Search - considered

Paragraph 22 of Interpretation Bulletin IT-530R, Support Payments, explains that a lump sum payment required by a court order or written agreement in respect of a period prior to the date of the order or agreement would not be considered a qualifying support amount for purposes of subsection 56.1(4) of the Act. ... It has been the long-standing position of the Canada Revenue Agency that a lump sum payment required by a court order or written agreement in respect of a period prior to the date of the order or agreement is not considered a qualifying "support amount" as defined in subsection 56.1(4) of the Act. ... As stated above, a lump sum payment required by a court order or written agreement in respect of a period prior to the date of the order or agreement would not be considered a qualifying "support amount" as defined in subsection 56.1(4) of the Act. ...

Constructive receipt is considered to occur in situations where an amount is credited to an employee's debt or account, set apart for the employee, or otherwise available to the employee without being subject to any restriction concerning its use. ... Where a bonus is not considered constructively received, the employee would be subject to the salary deferral arrangement ("SDA") rules. ... However, paragraphs (a) through (l) of the definition of an SDA specifically exclude certain plans or arrangements from being considered SDAs. ...

We have previously considered issues concerning the deductibility of losses by investors who had been victimized by fraud or a scam. ... However, since it was the capital itself that was stolen, the resulting loss was considered to be a capital loss at the time the theft was discovered. ... One such provision is paragraph 20(1)(b) of the Act, which provides for the deduction of expenses that can be considered eligible capital expenditures under subsection 14(5) of the Act. ...

At issue is whether cashing an original refund cheque, after being replaced by a duplicate, constitutes an excessive refund, and if so, whether it is considered a claim provable in bankruptcy. ... Accordingly, in the instant case, the amount obtained as a result of cashing the original cheque cannot be considered to be an amount refunded in excess, within the meaning of subsection 160.1(1) of the Act. ... Should the CRA succeed in a civil action against the taxpayer to recover the amount of the original cheque, that amount would not be considered to be a provable claim. ...

However, if, in the absence of the corporation, there would be no common law master-servant relationship and the individual who undertakes to perform the services would be viewed as a self-employed individual carrying on a business, the individual would not be considered to be an incorporated employee. ... Factors to be considered in applying this test include the required investments to be made by the individual, permanency of the relationship, and the skill required by the individual. ... In our view, this situation was considered based on the underlying assumption that there was a valid employer-employee relationship and that the existence of such a relationship was not an issue. ...

In the scenarios described above, the potentially relevant CCA classes would be Class 1(q), Class 6 and Class 10(e), depending on whether the wellsite trailers in question are considered to be trailers or buildings or structures. ... Therefore, they should fall within Class 6 if they are considered to be buildings. ... For this reason, the wellsite trailers in this scenario would not be considered to be buildings or structures and therefore would not fall within Class 1(q) or 6. ...

Section 36 of the Indian Act ("Special Reserves") provides that "where lands have been set apart for the use and benefit of a band and legal title thereto is not vested in Her Majesty", such lands will be considered a reserve for purposes of the Indian Act. ... The central management and control of an organization is usually considered to be exercised by the group that performs the function of a board of directors of the organization. ... Where an organization, which would otherwise not be considered to be resident on reserve, is asserting that it satisfies the definition because it holds its board of directors meetings on reserve, it should generally be considered to satisfy the definition where management and control over the organization is legitimately exercised during those meetings. ...

Our Comments The issue is whether the expenditures are considered reasonable in the circumstances. ... In determining the reasonableness of a fee the following should be considered: a) the nature of the services rendered and time expended in performing those services; and b) the fees which would be paid to obtain similar services from other sources. ... The case referred to by the representative, De Salaberry Realties Limited v The Queen (74 DTC 6408) focuses on the fact that in the circumstances being considered in the case, the corporation must be considered a trader in land as it was but an instrument of its shareholder group of companies. ...

(c) H would still be considered to be making a lump sum payment and be released from a previous liability pursuant to the First Order. It is also considered that the Second Order varies the First Order and that the commencement day would be "the day on which the first varied amount is required to be made" (subparagraph (b)(ii) of the definition of commencement day). Situation 2- The order made before May 1997 is not considered to have been "varied after May 1997" under b(ii) of the definition of commencement day. ...

You have also asked for confirmation that the dividends received on the shares of Xco prior to amalgamation are not to be considered in the application of the stop-loss rule in subsection 112(5.2) of the Act to a subsequent disposition of XYco shares. ... Accordingly, in the situation described, FIco is considered to have disposed of the Xco shares on the amalgamation of Xco and Yco for proceeds equal to the fair market value of the XYco shares received with the result that any gain or loss on the disposition is to be reported by FIco. ... Subsection 112(5.2) Your analysis indicates that when applying the stop-loss rule in subsection 112(5.2) of the Act to a disposition of XYco shares by FIco, the dividends received by FIco on the Xco shares prior to amalgamation are not to be considered. ...