Search - convention

As for cumulative effects, the RAD explained that it would only consider those individual incidents that related to a reason found in the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees [Convention] (Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v Hund, 2009 FC 121 [Hund] at para 35). ... It is very detailed and engages with all of the arguments raised by the Applicants, none of which was found to be related to a Convention ground. ... But this is true as long as there is evidence of a personal nexus between the claimant and the alleged persecution on a Convention ground (Pour-Shariati at para 3; Salibian at para 17). ...

(the appellant) is a corporation incorporated in the United States and was a resident there for purposes of the Canada-United States Reciprocal Tax Convention, 1942 (the 1942 Convention). ... Tax Convention (S.C. 7 George VI, c. 21, as amended by 14 George VI, c. 27). ... That purpose appears most clearly from the preambles both to the original Convention and to the amending Convention of 1950. ...

Looking only at the Income Tax Act, and setting to one side the Canada-United States of America Tax Convention, there were, prior to 1955, two alternatives with reference to the liability of such a person under the Income Tax Act. ... I turn now to the relevant provision of the Canada-United States of America Tax Convention, While the Canadian income tax provisions were in the state that I have described, a provision was introduced into that convention reading as follows: XIIA. 2. ... (As already indicated section 99 was substantially the same as section 110 of the 1952 Income Tax Act as it was before 1955.) lt is common ground that, if this provision in the tax convention is inconsistent with the provisions of the Income Tax Act that would otherwise apply in a particular case, the tax convention provision must prevail. ...

The appellant conceded at trial that he was carrying on business in Canada within the meaning of paragraph 2(2)(b) and subsection 139(7) of the Act, but he contended that he escaped liability for taxation by virtue of Article 1 of the Canada-United States Tax Convention for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion, which was given the force of law in Canada by The Canada-United States Tax Convention Act, SC 1943, c 21, as amended by SC 1959, c 27. Article 1 of the Convention provides: Article 1 An enterprise of one of the contracting States is not subject to taxation by the other contracting State in respect of its industrial and commercial profits except in respect of such profits allocable in accordance with the Articles of this Convention to its permanent establishment in the latter State. ... Paragraph 3 of the Protocol to the Convention contains the following definitions: 3. ...

The issue involves the interpretation of the Canada-Japan Income Tax Convention 1986. [2]                 The applicant, a resident of Canada, received pension income from Japan. ... He says that under the Convention, he should not be taxed on that pension income in Canada. [3]                 Bell T.C.J. rejected that argument and we must do so as well. [4]                 Article 20.1 of the Convention provides that income of a resident of Canada, wherever arising, shall be taxable only in Canada. ... Having regard to context and the object and purpose of the Convention (see Article 31 of Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 23 May 1969, [1980] Can T.S. ...

Having gone this far, the respondent submitted that the appellant is taxable unless he is exempt by the Canada-US Income Tax Convention. ... The appellant’s submission was that, if there was a conflict between the Act and the Convention, the Convention would prevail. Therefore, if the Convention exempts the sum in dispute herein from tax, then the appellant would pay no tax. ...

Minister of National Revenue, [1975] C.T.C. 2116, 75 D.T.C. 74 The Assistant Chairman: 1 This is the appeal of Dr Emile S Shihadeh from an income tax assessment wherein a tax in the amount of $3,362.70 was levied against the appellant in the 1969 taxation year. 2 The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant qualifies for the exemption from taxation provided for in Article VIIIA of the Canada-US Tax Convention. 3 In 1967 the appellant, who was a resident of the City of Ithaca, in the State of New York, USA, applied to several universities in the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada for a teaching contract. ... The first one is an inquiry, dated February 19, 1968, from the appellant to the Taxation Division of the Department of National Revenue concerning his application for the tax exemption provided for in Article VIIIA of the said Reciprocal Tax Convention. ... In my opinion, it is not the purpose of the legislation to grant a tax holiday for those persons who intend to teach in Canada on a permanent basis, and the distinction to be made between remaining in Canada beyond the two-year period and continuing to teach in Canada beyond that period is necessary for the proper application of the purpose and intent of Article VIIIA of the Tax Convention. 19 I do not believe that the intention that a person may have had at the time of accepting his two-year teaching contract has any bearing or any effect on the mandatory disqualification from tax exemption provided for in Article VIIIA of the Tax Convention if the individual concerned continues to teach at a university in Canada after the expiration of the two-year teaching limit specified in the Tax Convention. 20 For these reasons the appeal is dismissed. ...

He concedes as well that the Tax Court judge was bound to apply the tie breaker rules found at paragraph 4(2) of the Convention. ... Ct), but he used the same term elsewhere in his reasons in a context where it could only mean "resident of Canada for the purposes of the Convention." ... Bujnowski's dual residency in the 2001 tax year and that he applied the tie-breaker rule found at para. 4(2) of the Convention, as he ought to have. ...

However, under the Convention referred to later in these reasons it is not to exceed 15% in situations to which the Convention applies. ... With respect to payments to residents of the United States, however, the provisions of the Income Tax Act are, and have been since 1944, subject to the provisions of the Canada-US Reciprocal Tax Convention and Protocol thereto signed in March 1942.* [2] Articles I and Il of the Convention provide: ARTICLE I An enterprise of one of the contracting States is not subject to taxation by the other contracting State in respect of its industrial and commercial profits except in respect of such profits allocable in accordance with the Articles of this Convention to its permanent establishment in the latter State. ... The Trial Division also held that the amounts did not fall within the meaning of “rentals and royalties” as defined in the Protocol to the Convention and were exempt under its provisions. ...

What the appellant's R&D employees attended was a conference, not a convention. ... At page 367 (D.T.C. 6308) he said: The word “convention” is not defined in the Act. ... In my view these gatherings could be categorized best, under the Income Tax Act, as conventions. ...