Words and Phrases - "pursuant to"
The former employees and retirees of a bankrupt corporation (the "Employer") received a lump for the cancellation of their rights in a group insurance plan and respecting legal costs incurred to recover the lump sum. The lump sum received for the Plan cancellation included compensation for the loss of medical and dental coverage and hospitalization coverage for themselves and their dependents (respecting the "Medical Plan"), as well as the loss of life insurance coverage (the "Coverage"). Damages also were claimed for the amounts owing under the Employment Standards Act (the "Dismissal Amount").
After finding that the portion of the lump sum allocable to the termination of the Medical Plan was taxable, and in going on to find that that portion allocable to the lost Coverage was taxable to the recipients under s. 6(3), the Directorate stated:
[T]he portion of the lump sum that relates to the Coverage is a reasonable substitute paid in lieu of the employer's obligation to provide the Coverage
and went on to note that the meaning of “in lieu of” was not narrowed by the French version. Furthermore, that amount
was paid "by reason" or "in consequence of" an obligation imposed by the employment contract …[and t]herefore … "arises" from the employment contract.
Finally, it did not matter that the payer was the trustee, as it was deemed by s. 128(1)(a) to be an agent of the Employer – and it was “not unreasonable to conclude that the portion of the lump sum related to the Coverage is also an amount received as damages for services that the Objectors have rendered to the Employer.”
|Locations of other summaries||Wordcount|
|Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 6 - Subsection 6(1) - Paragraph 6(1)(a) - Subparagraph 6(1)(a)(i)||damages received after 2011 by employees of an insolvent company for cancellation of their medical plan have become taxable||318|
|Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 248 - Subsection 248(1) - Death Benefit||damages received for loss of life insurance coverage were not rendered a death benefit under the surrogatum principle||319|
|Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 8 - Subsection 8(1) - Paragraph 8(1)(b)||legal fees paid to recover damages for employer cancellation of insurance coverage, and medical plan, qualified and did not qualify, respectively||353|
Tsiaprailis v. Canada, 2005 DTC 5119, 2005 SCC 8,  1 S.C.R. 113
The taxpayer received a lump sum payment of $105,000 in settlement of her claim for wrongful termination of her long-term disability benefits. Although the portion of the settlement that was in respect of future disability benefits was not paid "pursuant to" the plan because there was no obligation on the part of the insurer to make a lump sum payment under the terms of the plan, under the surrogatum principle, the portion of the lump sum payment that was intended to replace past disability payments was taxable to her under s. 6(1)(f).