...

The "place of business" refers to the location where these employees are considered to be employed, i.e., the employee's normal place of employment and not where the food is being served or at a temporary work location albeit a place of business of the employer. ... In other words, a particular employee would be considered to be employed at one particular place of business rather than being employed at each and every location that they perform a function for their employer. ... In the situations which you describe, employees from, say, Halifax and Vancouver who are attending training courses in Toronto would be considered to be employees of their respective cities and would be considered to be in travel status while in Toronto. ...

Principal Issues: Can a BC Dependant Contractor which is an employee for purposes of Labour Code of British Columbia be considered an employee for purposes of the Act? ... Hollinger 952442 Dependent Contractors This is in reply to your memo of September 11, 1995 requesting our opinion on whether dependent contractors considered "employees" for purposes of the "Labour Code of British Columbia" (the "LCBC") would also be considered "employees" for the purposes of accruing a pension benefit in a registered pension plan. ... You have requested our views on whether the dependent contractors would be considered employees for the purpose of the Act and the Income Tax Regulations (the "Regulations"). ...

Position: Under the circumstances, the eligible expenses related to the first move would likely be deductible with the second being considered not a qualifying move. Reasons: The second move would not be considered to have been made by reason of having commenced employment at a new work location. ... In order for Winnipeg to be considered as the taxpayer's new work location he would have to have commenced to be employed at that location in either 1995 or 1996. ...