Search - considered

One of the requirements that must be met for a location to be considered a special work site is that the taxpayer maintain at another location a self-contained domestic establishment that is the taxpayer's principal place of residence. Similarly, one of the requirements that must be met for a location to be considered a remote work location is that the taxpayer does not maintain a self-contained domestic establishment at that location. ... Therefore, the farm will not be considered a special work site or remote work location for the individual. ...

Principal Issues: Whether the short-term rental of a passenger vehicle is considered to be an indirect payment of "all or part of the actual lease charges in respect of a passenger vehicle" for the purposes of section 67.3 of the Act. ... Although it could be argued that any payment in respect of a short-term rental of a passenger vehicle could be considered to be an indirect payment of part of the actual lease charges of the lessor who has actually leased the passenger vehicle, it is our general view that a payment, in respect of an hourly rental or a daily rental of a passenger vehicle, would not normally be considered to be the indirect payment of part of the actual lease charges of a taxpayer carrying on a business of renting out passenger vehicles. ...

Reasons: Aco may be considered not to be dealing at arm's length with individual D with respect to the sale. 2003-004910 XXXXXXXXXX Daniel Wong (613) 954-4949 December 30, 2003 Dear XXXXXXXXXX: Re: Technical Interpretation Request of November 17, 2003: Gift of shares to a corporation This is in reply to the above-captioned request wherein you described the following facts. ... In any event, a request cannot be considered for a ruling when the transactions are completed or where the issues involved are primarily questions of fact. ... In the present case, it is also our view that Aco may be considered not to be dealing at arm's length with individual D with respect to the sale. ...

Position: 1) No employment income inclusion to employees (members of the RPP). 2) Damages are not considered a contribution to the RPP or RRSPs. ... Finally, where damages in respect of a breach of contract or tort are paid by the employer to compensate for investment losses caused by the employer as administrator of a registered plan which has been established for a group of employees, such damages paid by the employer to the employees' accounts within the registered pension plan or deferred profit sharing plan or to the individual's RRSPs or RRIFs are not considered employment income to the employees. In these circumstances, neither the employer nor the employee are considered to have made a contribution to the plan as a consequence of the payment of the damages and, thus, there is no contribution deduction available. ...

Position: 1) Yes; 2) No Reasons: 1) The completion of forms is considered ancillary to the medical service provided by the practitioner; and 2) Theraband, tubing, and support socks are not listed as prescribed medical devices under regulation 5700. ... Amounts paid for completing health or disability forms Pursuant to paragraph 118.2(2)(a) of Act, an amount paid to a medical practitioner, dentist or nurse, or a public or licensed private hospital is considered to qualify as a medical expense of an individual only if it is paid in respect of a medical or dental service. ... While a physiotherapist may be considered a medical practitioner for this purpose (depending on the applicable province or jurisdiction), it is our view that "theraband, tubing, and support socks" are not included in the list of qualifying medical devices or equipment in Regulation 5700 and, accordingly, the costs for such items would not qualify as a medical expense. ...

As explained in paragraph 51 of Interpretation Bulletin IT-522R, Vehicle, Travel and Sales Expenses of Employees, the reimbursement by an employer of an employee's reasonable employment-related travel expenses would not normally be considered a taxable employment benefit, but the reimbursement of an employee's personal expenses would be included in employment income. In this regard, it is our view that expenses incurred for travel between an employee's home and his or her regular work location would be considered personal expenses. ... It is our view that the employer would likely be considered to have indirectly paid the vehicle lease charges in the above scenario. ...

The Queen, 2000 D.T.C. 2072 (TCC), for an example of a situation where an individual was considered not to be resident where his spouse, children and family home were located). On the facts of the present situation it appears that the taxpayer is resident in British Columbia based on the location of his wife, children and a residence that could presumably be considered a "family home". As a general rule, an individual whose spouse and dependants reside in a particular province will be considered to be resident there. ...

Reasons: Longstanding position that travel between an employee's home and a regular place of employment is considered personal. ... In determining the taxable status of employment benefits under the Income Tax Act in respect of the personal use of an employer provided automobile, travel between an employee's home and a regular place of employment is considered personal. ... However, any location at or from which the employee regularly reports for work or performs the duties of employment, is considered a regular place of employment. ...

(ii) Whether a premium received on a debt re-opening would be considered to fall in the category of premium received where debt is not deliberately priced to achieve this result as described in paragraph 40 of IT-533? ... (c) Please confirm that any premium received in connection with a reopening issue will not be considered to arise because the issue was "deliberately priced" to generate a premium. ... With respect to (c), a premium received on a debt re-opening could be considered in the category of a premium received where debt is not deliberately priced to achieve this result. ...

As noted in ITTN 13, to assist in determining whether employer-paid training assistance is considered to be a taxable employment benefit, three broad categories of training have been identified. ... Specific Employer-Related Training Amounts paid for training of this nature are considered to be primarily for the employer's benefit and are not included in income. ... Personal Interest Training If an employer pays for personal interest courses or courses for skills not related to the employer's business, they are considered to be primarily for the employee's benefit and the benefit is included in income. ...