Search - considered

4 December 2018 External T.I. 2016-0670851E5- Regular Places of Employment and Personal Travel-- summary under Paragraph 6(1)(b) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 6- Subsection 6(1)- Paragraph 6(1)(b) scope of “regular place of employment" Respecting requested clarification as to when a particular work location is considered a regular place of employment for an employee, CRA stated: [T]ravel between an employee’s home, including a home office, and a regular place of employment (RPE) is generally considered personal travel …. ... For example, a work location may be considered to be a RPE for an employee even though the employee may only report to work at that particular location on a periodic basis (e.g., once or twice a month) during the year. ...

In such a situation, the “principal purpose” of the trading business would generally not be to derive income from property and it would not be considered to be a “specified investment business.” As a result, the trading business may be considered an “active business” and any gains or losses from the trading business, as well as any interest or dividend income pertaining to or incident to that business, may be considered “income of the corporation for the year from an active business” under subsection 125(7) of the Act. ...

Although the agreement does not attribute any amount of consideration to the acquisition of the purchase option, pursuant to section 68, the sum of the part of the periodic payment amounts of consideration that can reasonably be considered to relate to the acquisition of the purchase option will be deemed to be the proceeds of disposition of that option to the Lessor and the amount paid to acquire that option by the Lessee. The sum of the other part of the periodic payment amounts of the consideration will therefore relate to the amount paid by the Lessee for the use of the property, which may be considered to be in the nature of rent. ... By contrast, the portion of the periodic amounts of the consideration relating to the acquisition of a purchase option on the Vehicle should be considered as expenditures of a capital nature for the acquisition of a capital property. … To the extent that Aco exercises its purchase option … Aco's cost of the Vehicle pursuant to subsection 49(3) will be the sum … paid in accordance with the exercise price … plus the adjusted cost base of the option, which will be the portion of the consideration paid that is attributable to the acquisition of that option. ...

Would the Other Assets be considered in ascertaining whether the Division Assets met the all or substantially all test in s. 125.7(4.1)(b)(i)? After noting that, under Ensite, “[i]f the withdrawal of the property would have a decidedly destabilizing effect on the corporate operations, the property would generally be considered to be used in the course of carrying on a business,” CRA stated: [W]here the Other Assets were employed and risked in BCo’s business such that their withdrawal would have a decidedly destabilizing effect on BCo’s operations, such assets must be considered when ascertaining whether, immediately prior to the acquisition by ACo, the fair market value of the Division Assets constituted all or substantially all of the fair market value of the property of BCo used in the course of carrying on business under subparagraph 125.7(4.1)(b)(i). ...

Subsection 83(2.1) could be considered applicable in certain reorganizations or conversions carried out to allow shareholders to receive capital dividends. However, subsection 83(2.1) is generally not considered applicable in situations where the objective is to pay capital dividends to taxpayers who were already shareholders. Thus, the payment of the capital dividend account to certain shareholders would generally not be considered abusive for the purposes of subsection 245(2) if subsection 83(2.1) did not otherwise apply. ...

(Tax Window, No. 1, p. 9, ¶1166)-- summary under Article 5 Summary Under Tax Topics- Treaties- Income Tax Conventions- Article 5 Because the taxpayer's activities in Canada must be considered in relation to its business activities elsewhere, a U.S. resident will not be precluded from being considered to have a permanent establishment in Canada by virtue only of the Canadian activities having no expectation of profit. ...

5 January 2011 External T.I. 2008-0305252E5- Taxation of Post-Doctoral Fellowships-- summary under Subsection 5(1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 5- Subsection 5(1) Income from a post-doctoral fellowship generally is considered to flow from a period of paid training, i.e., post-doctoral students generally are analogous to articling students or medical residents, so that they are considered to be employees rather than students. ...

21 October 1991 T.I. 912692-- summary under Section 67 Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 67 Management fees paid by a professional practitioner to a related corporation generally will be considered deductible if they do not exceed 115% of the reasonable cost incurred by the corporation. A mark-up on outlays or expenses attributable directly to the practice of the profession would be considered unreasonable. ...

28 January 1994 External T.I. 9332425 F- Medical Expenses- Fees to Dietitian or Nutritionist-- summary under Subsection 118.4(2) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 118.4- Subsection 118.4(2) A dietician who is qualified under s. 7 of the Dietetics Act (Ontario) will be considered to be a medical practitioner. However, a nutritionist will not be considered to be a medical practitioner except to the extent that she qualifies as a dietician. ...

21 October 1991 TI 912692 (Tax Window, No. 12, p. 22, 1545)-- summary under Related Companies Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 18- Subsection 18(1)- Paragraph 18(1)(a)- Related Companies Management fees paid by a professional practitioner to a related corporation generally will be considered deductible if they do not exceed 115% of the reasonable cost incurred by the corporation. A mark-up on outlays or expenses attributable directly to the practice of the profession would be considered unreasonable. ...