Search - considered

Although this sale occurred May 16, 2007, de facto directorship “must be considered to endure at least as long as [the] person manages or supervises the management of the business and affairs of the corporation in question”: see Bremner v. ... These circumstances must be taken into account, but must be considered against an objective “reasonably prudent person” standard. . . . ...

  [14]         Justice Bowman, as he then was, considered the definition of SR&ED in Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Limited v. ...   [28]         The interaction of the above provisions was considered by the Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) in Innovations et Intégrations Brassicoles Inc. v. ...

.- any amount (other than a prescribed amount) received by the taxpayer in the year, in the course of earning income from a business or property, from (i) a person who pays the amount (in this paragraph referred to as “the payor”) in the course of earning income from a business or property or in order to achieve a benefit or advantage for himself or for persons with whom he does not deal at arm’s length, or (ii) a government, municipality or other public authority where the amount can reasonably be considered to have been received (iii) as an inducement, whether as a grant, subsidy, forgivable loan, deduction from tax, allowance or any other form of inducement, or (iv) as a reimbursement, contribution, allowance or as assistance, whether as a grant, subsidy, forgivable loan, deduction from tax, allowance or any other form of assistance, in respect of the cost of property or in respect of an Outlay or expense, to the extent that the amount (v) was not otherwise included in computing the taxpayer’s income, or deducted in computing, for the purposes of this Act, any balance of undeducted outlays, expenses or other amounts, for the year or a preceding taxation year, (vi) except as provided by subsection 127(11.1), does not reduce, for the purposes of this Act, the cost or capital cost of the property or the amount of the outlay or expense, as the case may be, ARTICLE 12: Sommes à inclure comme revenu tiré d’une entreprise ou d’un bien. (1) Sont à inclure dans le calcul du revenu tiré par un contribuable d’une entreprise ou d’un bien, au cours d’une année d’imposition, les sommes appropriées suivantes: x) Paiements incitatifs et autres- un montant (à l’exclusion d’un montant prescrit) reçu par le contribuable dans l’année, en tirant un revenu d’une entreprise ou d’un bien, (1) d’une personne qui paie le montant- appelé “débiteur” au présent alinéa- en tirant un revenu d’une entreprise ou d’un bien ou en vue d’obtenir un avantage pour lui-même ou pour des personnes avec qui il a un lien de dépendance, ou (ii) d’un gouvernement, d’une municipalité ou d’un autre organisme public, s’il est raisonnable de considérer le montant comme reçu: (iii) à titre de paiement incitatif, sous forme de prime, subvention, prêt à remboursement conditionnel, déduction de l’impôt, indemnité ou sous toute autre forme, ou (iv) à titre de remboursement, contribution ou indemnité ou à titre d’aide, sous forme de prime, subvention, prêt à remboursement conditionnel, déduction de l’impôt, indemnité ou sous toute autre forme, à l’égard du coût d’un bien ou à l’égard d’un débours ou d’une dépense, dans la mesure où (v) le montant n’est pas déjà inclus dans le calcul du revenu du contribuable ou déduit dans le calcul, pour l’application de la présente loi, d’un solde de débours, dépenses ou autres montants non déduits, pour l’année ou pour une année d’imposition antérieure, (vi) sous réserve du paragraphe 127 (11.1), il ne réduit pas, pour l’application de la présente loi, le coût ou coût en capital du bien ou le montant du débours ou de la dépense, I cannot help adding that section 12, like most of the provisions of that Act, is not a model of clarity. ... The Minister considered these objections and determined that the amount of $2,794,438 had been paid by these corporations in error. ...

Severinov filed this appeal before the CRA had considered the notice of objection. ... Severinov may have contributed to this because he filed an appeal before his objection was considered. ...

Savage. [4] In that case the Supreme Court of Canada considered the taxability of a payment of $300 made by an employer to an employee as a reward for the successful completion of certain business related courses. ... Reimbursement for out of pocket expenses incurred as a result of a move, explains NoËl J., cannot be considered a benefit because it adds nothing of value to the recipient’s economic situation. ...

Looking at all of the facts and circumstances in this case, I fail to see how mining and exploration can be considered to be the chief or main or most important element of Sogemines’ business. ... case (supra) expressed agreement with the Tax Appeal Board judgment which considered the following factors: (a) corporate name; (b) corporate purposes and objects as contained in Company’s Letters Patent; (c) the development of its own properties to point of commercial production after an expenditure of over half a million dollars; (d) its general and continuing mining, development and exploring activities during the relevant period; (e) its management contract under which it undertook very serious and extensive mining operations on behalf of several mining companies bringing them to a successful conclusion; (f) the way so many mining companies seemed to turn to Mogul for scientific and technical services as well as for financing help; and (g) its experienced and specialized officers and staff. ...

  [25]          Further, Justice Bowman held that, the Appellant was attending full-time as he was considered a full-time student by the institution and did 22 to 36 hours of course work per week. ... The Queen, 2006 TCC 145, 2006 D.T.C. 2685, Justice Woods held that, for online educational programs to be considered full-time, they need only require the attention of the student on a “full-time” basis. ...

It seems to me that all of the expenditures relating to the investigation of opportunities must be considered on the same footing. ... The Court held at pages 837-38 (D.T.C. 5481): I do not indeed feel that merely because the expenditure was made for the purpose of determining whether to bring into existence a capital asset, it should always be considered as a capital expenditure and, therefore, not deductible. ...

Since an ovum is not an organ, an egg donation cannot be considered to be an "organ transplant". ... Since her reasons, for seeking treatment elsewhere, were completely personal, they cannot be considered in the analysis of the "availability" requirement in paragraphs 118.2(2)(g) and (h). ...

.^ [3] Spar included the foregoing clause in its contract with Com Dev, but also included the following diminution modification clause: 12.7 The information detailed in the Contractor’s letter dated April 19, 1990 is considered proprietary to the Contractor or its Subcontractors as the case may be.^ [4] The letter referred to in clause 12.7 and filed as an exhibit in this proceeding reads as follows: April 19, 1990 File: 5050 Ref.: JB-1578 SPAR Aerospace Satellite and Communications System Division 21025 Trans Canada Highway Ste. ... Statement of Proprietary Information In accordance with the conditions of the RADARSAT Contract between SPAR Aerospace and COM DEV, S-700014, Article 12 — Intellectual Properties — this will certify that all equipments, associated Technical Information and Technical Documentation to be generated in performance of the Work and considered deliverable under the contract will utilize computer software, processes, methods, techniques and know-how in existence or residence with COM DEV prior to effective date of the Contract. ...