Search - considered

It is our general view that where an employer agrees to pay an employee an amount on or after his retirement and the amount cannot reasonably be considered to be salary for services rendered that the employee agreed to defer receipt of, the amount will not be considered to be a payment out of a salary deferral arrangement. Whether such an amount would be considered to be a retiring allowance as defined in the Act can only be determined by reference to the facts of the particular case. ...

7 April 1991 Income Tax Severed Letter- Tax implications of travel between an employee's home and regular work location Unedited CRA Tags none Dear XXX I am writing in response to your letter of March 11, 1991, regarding concerns XXX Travel between an employee's home and regular work location is considered personal commuting, the costs of which are not considered a deductible travelling expense. The employer's place of business is considered to be the place where the employee usually works for his employer. ...

It is our general view that where an employer agrees to pay an employee an amount on or after his retirement and the amount cannot reasonably be considered to be salary for services rendered that the employee agreed to defer receipt of, the amount will not be considered to be a payment out of a salary deferral arrangement. Whether such an amount would be considered to be a retiring allowance as defined in the Act can only be determined by reference to the facts of the particular case. ...

Research File Subject or Corporate Case FileReturn to Rulings, Room 303, Metcalfe Building                                   April 18, 1991Dear 19(1) I am writing in response to your letter of March 11, 1991 regarding concerns   24(1) Travel between an employee's home and regular work location is considered personal commuting, the costs of which are not considered a deductible travelling expenses.  The employer's place of business is considered to be the place where the employee usually works for his employer 24(1) The Income Tax Act does not contain a provision to provide the tax assistance that your constituents desire.  ...

It is our general view that where an employer agrees to pay an employee an amount on or after his retirement and the amount cannot reasonably be considered to be salary for services rendered that the employee agreed to defer receipt of, the amount will not be considered to be a payment out of a salary deferral arrangement. Whether such an amount would be considered to be a retiring allowance as defined in the Act can only be determined by reference to the facts of the particular case. ...

Research File Subject or Corporate Case File Return to Rulings, Room 303, Metcalfe Building April 18, 1991 19(1) Dear 19(1) I am writing in response to your letter of March 11, 1991 regarding concerns 24(1) Travel between an employee's home and regular work location is considered personal commuting, the costs of which are not considered a deductible travelling expenses. The employer's place of business is considered to be the place where the employee usually works for his employer 24(1) The Income Tax Act does not contain a provision to provide the tax assistance that your constituents desire. ...

Salary and wages were, in the Bulletin, considered to be earned where the services were performed. ... In summary, salary and wages were considered, until 1983, to be earned where the services were performed. ... First Nations that do not meet these requirements can be considered on a case-by-case basis. ...

Generally, any location at or from which the employee regularly reports for work or performs the duties of employment, may be considered a RPE for the employee. ... In such instances, travel between an employee's home and his or her RPE would be considered personal travel and would give rise to a taxable benefit where the employer pays for or provides a vehicle for such travel. ... However, employer-provided transportation relating to an employee's travel between their temporary residence (e.g. a hotel) and a special work site that is considered a RPE for the employee would be considered personal in nature and would give rise to a taxable benefit under paragraph 6(1)(a) of the Act. ...

Two contracts may be considered a single unit if they form a coherent whole commercially and geographically but this can only be determined on a case by case basis after reviewing all relevant information. ... The two issues that you asked us to address is: (1) whether such decommissioning work (the First Segment and the Second Segment) can be considered to fall under the scope of the Construction PE Provision; and (2) whether the twelve month test (“Duration Test”) in Article 5(3) of the Model Treaty can be considered to apply in this situation. ... (footnote 1) Therefore, even though the Commentary does not specify that demolition would be considered a construction or installation project or that a site where demolition takes place would be considered a building site, it is our opinion that the decommissioning work described above (both the First Segment and the Second Segment) would likely be considered to fall under the scope of the Construction PE Provision. 2. ...

Are related parties considered third parties? What constitutes an "enterprise" for purposes of subparagraph 9(b) of Article V of the Treaty? ... Paragraph 2 of the General Note provides that for purposes of subparagraph 9(b), projects shall be considered to be connected if they constitute a coherent whole, commercially and geographically. ... Question 3 A2 Part II: A related person in reference to a particular person is considered a "third party" for purposes of paragraph 9 of Article V of the Treaty. ...