Search - considered

As indicated in the Bulletin, should these factors change after employment commences, it may be necessary to redetermine whether the duties undertaken by the employee are considered to be of a temporary nature for the purposes of the special work site exclusion. ...

In the second scenario, a Canadian resident sells a good (or provides a service) to a non-resident at an amount less than an arm’s length price and a transfer pricing adjustment is made to increase the amount considered to be received. ...

CRA considered that this was merely a convenient way of referring to the corporation which had now become a foreign affiliate of Canco rather than implying that there was a requirement that it also have been a foreign affiliate of Canco in the preceding year. ...

Thus… a Canadian corporate shareholder that receives such [ECP] property from its wholly-owned foreign affiliate on a return of capital should be considered to have “made or incurred” an “outlay or expense” in an amount equal to the FMV of the property at the time of the distribution. ...

In finding that the LLC3 and US LP2 units were not identical property, so that s. 40(3.3) did not apply to deny the loss, CRA stated: These differences in inherent qualities and elements could result in a prospective buyer to have a preference of one property over the other, which would then result in the membership units in DLLC and the partnership units in DLP not being considered identical properties. ...

. … Given that it is our view that Weston should not have any effect on Rulings’ policy regarding interest rate derivatives, Rulings’ policy regarding interest rate derivatives would continue to apply and therefore the Bond Locks should be considered to be on income account. … ...

CRA indicated that it was not convinced that an analysis of the Civil Code provisions pointed to this conclusion, but went on to state (TaxIntepretations translation): [I]f it were determined that such a comparative analysis supported the conclusion that a US LLC must be considered as a partnership for the purpose of application of the Act, we suggest that it would not be appropriate to adopt a classification approach to entities and foreign arrangements which could result in a different classification according to the province or territory of the residence (or permanent establishment) of the taxpayer holding an interest in the entity or the arrangement. … [I]t appears to us, based in particular on the conflict of law rules, that the provincial and territorial laws of property and civil rights in Canada provide for mutual recognition of different types of entities or arrangements established under the respective jurisdictions of the various provinces and territories, thus providing an expanded base for analysis that is uniform across Canada for the purposes of applying the two-step approach. ...

. … [I]f it were determined that such a comparative analysis supported the conclusion that a US LLC must be considered as a partnership for the purpose of application of the Act, we suggest that it would not be appropriate to adopt a classification approach to entities and foreign arrangements which could result in a different classification according to the province or territory of the residence (or permanent establishment) of the taxpayer holding an interest in the entity or the arrangement. … [I]t appears to us, based in particular on the conflict of law rules, that the provincial and territorial laws of property and civil rights in Canada provide for mutual recognition of different types of entities or arrangements established under the respective jurisdictions of the various provinces and territories, thus providing an expanded base for analysis that is uniform across Canada for the purposes of applying the two-step approach. ...

26 April 2016 Internal T.I. 2015-0623571I7- one-time salary transition payment-- summary under Paragraph 8(1)(n) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 8- Subsection 8(1)- Paragraph 8(1)(n) deduction for repayment of transitional advance CRA considered that an advance to an employee is current s. 5 income to him or her even if the advance is required to be repaid if the future services are not performed. ...

The Directorate indicated that the Payment (following Ellis Vision) “could be considered as an amount paid in advance for the use of chattels,” in which case it would be included in income under s. 12(1)(a). ...