Search - convention

It is necessary to set out Article XIIIA 2 of the Convention:* [1] ARTICLE XIII A 1.... 2. ... This brings me to the final point which is whether the Article of the Convention prevents the application of subsection 110(5) to this case. ... The appeal is therefore allowed with costs and the assessment referred back to the Minister accordingly. 1 *The Canada-United States of America Tax Convention Act, SC 1943, pro vides that in the event of inconsistency between the Convention “and the operation of any other law” the Convention shall prevail (section 3). 2 *The words used in subsection 20(1) and defined in paragraph 20(5)(e). 3 Pioneer Envelopes Limited v MNR (1962), 28 Tax ABC 225; 62 DTC 16; Powell Rouyn Gold Mines Limited v MNR (1959), 22 Tax ABC 281; 59 DTC 401. ...

Justice Adams of the Ontario Court of Justice (General Division) dated October 21, 1992, the Appellant became entitled to receive additional pension benefits from the Pension Society; (d) in 1997, the Appellant was entitled to receive pension benefits of $60,734.82 (US); (e) the Pension Society withheld $15,183.71 (US) or 25% of the amount payable (25% of 60,734.82), in accordance with subsection 212(1) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985 (5 th Supp.) as amended (the " Act ") and remitted the amount so withheld to the Minister of National Revenue (the "Minister"); (f) in 1997, the Appellant received pension benefits of $60,734.82 (US) from the Pension Society from which $15,183.71 (US) was withheld for non-resident tax; (g) by reassessment, notice of which was dated July 8, 1998, the Minister reduced the rate of withholding tax from 25% to 15% in accordance with Article XVIII of the Canada-United States Income Tax Convention, 1980 and issued a refund to the Appellant of the excess withholding tax; (h) during the 1968 – 1978 period, the Appellant was employed as a professional hockey player with the Minnesota North Stars to perform employment services in both the United States and Canada; (i) as part of his employment contract, the Appellant played at regularly scheduled NHL hockey games in Canada and also participated in training and played in playoff games in Canada; (j) during the 1968-1978 period, the Appellant was employed in Canada and was not "only occasionally employed in Canada" within the meaning of subparagraph 212(1)(h)(vi) of the Act; All of the assumptions except 10(j) are correct. 10(j) is in dispute. [3] In respect to Mr. ... Justice Adams of the Ontario Court of Justice (General Division) dated October 21, 1992, the Appellant became entitled to receive additional pension benefits from the Pension Society; (d) in 1997, the Appellant was entitled to receive pension benefits of $128,462.87 (US); (e) the Pension Society withheld $32,115.72 (US) or 25% of the amount payable (25% of $128,462.87), in accordance with subsection 212(1) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985 (5 th Supp.) as amended (the " Act ") and remitted the amount so withheld to the Minister of National Revenue (the "Minister"); (f) in 1997, the Appellant received pension benefits of $128,462.87 (US) from the Pension Society from which $32,115.72 (US) was withheld for non-resident tax; (g) by reassessment, notice of which was dated July 8, 1998, the Minister reduced the rate of withholding tax from 25% to 15% in accordance with Article XVIII of the Canada-United States Income Tax Convention, 1980 and issued a refund to the Appellant of the excess withholding tax; (h) during the 1958 – 1980 period, the Appellant was employed as a professional hockey player with the Chicago Black Hawks to perform employment services in both the United States and Canada; (i) as part of his employment contract, the Appellant played at regularly scheduled NHL hockey games in Canada and also participated in training camp and played in playoff and Stanley Cup games in Canada; (j) during the 1958 – 1980 period, the Appellant was employed in Canada and was not "only occasionally employed in Canada" within the meaning of subparagraph 212(1)(h)(vi) of the Act; All of the assumptions except 10(j) are correct. 10(j) is in dispute. [4] Paragraph 212(1)(h) of Part XIII as it affects the withholdings in question reads: PART XIII Tax on Income from Canada of Non-Resident Persons 212(1) Every non-resident person shall pay an income tax of 25% on every amount that a person resident in Canada pays or credits, or is deemed by Part I to pay or credit, to the non-resident person as, on account or in lieu of payment of, or in satisfaction of... ...

Procedural History [5]   The Refugee Protection Division [RPD] heard the Applicants’ claims and concluded they were not Convention Refugees in a decision published August 29, 2016. ... They argue that returning the Applicants would be contrary to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Convention Against Torture. ...

Can such a reference to a right create a "right under a purchase and sale agreement" [un droit prévu par convention d'achat-vente]?   ... Lachapelle et al. in Table ronde sur la fiscalité fédérale, Congrès 2002 (Montréal: APFF, 2002), 57:11, at page 57:16, Question No. 6, Sens du terme « convention d’achat‑vente » à l'alinéa 110.6(14) b) de la L.I.R., was that an option contract is not a purchase and sale agreement. ...   [51]     It is obvious that a contract entitled "Option Agreement" would not be a purchase and sale agreement; however, a clause in a contract, stating that the purchaser and vendor offer each other the option to sell or purchase the remaining shares, could be a "right under a purchase and sale agreement" [droit prévu par convention d'achat-vente] ...

  [6]   Before addressing the specifics of the case, it is useful to review the background against which tariff classification decisions are made. [7]   The Customs Tariff implements Canada’s obligations under the  International Convention on the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System (Convention). The main purpose of the Convention is to provide a standard classification system among state parties so as to “foster stability and predictability in classification practices internationally” while at the same time permitting state parties to set their own rates of duty “in conformance to their individual international trade obligations” (Canada (Attorney General) v. Igloo Vikski Inc., 2016 SCC 38, [2016] 2 S.C.R. 80 at para. 4 (Igloo Vikski)). [8]   In order to achieve that goal, the Convention sets out rules of interpretation, as evidenced by sections 10 and 11 of the Customs Tariff, which incorporate these rules into Canadian domestic law: General Dispositions générales … […] Classification of goods in the List of Tariff Provisions   Classement des marchandises dans la liste des dispositions tarifaires 10. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the classification of imported goods under a tariff item shall, unless otherwise provided, be determined in accordance with the General Rules for the Interpretation of the Harmonized System and the Canadian Rules set out in the schedule.   10. (1) Sous réserve du paragraphe (2), le classement des marchandises importées dans un numéro tarifaire est effectué, sauf indication contraire, en conformité avec les Règles générales pour l’interprétation du Système harmonisé et les Règles canadiennes énoncées à l’annexe ...

The Appellants argue that this is not only consistent with the text, context, and purpose of the Act but also consistent with the Canada-United States Convention [8] and other domestic and international tax principles. [9] [24] The Respondent’s position is that the RCA Contributions do not enter into the computation of the Appellants’ income for Canadian tax purposes. ... [Emphasis added.] [54] The foregoing is also consistent with the Canada-United States Convention, which provides that Canada can only tax salary, wages, remuneration derived by a resident of the United States for employment services provided in Canada, if the employment is exercised in Canada. For example, Article XV of the Canada‑United States Convention reads as follows [18]: Subject to the provisions of Articles XVIII (Pensions and Annuities) and XIX (Government Service), salaries, wages and other similar derived by a resident of a Contracting State in respect of an employment shall be taxable only in that State unless the employment is exercised in the other Contracting State. ...

.), (the Act), apply the appropriate international tax convention provisions, and release the sum of $5,350,603 held for the applicant's account. ... The applicant requested that a certificate be issued without any payment of tax on its part, on the grounds that under subsection 14(4) of the Canada-Barbados Income Tax Convention (the treaty), any capital gain resulting from its disposition of the shares is taxable exclusively in Barbados. [6]      Beginning in October 1998, the International Audit Section of the CCRA began requesting additional information and documents from the applicant for the purpose of determining the application of the General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR). ...

Canada, 2004 F.C.A. 327; 2004 DTC 6676. [4]           See Canada-US Income Tax Convention (1980), Article XVI. [5]           C.R.C. 1979, c. 945 as amended. [6]           2002 CanLii 966(TCC); aff'd 2003 FCA 169. ...

In so reassessing the Appellant for its 1998 and 1999 taxation years and in confirming the reassessments, he Minister relied on the following assumptions: a)          In September 2002, a Specific Request for Information was made by the Belgium authorities to the Canadian government under the Exchange of Information Program governed by the Canada-Belgium Income Tax Convention with respect to a series of billings by the Appellant to FICS Group, a Belgium company ("FICS"); b)          The Specific Request for Information raised the following three points of concerns by the Belgian authorities:                         i)           Is GLOBTECK INC. legally incorporated in Canada? ...

Statement of the arm’s length principle i) Article 9 of the OECD Model Tax Convention 1.6       The authoritative statement of the arm’s length principle is found in paragraph 1 of Article 9 of the OECD Model Tax Convention, which forms the basis of bilateral tax treaties involving OECD Member countries and an increasing number of non-Member countries. ... As stated in Chapter I, paragraph 1 of Article 9 of the OECD Model Tax Convention provides that where “conditions are made or imposed between the two enterprises in their commercial or financial relations which differ from those which would be made between independent enterprises, then any profits which would, but for those conditions, have accrued to one of the enterprises, but, by reason of those conditions, have not so accrued, may be included in the profits of that enterprise and taxed accordingly. 2.3       The Commentary on paragraph 1 of Article 9 indicates that paragraph 1 authorizes a tax administration “for the purpose of calculating tax liabilities [to] re-write the accounts of the [associated] enterprises if as a result of the special relations between the enterprises the accounts do not show the true taxable profits arising in that State.” ...