Words and Phrases - "bursary"
9 May 2006 Internal T.I. 2006-0176371I7 F - Bourses d'études ou d'entretien
After stating that “bursaries are grants given to students who need financial assistance to continue their education,” CRA found that bursaries paid to Quebec students under the Program québécois de prêts et bourses (the Quebec loans and bursaries program) by converting loans initially made to them into bursaries (following an ARQ verification of their income) that, thus, did not have to be repaid, were includible in income under s. 56(1)(n), subject to the exclusions under s. 56(3).
| Locations of other summaries | Wordcount | |
|---|---|---|
| Tax Topics - General Concepts - Payment & Receipt | bursaries “received” by students even though required to be applied directly to their loans | 119 |
Chabaud c. La Reine, 2012 DTC 1076 [at at 2856], 2011 TCC 438 (Informal Procedure)
Archambault J. found that "bursary" amounts that the taxpayer received from the University of Laval in connection with his postdoctoral fellowship at that university were employment income rather than amounts described under s. 56(1)(n), because his work was in the nature of "employment" under Quebec civil law. Under art. 2085 of the Civil Code, "a contract of employment is a contract by which a person, the employee, undertakes for a limited period to do work for remuneration, according to the instructions and under the direction or control of another person, the employer." The relative independence of research fellows as employees was irrelevant given that they were ultimately accountable to their supervisors. Archambault J. stated (at para. 72):
Having more independence does not necessarily mean that there is no relationship of subordination. The existence of a relationship of subordination does not depend on the right of direction and control being exercised, but on the existence of the right to exercise such control.
None of the amounts received by the taxpayer was a "bursary," namely "an amount granted either as financial aid, or in recognition of the student's excellence" (para. 79) given that they were paid for services, and the taxpayer no longer was a student (but, rather, was analogous to an articling student or medical resident). In addition, none of the amounts received was a "fellowship," namely, "assistance or a grant given to a person to enable the person to acquire new knowledge" (para. 89) as the goal of the University instead was to remunerate him for services he rendered. Furthermore (and in response to Savage), s. 56(1)(n) was amended to provide "that scholarships and bursaries paid by an employer to its employee are entirely taxable" (para. 93), so that it would not have assisted the taxpayer if the amounts received had been bursaries or fellowships.
| Locations of other summaries | Wordcount | |
|---|---|---|
| Tax Topics - General Concepts - Substance | labels not deterinative | 64 |
| Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 5 - Subsection 5(1) | 172 | |
| Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 56 - Subsection 56(1) - Paragraph 56(1)(o) | 50 |
Simser v. Canada, 2005 DTC 5001, 2004 FCA 414
Funds received by the taxpayer, who was profoundly deaf and studying to be lawyer, pursuant to the Special Opportunities Grant for Disabled Students With Permanent Disabilities, in order to help defray the costs of real time captioning and sign language interpretation during his attendance at a bar admission course, constituted a bursary for purposes of s. 56(1)(n). The reservation of the grant for students who attained a satisfactory scholastic standard (in addition to being in need of financial assistance) took the grant out of the realm of mere "accommodation", the obligation of the taxpayer to spend the funds on specific services did not alter the nature of the grant, and the grant accorded with various definitions of "bursary" which evoked the notion of financial assistance for needy students.
| Locations of other summaries | Wordcount | |
|---|---|---|
| Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 56 - Subsection 56(1) - Paragraph 56(1)(u) | 112 |
Mbarga v. The Queen, 2005 DTC 1447, 2005 TCC 595 (Informal Procedure)
An amount paid by Alberta Human Resources and Employment directly to the University of Calgary to enable the taxpayer to take a technology program constituted a "bursary" ("an endowment given to a student") and also was "received" by the taxpayer given that "the law is clear that 'receipt' includes constructive receipt" (p. 1448), i.e., the enjoyment of advantages without necessarily having them in one's hands.