Search - considered

Paragraph 5 of Interpretation Bulletin IT-126R dated February 3, 1975 issued by Revenue Canada, Taxation (“IT-126R”) indicates that where “there is substantial evidence that the corporation will be dissolved within a short period of time, for the purposes of section 88 the corporation is considered to be wound up.” You have asked whether the holding period would be considered “a short period of time” as referred to in paragraph 5 of IT-126R. ... The comments expressed are not advance income tax rulings and are not considered binding on the Department, in respect of any taxpayer, in accordance with paragraph 21 of Information Circular 70-6R2 dated September 28, 1990. ...

We agree with your interpretation to the effect that a debt which is properly booked under any of liability Items 1, 2 or 3 of Schedule J of the Bank Act should be considered as an amount “deposited with the bank”. All such liabilities are generally considered deposit liabilities from our standpoint and I cannot see why they should be considered differently for the purposes of clause 212(1)(b)(iii)(D) of the Income Tax Act. ... This treatment applies whether the note is considered a “bearer deposit note” or a standard promissory note bearing no interest and payable to bearer on a specified date. ...

In our opinion the small propane tanks filled from a bulk container and delivered to customers should be considered returnable containers and we would therefore refer you to our Interpretation Bulletin IT-165 for the proper treatment of the cost of such containers. ... The medium sized bulk tanks which are permanently attached to a truck would be considered part of the truck for capital cost allowance purposes and therefore included in the same class as the truck. The large bulk tanks which remain at the distributor's place of business and are used to fill the other tanks previously mentioned would be considered an oil storage tank and therefore should be included in class 6. ...

Yes, if the promissory note is considered conditional payment for the shares. 2. No, if the promissory note is considered as absolute payment for the shares. ... Whether or not a promissory note is considered as conditional payment or absolute payment is a question of fact. ...

Further, in order for an expenditure or transfer of property to be considered a gift, it must be made without conditions, from detached and disinterested generosity, out of affection, respect, or charity or like impulses, and not from the constraining forces of any moral or legal duty. In our view the lottery winner in the situation described above would not be considered to have made a gift for purposes of sections 118.1 or 110.1 of the Act since he had agreed prior to acquiring the lottery ticket that 24(1) would receive the winning prize money. If a gift could be considered to have been made at all, it would be a gift of the chance to win represented by a particular ticket, the value of which would presumably be equal to the lesser of the value of the prize divided by the number of tickets eligible to win and the face value of the ticket. ...

The balance of the land is considered unusable and left vacant. Our Comments Under subsection 110.6(1) of the Act a real property owned by an individual will be considered as a "qualified farm property" if it was used by him, his spouse or any of his children in the course of "carrying on the business of farming" in Canada. ... Generally, however, if 80% of the land has never been used in the farming business, that portion will not be considered "qualified farm property" and if the individual does not have an expectation of profit on the remainder he will not be considered to be "carrying on the business of farming". ...

In order for interest on any portion of the remaining $1,000 of the loan to be deductible, the application of subsection 20.1(1) needs to be considered. ... (According to the Finance Technical Notes, the two loans are to be considered together.) ... In order for interest on any of the remaining $1,000 of the loan to be deductible, the application of subsection 20.1(1) needs to be considered. ...

Each entity is thereby considered fiscally transparent for United States income tax purposes. USLLC1 and USLLC2 are each considered to be corporations for the purposes of the Act, while the LP Fund is fiscally transparent for the purposes of the Act. The Canadian-resident corporations in which the LP Fund invests are not considered to be fiscally transparent for both Canadian and United States income tax purposes. 8. ...