Search - convention

During the Tax Foundation 1984 convention being the 36th Tax Conference, Revenue Canada at its round table set forth their position in answer to this question concerning S.R.T.C. investments: Q. ...

Omitting many words which are not necessary for the purposes of this appeal, Regulation 2902 reads: 2902 For the purposes of the definition “ qualified expenditure" in subsection 127(9) of the Act, a prescribed expenditure is (a) an expenditure of a current nature incurred by a taxpayer in respect of (i) the general administration or management of a business, including (A) an administrative salary or wages and related benefits in respect of a person whose duties are not all or substantially all directed to the prosecution of scientific research and experimental development, except to the extent that such expenditure is described in subsection 2900(2) or (3), (B) a legal or accounting fee, (C) an amount described in any of paragraphs 20(1)(c) to of the Act, (D) an entertainment expense, (E) an advertising or selling expense, (F) a convention expense, (G) a due or fee in respect of membership in a scientific or technical society or organization, and (H) a fine or penalty, or (ii)... except any such expenditure incurred by a taxpayer who derives all or substantially all of his revenue from the prosecution of scientific research and experimental development or the sale of rights in or arising out of scientific research and experimental development carried on by him; The respondent took the position that the amount in issue was a "prescribed expenditure" because it was of current nature incurred in respect of the “ general administration or management" of the appellants business. ...

. $3,784.24, $2,416.73, $6,170.10 and $3,756.88 allowed by the Minister in the 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993 taxation years, were not incurred, or if incurred, were not incurred by the Appellant for the purpose of carrying on the research work, but were personal or living expenses of the Appellant; Expenses for Professional Assistance (aa) in the 1990, 1992 and 1993 taxation years, the Appellant deducted the amounts of $1,021.18, $1,321.36 and $623.19 respectively, as expenses for professional assistance in computing his net research income; (ab) in the 1990 taxation year, the Appellant incurred convention expenses of $629.77; (ac) in the 1992 taxation year, the expenses of $930.00 were claimed twice by the Appellant or were incurred by other persons; (ad) in the 1993 taxation year, the expenses of $623.19 were incurred by other persons; (ae) the documentation provided by the Appellant did not substantiate the total expenses for professional assistance claimed by the Appellant; (af) the expenses for professional assistance, in excess of the amounts i.e. $121.18 and $41.36 allowed by the Minister in the 1990 and 1992 taxation years, were not incurred, or if incurred, were not incurred by the Appellant for the purpose of carrying on the research work. ...

Section 122.6 of the Income Tax Act (the " Act ") defines "eligible individual" as follows: " eligible individual "- "eligible individual" in respect of a qualified dependant at any time means a person who at that time              (a) resides with the qualified dependant, (b) is the parent of the qualified dependant who primarily fulfils the responsibility for the care and upbringing of the qualified dependant, (c) is resident in Canada or, where the person is the cohabiting spouse of a person who is deemed under subsection 250(1) to be resident in Canada throughout the taxation year that includes that time, was resident in Canada in any preceding taxation year,              (d) is not described in paragraph 149(1)(a) or (b), and (e) is, or whose cohabiting spouse is, a Canadian citizen or a person who (i) is a permanent resident (within the meaning assigned by the Immigration Act), (ii) is a visitor in Canada or the holder of a permit in Canada (within the meanings assigned by the Immigration Act) who was resident in Canada throughout the 18 month period preceding that time, or (iii) was determined before that time under the Immigration Act, or regulations made under that Act, to be a Convention refugee, and for the purposes of this definition, (f) where the qualified dependant resides with the dependant's female parent, the parent who primarily fulfils the responsibility for the care and upbringing of the qualified dependant is presumed to be the female parent, (g) the presumption referred to in paragraph (f) does not apply in prescribed circumstances, and (h) prescribed factors shall be considered in determining what constitutes care and upbringing. [8]            Section 6302 of the Income Tax Regulations (the " Regulations "), which appears in Part LXIII of those Regulations, prescribes the factors to be considered in determining what constitutes care and upbringing of a qualified dependant. ...

ISSUE: [1]      The issue is whether the Appellant was, for the period from September 1, 1999 to April 30, 2001, within the meaning of section 122.6 of the Income Tax Act (" Act "), an "eligible individual" respecting the "Canada Child Tax Benefit" ("Benefit"). [2]      The term "eligible individual" is defined in that section as follows: "eligible individual" in respect of a qualified dependant at any time means a person who at that time (a) resides with the qualified dependant, (b) is the parent of the qualified dependant who primarily fulfils the responsibility for the care and upbringing of the qualified dependant, (c) is resident in Canada or, where the person is the cohabiting spouse or common-law partner of a person who is deemed under subsection 250(1) to be resident in Canada throughout the taxation year that includes that time, was resident in Canada in any preceding taxation year, (d) is not described in paragraph 149(1)(a) or (b), and (e) is, or whose cohabiting spouse or common-law partner is, a Canadian citizen or a person who (i) is a permanent resident (within the meaning of assigned by the Immigration Act), (ii) is a visitor in Canada or the holder of a permit in Canada (within the meanings assigned by the Immigration Act, who was resident in Canada throughout the 18 month period preceding that time, (iii) was determined before that time under the Immigration Act, or regulations made under that Act, to be a Convention refugee, or (iv) was determined before that time to be a member of a class defined in the Humanitarian Designated Classes Regulations made under the Immigration Act, and for the purposes of this definition, (f) where a qualified dependant resides with the dependant's female parent, the parent who primarily fulfils the responsibility for the care and upbringing of the qualified dependant is presumed to be the female parent, (g) the presumption referred to in paragraph (f) does not apply in prescribed circumstances, and (h) prescribed factors shall be considered in determining what constitutes care and upbringing; [3]      The term "qualified dependant" is defined in section 122.6 as: "qualified dependant" at any time means a person who at that time (a) has not attained the age of 18 years, (b) is not a person in respect of whom an amount was deducted under paragraph (a) of the description of B in subsection 118(1) in computing the tax payable under this Part by the person's spouse or common-law partner for the base taxation year in relation to the month that includes that time, and (c) is not a person in respect of whom a special allowance under the Children's Special Allowances Act is payable for the month that includes that time; FACTS RELATING TO WHETHER THE APPELLANT "RESIDES" WITH THE QUALIFIED DEPENDANT: [4]      Because the conditions outlined in the above definition are cumulative, I shall set forth the facts as they relate to each relevant paragraph commencing with paragraph (a) of the definition of "eligible individual". [5]      The Appellant applied for and received the Benefit in respect of the period from September 1, 1999 to April 30, 2001. ...

  (1) For the purposes of this Act, a person shall, subject to subsection (2), be deemed to have been resident in Canada throughout a taxation year if the person   …   (g) was at any time in the year, under an agreement or a convention with one or more other countries that has the force of law in Canada, entitled to an exemption from an income tax otherwise payable in any of those countries in respect of income from any source (unless all or substantially all of the person's income from all sources was not so exempt), because at that time the person was related to or a member of the family of an individual (other than a trust) who was resident in Canada ...

For the purposes of this Convention, the term "pensions" includes any payment under a superannuation, pension or other retirement arrangement, Armed Forces retirement pay, war veterans pensions and allowances and amounts paid under a sickness, accident or disability plan, but does not include payments under an income-averaging annuity contract or, except for the purposes of Article XIX (Government Service), any benefit referred to in paragraph 5.  ...   5.   ...

Some of the cases involve generally accepted constitutional conventions based on which a provision, or its application, can be declared unconstitutional ...

Le ministre soutient que cette somme n'a pas été versée comme don valablement fait, mais était plutôt la contrepartie de l'utilisation d'un ordinateur à des fins personnelles exclusivement. [2]      Le ministre a énoncé au paragraphe 14 de sa Réponse à l'avis d'appel les faits suivants, sur lesquels il s'est fondé pour établir sa cotisation: a)          en produisant sa déclaration de revenus pour l'année d'imposition 1995, l'appelant a réclamé un crédit pour don de bienfaisance en rapport, entre autres, avec un montant de 6 068 $ qui correspondrait à un reçu (ci-après, le « reçu ») établi par le « Fonds de Développement du Collège Édouard-Montpetit » (ci-après, le « Fonds »), au cours de l'année d'imposition 1995; b)          l'appelant est un employé du Collège d'enseignement général et professionnel Édouard-Montpetit (ci-après, le « Collège »); c)          une vérification effectuée par un vérificateur de la Division des organismes de charité de l'Agence des douanes et du revenu du Canada a démontré ce qui suit: i)       dans le cadre d'un programme intitulé « Fonds d'accroissement du parc de micro-ordinateurs »: A)     il était convenu entre les [sic] Fonds, le Collège et les employés du Collège, que les employés pouvaient avoir, pour leur usage exclusif, du matériel informatique de plus de 500 $, en échange d'un « don » au Fonds, d'un montant égal au prix d'achat du matériel informatique; B)     le Fonds achetait le matériel informatique choisi par l'employé-utilisateur; C)     le Fonds transférait au Collège le matériel informatique choisi par l'employé-utilisateur; D)     il n'existait aucune pièce justificative venant attester du transfert du matériel informatique du Fonds au Collège; E)     de plus, le Collège ne comptabilisait pas dans ses registres le matériel informatique qui lui était donné par le Fonds; F)     aussi, plusieurs factures de matériel informatique (ci-après, les « factures ») étaient au nom du Collège, alors que c'était le Fonds qui commandait et payait ce matériel par ailleurs choisi par l'employé-utilisateur; G)     le choix du matériel informatique et du fournisseur de ce matériel revenait à l'employé-utilisateur; H)     le matériel informatique choisi par l'employé-utilisateur lui était ensuite remis par le Collège; I)      aucune convention de prêt n'était signée par les employés-utilisateurs relativement à ce matériel informatique, ni avec le Collège ni avec le Fonds; J)      le matériel informatique pouvait même être livré directement chez l'employé-utilisateur par le fournisseur; K)    d'ailleurs, certaines factures indiquaient même que le matériel informatique devait être livré chez l'employé-utilisateur; L)     en aucun temps, le Fonds n'a été en mesure de montrer le matériel informatique acheté, la localisation du matériel ne lui étant pas connue; M)    le Fonds établissait un reçu fiscal à l'employé-utilisateur; ii)      l'appelant a versé au Fonds un montant équivalent au montant inscrit sur le reçu qu'il a présenté au Ministre; iii)     l'appelant pouvait lui-même choisi [sic] le matériel informatique; iv)     ce matériel informatique était réservé à l'usage exclusif de l'appelant; v)      l'appelant pouvait utiliser ce matériel informatique à sa résidence; vi)     l'appelant était responsable de l'assurance, de l'entretien et de la réparation du matériel informatique; vii)    l'appelant était personnellement responsable de la destruction, de la perte ou du vol du matériel informatique apporté à sa résidence; viii) le reçu indiquait un don d'une valeur égale à l'équipement informatique mis à la disposition de l'appelant; [3]      Monsieur Gonthier a admis tous les faits énoncés par le ministre, à l'exception de ceux aux 14 c) i) D), E), I), J), K) et L) et de ceux aux 14 c) iv) et vii). ...

  [19]   Whether talking about the tasks or the responsibilities that are given to them, the remuneration, the salary and bonus, (both items must be taken into account) the work timetable, sick leaves, the advantages they enjoyed, courses, conventions, trips, use of credit cards, all these conditions, I have seen almost nothing in the evidence that I have heard today that makes the work conditions of these two individuals similar to those of the other managers in the same store ...