Automobile

Administrative Policy

9 March 2017 External T.I. 2017-0689241E5 F - Avantages imposables relatifs aux automobiles ou autres véhicules

emergency vehicle's markings must clearly mark it as police or fire vehicle

After being asked about fire chiefs, who were on call 24 hours a day throughout the year with a clearly identified vehicle, equipped with all emergency equipment, to enable them to get to an emergency scene quickly, CRA stated that “an emergency response vehicle…is generally considered to be clearly identified if it is readily identifiable by the general public as a police or fire vehicle because of symbols or lettering on the exterior of the vehicle.”

Locations of other summaries Wordcount
Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 6 - Subsection 6(2) even where a vehicle available 24 hours a day to a fire chief is clearly marked as a firefighter car, the employer must still estimate whether there is a personal-use benefit 195

14 July 1995 T.I. 950797 (C.T.O. "Definition of Automobile")

A "Hummer" qualifies as a "motor vehicle of a type commonly called a van or pick-up truck or a similar vehicle".

10 December 1992 Memorandum (Tax Window, No. 27, p. 21, ¶2327)

Unless the configuration of a pick-up truck is permanently altered by the removal of the rear seat, it will not qualify for the exemption from the definition of automobile in subparagraph (e)(i) merely by the removal of a backseat and utilization of the space which is behind the front seat to store tools.

88 C.R. - "Automobile Rules" - "With Respect to Expensive Automobiles"

A pick-up truck that has been adapted to transport more than two passengers as well as equipment, is included.

Locations of other summaries Wordcount
Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 67.3 14

Paragraph (e)

Subparagraph (e)(ii)

See Also

BH Parkway Place Ltd. v. The Queen, 2019 TCC 7 (Informal Procedure)

a Mercedes SUV used in transporting goods was not an automobile

D'Auray J also accepted evidence that the appellant (a commercial landlord) had purchased a $73,000 Mercedez Benz SUV in order to permit its principal to move goods to and from business premises. On this basis, the SUV was not an “automobile,” whose ITA definition (applicable also for ETA purposes), excluded a “van or pick-up truck, or a similar vehicle” (interpreted by CRA to include an SUV) “the use of which … is all or substantially all for the transportation of goods, equipment or passengers in the course of gaining or producing income.” Accordingly, its cost was not limited for input tax credit (or, presumably, CCA) purposes to $30,000.

Locations of other summaries Wordcount
Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 182 - Subsection 182(1) a statutory penalty received by a landlord from a defaulted tenant was not subject to s. 182 206
Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 201 $74K SUV used for transporting goods was not subject to $30K cap 214

Pronovost v. The Queen, 2003 DTC 720, 2003 TCC 139 (Informal Procedure)

A six-passenger pick-up truck of the taxpayer was used by him to carry tools required for work by him as an employee of a forestry company, and his personal use of the truck was minimal. Accordingly, the truck did not constitute an automobile by virtue of paragraph (e)(iii) of the definition.

Navigation