Search - considered

Lord Advocate^ [2] the House of Lords considered the question whether an individual was a “regular minister of a religious denomination” within the meaning of a statute which conferred exemption from compulsory military service on “a man in holy orders or a regular minister of any religious denomination”. ... I do not find the bulletin of any assistance in interpreting paragraph 8(1)(c) for it sheds no light on the con- siderations which led the author of the bulletin to conclude that such of- ficers are considered to be ministers. ... Appeal dismissed. 1 [There does not appear to be any relationship between the source of income and the deduc- tion sought in this case, but the point was not put in issue and need not be considered further. 2 211956] 3 All E.R. 129 (U.K. ...

For the purposes of this section and section 60, where a decree, order or judgment of a competent tribunal or a written agreement made at any time in a taxation year provides that an amount paid before that time and in the year or the immediately preceding taxation year is to be considered as having been paid and received pursuant thereto, the following rules apply: (a) the amount shall be deemed to have been paid pursuant thereto; and (b) the person who made the payment shall be deemed to have been separated pursuant to a divorce, judicial separation or written separation agreement from his spouse or former spouse at the time the payment was made and throughout the remainder of the year. ... L'Heureux-Dubé J.A., as she then was, dissenting because the evidence submitted did not persuade her, nonetheless considered that in the absence of proper records the taxpayer did not lose his right to present a valid defence to the assessment. ... It reads as follows: 336.4 For the purposes of this chapter, where a decree, order or judgment of a competent tribunal or a written agreement made at any time in a taxation year provides that an amount paid before that time and in the year or the preceding taxation year is to be considered as having been paid and received thereunder, (a) the amount is deemed to have been paid thereunder; and (b) the person who made the payment is deemed to have been separated pursuant to a divorce, judicial separation or written separation agreement from his spouse or former spouse to whom he was required to make the payment at the time the payment was made and throughout the remainder of the year. ...

(l) The salaries were not actually paid to Ben but were considered as accrued to him. ... As a result, the deduction of Ben’s allocation by the partnership was disallowed because Revenue Canada considered that it represented an allocation of capital. ... Rankin, and the changes in American tax law had a negative and unexpected impact on the business, no evidence was presented to show what profit the taxpayer might have earned had these events not occurred and whether the amount would have been considered substantial when compared to his professional income. ...

[the exceptions do not apply] where such property is owned by the taxpayer... if, in the taxation year in respect of which the expression is being applied, the property was used by the taxpayer... principally for the purpose of gaining or producing gross revenue that is rent, royalty or leasing revenue,... 1100(17.2) For the purposes of subsection (17), gross revenue derived in a taxation year from (a) the right of a person or partnership, other than the owner of a property, to use or occupy the property or a part thereof, and (b) services offered to a person or partnership that are ancillary to the use or occupation by the person or partnership of the property or the part thereof shall be considered to be rent derived in the year from the property. 1100(17.3) Subsection (17.2) does not apply in any particular taxation year to property owned by (b) an individual, where the property is used in a business carried on in the year by the individual in which he is personally active on a continuous basis throughout that portion of the year during which the business is ordinarily carried on; or 11 With respect to the Appellant's grandfathering argument, based on the fact that the boat was purchased in 1985, the Appellant refers to the Budget Papers tabled in the House of Commons by the Minister of Finance on May 23, 1985. ... I believe that, reading all of the subsections together, one must conclude that if in virtue of subsection 1100(17.3) “rent” is not considered to exist when the owner is personally active in the business, then, since the Appellant was receiving rent (not a royalty), the yacht is not “leasing property” and the restrictions in subsection 1100(15) are not applicable. ... Property used more than 50% of the time for the purpose of gaining or producing gross revenue that is rent, royalty or leasing revenue is considered to be used principally for that purpose. ...

Pembina Highway is the second largest thoroughfare in Winnipeg; it is the main route to certain suburbs of Winnipeg. 12 The Appellant Larry Chartrand considered it was more economical to own the building rather than rent it. ... This agreement, dated December 17, 1990, which was filed with the Court, reads as follows: Let it be known that Larry Chartrand and Richard Banack both agree with the following and that this is to be considered a legal agreement. ... In the event of the company going bankrupt or closing it's [sic] doors, the $5000.00 loan shall be considered unpayable until all other debts have been paid first. ...

Lastly, he contends that including “feeding and dressing oneself” in the enumeration of these activities in subparagraph 118.4(1)(c)(ii) constitutes a requirement that the individual be unable to do both things, which must be considered as a single activity. ... Both are legitimate purposes which equally embody the legislative intent and it is thus hard to see why one should take precedence over the other. 12 Above all, it is important to recall what the Supreme Court of Canada has considered, particularly in Stubart,as the modern rule of interpretation, as stated by E.A. Dreidger: Today there is only one principle or approach, namely, the words of an Act are to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of Parliament. 13 The basic conditions stipulated in subsection 118.3(1) for an individual to be entitled to the credit for mental or physical impairment are first that the impairment be severe and prolonged and that its effects be such that the individual's ability to perform a basic activity of daily living is markedly restricted. 14 Paragraph 118.4(1)(a) specifically states that an impairment is prolonged where it has lasted, or can reasonably be expected to last for a continuous period of at least 12 months. 15 This point is not disputed in the instant case and I find it reasonable to conclude that this condition was met for a continuous period of at least 12 months over the two taxation years in issue. 16 Furthermore, paragraph 118.4(1)(b) specifically states the additional requirement in the following terms: (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 unable (or requires an inordinate amount of time) to perform a basic activity of daily living. 17 Paragraph 118.4(1)(c) stipulates what the basic activities of daily living are and paragraph 118.4(1)(d) states that the enumeration in paragraph (c) is exhaustive and that no other activity shall be considered as a basic activity of daily living. 18 Paragraph 118.4(1)(c)(ii) mentions “feeding and dressing oneself”. ...

(F.C.A.)[2] the Federal Court of Appeal had similarly said the traditional Sagaz/Wiebe Door factors must be considered “in the light of the parties’ intent.” [11] This second step is otherwise the same as how the Court would proceed in cases where there is no common shared intention regarding the characterization of the work relationship by the parties. ... The effect of the supervision or control of a worker by the payor’s client has been previously been considered by the court to reflect relevant control and supervision by the payor in comparable circumstances. ... Irregular, casual workers may be common in a gig economy, but are not excluded from being casual employees once relevant factors are considered and weighed. [16] Having regard to the evidence in this case, I believe CSS’s control over the work, and the subordination of the workers to CSS, clearly weigh in favor of employment over independent contractor status. ...

Since the concept of a “business” is not exhaustive, the Courts have identified a number of factors to be considered to determine whether actions or activities that have a personal element constitute the carrying on of a business for the purposes of subsection 9(1) and paragraph 18(1)(a) of the ITA. ... Canada, [5] the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) considered and set aside the concept of “a reasonable expectation of profit” [6] as a factor to consider in determining whether a business exists and expenses or losses are deductible against net sources of income. ... In Stewart, the SCC confirmed that the other factors identified in Moldowan should be considered in determining whether actions and activities that have a personal element constitute the carrying on of a business as a source of income for the purpose of the ITA. [14] The relevant factors for distinguishing elements of a personal nature from activities that are undertaken in the course of a business include: (1) the profit and loss experiences in past years; (2) the taxpayer’s training; (3) the taxpayer’s intended course of action; and (4) the capability of the venture to show a profit. [8] In Stewart, the SCC noted that those four factors are not exhaustive, and that the factors will differ with the nature and extent of the activities. [15] I will consider the factors noted above in the present case, because they are useful in determining whether the actions Mr. ...

In order to determine whether subsection 31(1) of the Act applies to the facts of this appeal, various tests, suggested in several Court decisions, must be considered. ... The other tests: time spent by the appellant with respect to different sources of income; the capital invested; the cash flow and other similar tests must also be considered and compared with the same tests also applicable to the taxpayer’s farming income. ... Failing that, the appellant would come under the second class of farmers and his farming activities considered as a sideline to some other source or sources of income. ...

On the basis of income and expense projections, the overall rental operations was considered viable and had a reasonable expectation of profit. ... For the annual interest expense to be considered “reasonable in the circumstances”, surely it alone should not generally exceed the gross annual income. ... I conclude that, in the present circumstances, interest should not generally exceed the gross rental income in order to be considered a reasonable expense. ...