Words and Phrases - "ascertainable"
Rockport Developments Inc. v. The Queen, 2009 TCC 180
The appellants were subcontractors of an affiliated company (“Exelon”) which, in turn, had a contract for the performance of construction work with a third party (“Enbridge”). Angers J found that for purposes s. 168(6) the consideration receivable bhy the appellans for their work did not become ascertainable for so long as a significant contractual dispute with Enbridge was resolved, stating (at para. 51) that:
[A]lthough invoices may have been tendered to Exelon, the exact value of the consideration had not been determined prior to this second [settlement] agreement. The value of the consideration was in dispute from the time the requests for payment were made and the invoices were issued. It was therefore impossible to establish the tax owing until the exact amount of the consideration was ascertained, which is what the settlement agreement did.
Merchant v. The Queen, 84 DTC 6215, [1984] CTC 253 (FCTD)
After stating (at p. 6217) tht "I am not convinced that at the time of taking office the taxpayer must know how much he will receive.... [A] specified amount per sitting renders the income sufficiently ascertainable," Reed, J., tentatively concluded, in obiter dicta, that sums that would have been received by an individual as leader of the Saskatchewan Liberal Party would not be received from an "office" because it could not be said that such a leader knows before taking office, with any degree of certainty, what the amounts would be given that the amounts would be determined annually.
| Locations of other summaries | Wordcount | |
|---|---|---|
| Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 18 - Subsection 18(1) - Paragraph 18(1)(a) - Start-Up and Liquidation Costs | 118 | |
| Tax Topics - Statutory Interpretation - Interpretation/Definition Provisions | "means" is exhaustive | 55 |