Cases
Stewart v. Canada, 2002 DTC 6969, 2002 SCC 46, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 645
avoid judicial rule-making
Before finding that the taxpayer was not required to establish that he had a reasonable expectation of profit ("REOP") with respect to four rental condominium units held by him, the Court stated (at p. 6979) that:
"The REOP test has been applied independently of provisions of the Act to second-guess bona fide commercial decisions of the taxpayer and therefore runs afoul of the principle that courts should avoid judicial rule-making in tax law."
| Locations of other summaries | Wordcount | |
|---|---|---|
| Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 20 - Subsection 20(1) - Paragraph 20(1)(c) | not tainted by capital gains motivation | 115 |
| Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 248 - Subsection 248(1) - Business | "business" has its broad common law definition | 95 |
| Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 248 - Subsection 248(1) - Personal or Living Expenses | 12 | |
| Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 3 - Paragraph 3(a) - Business Source/Reasonable Expectation of Profit | no reasonable expectation of profit test if no personal element | 86 |