Inserting Words

Table of Contents


CIBC World Markets Inc. v. Canada, 2011 FCA 270

no implied irrevocability of election

As ETA s. 141.01(5) did not stipulate that the choice of an ITC allocation method was irrevocable; irrevocability was not to be inferred.

Locations of other summaries Wordcount
Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 141.01 - Subsection 141.01(5) no implied irrevocability of choice of method 167
Tax Topics - Statutory Interpretation - Interpretation Act - Subsection 45(2) subsequent provision illustrates the missing words in current provision 106

Friesen v. Canada, 95 DTC 5551, [1995] 3 S.C.R. 103

After characterizing the Crown's proposed interpretation of the definition of "inventory" in s. 248(1) of the Act as a request to treat the definition as if it contained additional words, Major J. stated (at p. 5556):

"It is a basic principle of statutory interpretation that the Court should not accept an interpretation which requires the insertion of extra wording where there is another acceptable interpretation which does not require any additional wording. Reading extra words into a statutory definition is even less acceptable when the phrases which must be read in appear in several other definitions in the same statute."

See Also

Veracity Capital Corp. v. The Queen, 2017 BCCA 3

Crown's interpretation entailed the addition of words that were already in a closely related provision

In the course of her analysis of the B.C. GAAR (s. 68.1(1)), MacKenzie JA found it telling that s. 68.1(1)(d), unlike s. 68.1(1)(c), did not refer to the reduction, avoidance or deferral of tax under the B.C. Act or “under any other federal or provincial Act.” In this regard, she stated (at para. 78):

It is clearly not the role of the courts to add language that is not there, especially when interpreting tax legislation, where the Supreme Court has recognized that legislatures choose their words carefully to balance delicate, competing policy interests: Shell Canada Ltd. v. Canada, 1999 CanLII 647 (SCC), [1999] 3 S.C.R. 622 at para. 43. This is especially true with the GAAR, which strikes a balance between the well-recognized right of taxpayers to organize their affairs in accordance with the statute to minimize taxes, and the right of the government not to be deprived of its revenues due to abusive tax avoidance: Ludco Enterprises Ltd. v. Canada, 2001 SCC 62 (CanLII) at para. 39. Also apposite in this balancing are the principles of consistency, predictability and fairness in tax law (Canada Trustco at para. 42, Copthorne at para. 67)… .

Locations of other summaries Wordcount
Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 245 - Subsection 245(4) avoidance of provincial capital gains tax was not GAARable in B.C. as there was no abuse of the B.C. Act itself 774

Canadian Occidental U.S. Petroleum Corp. v. The Queen, 2001 DTC 295 (TCC)

The taxpayer lent money on an interest-free basis to a non-resident wholly-owned subsidiary in 1988 and then, in November 1994, transferred the shares of the subsidiary to a sister company so that the borrower ceased to be a subsidiary controlled corporation of the taxpayer. The Minister assessed on the basis that the loan thereupon ceased to qualify for the exemption in former s. 17(3), which was available to a loan that "was made to a subsidiary controlled corporation."

Bowman A.C.J. rejected this position on the basis that it had the effect of adding the words "and throughout the period in which the loan was outstanding the corporation continued to be a subsidiary controlled corporation" to s. 7(3). He stated (at p. 297):

"French and English are linguistic instruments capable of great precision of expression. Parliamentary drafters are presumed to have mastered one or both of those languages and to be able to say what they mean and to mean what they say."