Search - considered

It is the Department's position that, where in an arm's length situation, a long term employee is laid off or has retired without any assurance of being rehired at the time, and receives an amount from his employer in recognition of long service or in respect of a loss of an office or employment, such an amount would be considered a "retiring allowance" regardless of the fact that the employee might be rehired, by the former employer, at a later date when circumstances have changed. ... Accordingly, an amount received by the employee on account of his retirement in such circumstances would not be considered a retiring allowance. It is to be noted that the question of whether an employee has really suffered a loss of employment can only be determined after all the facts and the terms and conditions of the contract have been considered. ...

11 June 1992 Income Tax Severed Letter 2M01270- Foreing Exchange Gains and Losses- Calculating Currency Unedited CRA Tags 95(2)(f)(ii), Reg. 5907(6) 1992 Corporate Management Tax Conference FOREIGN EXCHANGE GAINS AND LOSSES Question 7 For purposes of subparagraph 95(2)(f)(ii) and Regulation 5907(6), under what circumstances will a particular currency be considered "reasonable in the circumstances"? ... Where a particular currency has become the generally accepted currency for conducting business in a country, such currency may be considered "reasonable in the circumstances", notwithstanding that some other currency is the Document Disclosed Pursuant to The Access To Information Act Document Divulgué en vertu de la loi sur l'accès à l'information official currency of that country. As well, the currency that is used for income tax purposes in the foreign jurisdiction would normally be considered "reasonable in the circumstances". ...

Our Comments In our opinion, a trust created in accordance with a will of an individual is considered as a trust created upon and in consequence of the death of the individual even though the properties are not received until a specified future date, e.g., until the death of a life tenant. If all the properties in the trust were contributed from the estate, the trust is considered as a testamentary trust, the settlor is considered to be the deceased individual and the ear end is determined in accordance with subsection 104(23) of the Act. ...

In the first hypothetical situation out lined above each of the four Canadian resident shareholders could have an equity percentage in Corporation A which was not less than 10% and therefore, assuming none of these shareholders was a non-resident-owned investment corporation, Corporation A would be considered a foreign affiliate of each of these shareholders. Corporation A would also be considered to be a controlled foreign affiliate of each of these shareholders pursuant to either of subparagraphs 95(1)(a)(ii) or (iii) of the Act. In the second hypothetical situation outlined above, Corporation B would have an equity percentage of 49% in Corporation A and therefore, assuming Corporation B was not a non-resident-owned investment corporation, Corporation A would be considered a foreign affiliate of Corporation B. ...

., will the amount of the deduction be considered as a prescribed benefit for the purposes of regulation 231(6) of the Income Tax Regulations? b)     If a limited partner of a limited partnership is entitled to exchange his partnership unit for partnership property that has a fair market value equal to the fair market value of the partnership unit at the time of disposition, will the fair market value of the partnership property so distributed be considered a prescribed benefit for the purposes of regulation 231(6) of the Income Tax Regulations? DEPARTMENT'S POSITION a)     Where shares issued by a corporation that are eligible as qualifying investments in RRSP, RRIF and DPSP are contributed to and held in such registered deferred income plans by a taxpayer, those shares will be considered "prescribed property" for the purposes of subsection 231(7) of the Regulations and hence will be excluded from the definition of "tax shelter" in subsection 237.1(1) of the Act. b)     The determination of whether a limited partner's ability to exchange his partnership unit for partnership property that has a fair market value equal to the fair market value of the partnership unit at the time of disposition would have the effect of reducing the impact of any loss he may sustain is a determination that can only be made based on the facts of a particular situation. ...

Is equipment considered to be "available for use" for purposes of draft subsection 13(27) of the Income Tax Act (the "Act") in the following two situations?            ... In the first situation, the equipment could be considered to become "available for use" in the particular taxation year by virtue of draft paragraph 13(27)(a) of the Act since the equipment was in fact used for the first time in that year in accordance with its intended purpose. In the second situation, the equipment could be considered to become "available for use" in the particular taxation year by virtue of draft paragraph 13(27)(d) of the Act since the time that it was capable of being used for its intended purpose preceded the time when it was first used. ...

The 1979 review of these payments concluded that they would not be considered a taxable benefit under paragraph 6(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act.  ... In converting the reimbursement into an allowance the provisions of paragraph 6(1)(b) of the Act must be considered.  ... Subparagraph 6(1)(b)(iii) of the Act provides for an exclusion from income for employees, such as those in question, of allowances considered to be "representation or special allowances" paid to the employee while he/she was in service outside Canada.  ...

Canadian residency is a question of fact based on the particular circumstances of each individual case and it is not open to an individual to elect to be considered a Canadian resident at his discretion. in your case, it would appear from the information available that you are not a Canadian resident in that you have severed your ties with Canada during your stay in Australia. ... Therefore, unless you feel that you have further facts to set before us which we have not considered or have not been made available to us you are not considered to be a resident of Canada for tax purposes. ...

As stated in paragraph 19 of the Department's Interpretation Bulletin IT-470R, where the course for which the fees were paid was undertaken on the employer's initiative and for the benefit of the employer rather than the employee, the amount paid by the employer is not considered to be a taxable benefit to the employee. ... It is always a question of fact as to whether or not the course taken is primarily for the benefit of the employer (and considered not to be a taxable benefit to the employee) or to the benefit of the employee (and considered a taxable benefit). ...

Furthermore, horses used in a riding business would not be considered inventory of that business. ... This means that although the original cost of acquiring the horses, as well as the cost of any expansion in the number of such animals, is considered a capital-expenditure, the cost of replacing these horses is considered a deductible expense in the year of replacement. ...