Search - convention

., 97 DTC 302, [1998] 1 C.T.C. 2300 (TCC)-- summary under Income Tax Conventions Summary Under Tax Topics- Treaties- Income Tax Conventions In finding that a deemed dividend arising under s. 84 did not result from an "alienation" for purposes of Article XIII of the Canada-U.S. Income Tax Convention, Bowman TCJ. stated that he could "see no reason why a treaty provision should not be subject to the same principles of interpretation as domestic statutes insofar as they require that the provisions be construed in accordance with the object and spirit and the telos at which they are aimed and not in a manner that permits the perpetration of an abuse of the treaty". ...

The Queen, 2011 DTC 1162 [at at 845], 2011 TCC 212, aff'd 2012 FCA 207-- summary under Income Tax Conventions Summary Under Tax Topics- Treaties- Income Tax Conventions The Canadian-resident taxpayer transferred shares to an Austrian private foundation, which held the shares under an arrangement which was found by C. ... Moreover, other articles in the Canada-Austria Convention and in other tax treaties contained specific exceptions where domestic tax laws would prevail over treaty provisions, and no such provision applied here. ...

The Queen, 2016 TCC 131, aff'd 2017 FCA 3-- summary under Income Tax Conventions Summary Under Tax Topics- Treaties- Income Tax Conventions OECD commentaries applied to Brazil (not an OECD member) At issue in a motion brought under Rule 58(1) was whether Art. ... After noting (at para. 65) that “ Crown Forest found that accepted model conventions and official commentaries thereon may be referred to without the need to find an ambiguity in the text of the tax treaty” and (at para. 67) that “although Brazil is not an OECD member, the similarities between the language used in Article XXII(2) of the Treaty and that found in paragraph 23B of the 1977 OECD Model is evidence that the 1977 OECD Model was considered in drafting the Treaty,” Paris J stated (at para. 72): At paragraph 63 of the Commentaries [on the 1977 OECD Model], the limitation on the deduction [in Art. 23B] is stated to be “normally computed as the tax on net income, i.e. on the income from [the State of source] less allowable deductions.” ...

The Queen, 2006 DTC 3307, 2006 TCC 460, aff'd 2007 FCA 236-- summary under Income Tax Conventions Summary Under Tax Topics- Treaties- Income Tax Conventions In March 1993 an individual ("Boulle") transferred his shares of a Canadian public junior exploration company ("DFR") to the taxpayer, which was a newly-incorporated Cayman Islands company wholly owned by him. ...

The Queen, 2014 DTC 1046 [at at 2882], 2014 TCC 12, briefly aff'd 2014 FCA 275-- summary under Article 4 Summary Under Tax Topics- Treaties- Income Tax Conventions- Article 4 Treaty residence not domestically applicable In 2002, the taxpayer was resident both in Canada and the U.K. for domestic tax purposes, but by virtue of Art. 4, para. 2(a) of the Canada-U.K Income Tax Convention (the "Convention") he was a resident of the U.K. for purposes of the Convention. S. 250(5) of the Act, which otherwise might have explicitly deemed his non-residence under the Convention to apply for purposes of the Act, did not apply to him in 2002. ... In rejecting this submission, Rip CJ indicated that the stipulation in Art. 4 that the taxpayer was resident in the U.K. for "purposes" of the Convention engaged only a "particular object" being "the Convention itself, nothing else" (para. 26), that "it is clear that if an income or capital item is not provided for in the Convention, Canada's authority to tax that item is not restricted" (para. 29), that in the OECD discussions of the residence tie-breaker rules "no mention is made of an override of domestic law" (para. 33), and that the Convention merely "allocates to each country the authority to tax" (para. 51). ...

., 97 DTC 1511, [1998] 1 CTC 2095 (TCC)-- summary under Article 10 Summary Under Tax Topics- Treaties- Income Tax Conventions- Article 10 Article IX of the 1980 Canada-U.S. Convention and Article IV of the 1942 Canada-U.S. Convention did not prevent the application of s. 18(4) of the Act to limit the deduction of interest by the taxpayer, not withstanding that the loans in question bore interest at an arm's length rate. ...

Convention and Article IV of the 1942 Canada-U.S. Convention did not prevent the application of s. 18(4) of the Act to limit the deduction of interest by the taxpayer, not withstanding that the loans in question bore interest at an arm's length rate. ...

The Queen, 2014 DTC 1046 [at at 2882], 2014 TCC 12, briefly aff'd 2014 FCA 275-- summary under Article 29 Summary Under Tax Topics- Treaties- Income Tax Conventions- Article 29 Treaty residence not domestically applicable In 2002, the taxpayer was resident both in Canada and the U.K. for domestic tax purposes, but by virtue of Art. 4, para. 2(a) of the Canada-U.K Income Tax Convention (the "Convention") he was a resident of the U.K. for purposes of the Convention. ... If he instead had been successful on this argument, he would have faced a further difficulty in Art. 27, para. 2 of the Convention, which provided that income, which otherwise was "relieved" from Canadian income tax under the Convention but was subject to tax in the U.K. only on a remittance basis, would only be subject to such relief to the extent it was so remitted. ... -source employment income (which had not been remitted to the U.K.), stating (at para. 67): I agree with respondent that reading the words such as "arising in Canada" into Article 27(2) would distort the intended meaning of that provision of the Convention. ...

After finding (at para. 142) that the Letters gave rise to a binding agreemetn which the Minister could not resile from as it was not "indefensible on the facts and the law," Owen J went on to find (at para 159) that, in any event: …[S]ubsection 3(2) of the CUSTCA [the Canada-United States Tax Convention Act, 1984] gives paramountcy to the provisions of the Convention when they are inconsistent with the provisions of the ITA. In this case, the power of the Minister to further reassess the Appellant under the ITA is inconsistent with the power of the CCA and the USCA to resolve cases by mutual agreement under Article XXVI of the Convention. Accordingly, the effect of the provisions of the Convention must be given paramountcy over the effect of the provisions of the ITA. ...

The Queen, 2014 DTC 1046 [at at 2882], 2014 TCC 12, briefly aff'd 2014 FCA 275-- summary under Subsection 45(2) Summary Under Tax Topics- Statutory Interpretation- Interpretation Act- Subsection 45(2) amendments usually change the Act In 2002, the taxpayer was resident both in Canada and the U.K. for domestic tax purposes, but by virtue of Art. 4, para. 2(a) of the Canada-U.K Income Tax Convention (the "Convention") he was a resident of the U.K. for purposes of the Convention. S. 250(5) of the Act, which otherwise might have explicitly deemed his non-residence under the Convention to apply for purposes of the Act, did not apply to him in 2002. ...