Words and Phrases - "near"
Yankson v. The Queen, 2005 DTC 1346, 2005 TCC 527 (Informal Procedure)
The taxpayer, who resided in Calgary and was enrolled in the Seattle Midwifery School, attended classes in Seattle for five days a month initially and two days a month later on, and also did online studies and practical studies in Calgary.
In finding that the taxpayer "commuted" to Seattle, Rip J. stated (at p. 1349) "if the individual is wont to travel from his or her residence to another locality hundreds of miles away on a regular or frequent basis, that person is commuting between the two places." However, she did not reside "near" to the Canada-U.S. border.
Humphreys v. The Queen, 2010 DTC 1084 [at at 2948], 2010 TCC 88 (Informal Procedure)
The taxpayer lived on the south of Vancouver Island and each week commuted for four hours to the Diver's Institute of Technology in Seattle. Sheridan J. found that the taxpayer lived "near the boundary between Canada and the United States" and so was entitled to tuition and textbook credits for his expenses.
Sheridan J. considered Van de Water v. MNR, 91 DTC 276 (TCC), in which a student whose home in a suburb of Montreal was 80 kilometers from the border and whose commute to a college in Plattsburg, New York did not qualify, noted that Dussault J. in that case stated that "the relief was granted so that those individuals could have access to educational institutions situated on the other side of the border but perhaps less distant than the ones situated in Canada...", and stated (para. 11) that "[w]hat may be 'not near enough' in the confined spaces of urban Quebec may be very 'near' indeed in the watery expanses of the Pacific coast."