Search - considered

Ruling E is amended to replace the final words "...the first taxation year of the Trust shall be considered to commence with the date that the Concurrent XXXXXXXXXX Lease is entered into by the Trust and B Co and the last taxation year of the Trust which will be considered to end on XXXXXXXXXX." with the following words "...the term of the Concurrent XXXXXXXXXX Lease shall be considered to commence with the date that the Concurrent XXXXXXXXXX Lease is entered into by the Trust and B Co and the last taxation year of the Trust which will be considered to end on XXXXXXXXXX." Ruling F is also amended to delete the final words "the first taxation year of the Trust shall be considered to commence with the date that the Concurrent XXXXXXXXXX Lease is entered into by the Trust and B Co and the last taxation year of the Trust will be considered to end on XXXXXXXXXX. ...

Whether the re-negotiated note would be considered to be accepted as "conditional payment" rather than as "absolute payment" is such a matter.  ... The extension of the note could occur before the original due date and before the end of the vendor's taxation year for which the reserve is being considered.  ... "  Thus, it would appear, unless there is evidence to the contrary, that the re-negotiated note in your fact situation may be considered to be accepted as conditional payment and not as absolute payment. ...

If a new employment contract is put in place, then the flex credits will not likely be considered salary. ... Generally, if the employees are subject to a collective agreement, the employment contract will be considered to have ended at the expiration of the collective agreement. ... Concerning the unionized employees, the expiration of the collective agreement would likely be considered to be the termination of the employment contract. ...

In our view an acquisition could be considered to  be in contemplation of a Purchase Butterfly, even  though the particular assets to be transferred or  the identity of the purchaser had not been determined at the time of the acquisitions. (2)       We agree that acquisitions made in the ordinary course of  business would not be considered to be in contemplation of a Purchase Butterfly.  ... We disagree with your suggestion that an acquisition of an asset that is  not itself transferred on a Purchase Butterfly could not  be considered to be made in contemplation of such Purchase Butterfly.  For example, if an asset were acquired to enable      24(1)   to transfer another asset on a Purchase Butterfly, the acquisition could be considered to have  been made in contemplation of the Purchase Butterfly. (4)       We disagree with your suggestion that an acquisition that does not achieve a material tax benefit cannot be considered to have been made in contemplation of a  Purchase Butterfly.  ...

(a)     If Non-Res and Can-Res A are acting in concert to control both Non-Resco and Holdco, the latter companies would be considered to be controlled by the same group of persons with the result that they would be related to each other pursuant to subparagraph 251(2)(c)(i) of the Act.  As Opco is owned 30.91% by Non-Resco and 49.35% by Holdco, Opco would, therefore, be considered to be controlled by a related group of persons. ... (b)     Provided that Non-Res and Can-Res A are not acting in concert and subsection 256(5.1) of the Act does not apply to result in both Non-Resco and Holdco being considered to be controlled directly or indirectly in any manner whatever by either Non-Res, Can-Res A or Non-Res and Can-Res A as a group, and provided also that subsection 256(5.1) of the Act does not apply to result in Opco being considered to be controlled directly or indirectly in any manner whatever by Non-Resco, it is our view that Non-Resco and Opco would not be considered to be related to each other under the  Act.  ...

Principal Issues: (a) Whether the facility (including a new natural-gas-powered turbine generator and a new heat recovery steam generator) would be considered as one system that is used by the taxpayer to generate electrical energy, or both electrical and heat energy, using only fuel that is fossil fuel as contemplated at clause (c)(i)(A) of Class 43.1, and whether an existing steam turbine would be considered as the steam host, notwithstanding that the facility and steam turbine would be used in a combined cycle for generating electricity. ... Position: (a) Yes (b) Yes Reasons: (a) Based upon the opinion of Natural Resources Canada dated May 29, 2000, the facility would be considered as one system and the steam turbine would be considered as the steam host to take delivery of steam generated from the facility, notwithstanding that the facility and steam turbine would be used in a combined cycle for generating electricity. ... As stated in paragraph 2 above, the steam produced by the Facility will be used to power the Unit #XXXXXXXXXX Steam Turbine, which will be considered the steam host. ...

Principal Issues: Request that we rule on whether, provided the taxpayer carries on business throughout a particular taxation year, following a change in control, in the manner described in the original ruling request (991245), for profit or with a reasonable expectation of profit, that such business will be considered the same business as that in which the non-capital losses were incurred. Position: Cannot rule, but can provide comments that the contingent facts would not in and of themselves prevent a finding that the business would be considered the same business as that in which the non-capital losses were incurred. ... Specifically you requested that provided XXXXXXXXXX carries on business throughout a particular taxation year following the change of control, in the manner described in the Ruling, for profit or with a reasonable expectation of profit such business will be considered the same business as that in which the non-capital losses were incurred. ...

Will the March 31, 1989 amendments to the original application be considered eligible for the CBITC. ... "  As such, only the original "plan" as submitted prior to July 1988 would be considered as meeting the definition of "approved project".  Any significant revision would be considered a new plan or project. 4)     The French version of the Income Tax Act uses the term "ouvrage approuve" as the equivalent of "approved project".  ...

In your memorandum you state that 24(1) 24(1) Our comments 24(1) This opinion is based on the following: 1)     Paragraph 5 of Interpretation Bulletin IT-145R states that the dyeing of cloth is considered to be a processing activity, therefore, silk screening would appear to be a processing activity.  In addition, paragraph 48 of IT-145R states that "alterations of clothing at a retail clothing establishment or the sale of custom tailored or off the rack articles is considered to be qualified manufacturing or processing activity".  Based on the comments in IT-145R it would appear that both silk screening and embroidering can be considered to be processing activities. 2)     24(1) We trust our comments will be of assistance to you. ...

Can an individual be considered to be employed for the purposes of paragraph 60(j.1) where he or she is a shareholder of the employer and all remuneration is received in the form of dividends? ... Usually the query is whether the employee can be considered to be retired notwithstanding his or her continuing to provide services in respect of a rental property. ... The management of a rental operation could be considered to be an "active" activity or a "passive" activity depending upon the nature of the services performed. ...