Archives - mai 2021

Posts tagged "Tax Litigation"

Logix Data Products Inc. v. R. – TCC: Taxpayer did not adduce evidence sufficient to establish SRED claims
26 mai 2021 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: The taxpayer claimed SRED expenditures and related tax credits in respect of the development of a dual purpose solar shingle, i.e., one that could be used to product solar power and also act as a roof shingle. The Tax Court found that the evidence adduced was not sufficient to meet the evidentiary burden of demonstrating that the solar shingle project met the various requirements necessary to qualify as SRED.
Logix Data Products Inc. v. R. – TCC: Taxpayer did not adduce evidence sufficient to establish SRED claimsPlus >
Leonard v. R. – TCC: Taxpayer partially successful in claiming loss on foreclosure proceeding was deductible – adventure in the nature of trade
21 mai 2021 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: Mr. Leonard claimed a non-capital loss in the amount of $1,472,006 in 2011 arising out of foreclosure proceedings in a complex land deal. CRA denied the loss. That also had the result of increasing the family income which reduced the Canada Child Tax Benefit which his wife had claimed. They both appealed to the Tax Court. The issue in the main appeal was whether the loss incurred by Mr. Leonard was on income or capital account. The Tax Court found that there was another issue to be determined, i.e., the quantum of the loss. The Tax Court found that Mr. Leonard was engaged in an adventure in the nature of trade and that the loss was on income account. Nevertheless the Court concluded that Mr. Leonard’s loss claim was overstated and reduced his loss to $826,426. Thus both his appeal and that of his spouse were allowed.
Leonard v. R. – TCC: Taxpayer partially successful in claiming loss on foreclosure proceeding was deductible – adventure in the nature of tradePlus >
Krumm v. R. – FCA: Tax Court did not err in finding that computer software was a “tax shelter” and disallowing the deductions claimed.
20 mai 2021 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: The taxpayer acquired computer software for a face price of $2.8 million with $700,000 payable up front and the balance my means of a promissory note. He sought to deduct the $2.8 million over a period of two years (1997 and 1998) and CRA denied his claim on the basis that the software was an unregistered “tax shelter”. The Tax Court dismissed his appeal. The case turned on whether a valuation report provided to the taxpayer by the vendors of the software prior to his purchase made the software a tax shelter Both the Tax Court and the Federal Court of Appeal concluded that the valuation was sufficient to make the software a tax shelter.
Krumm v. R. – FCA: Tax Court did not err in finding that computer software was a “tax shelter” and disallowing the deductions claimed.Plus >
Kam-Press Metal Products Ltd. v. R. – FCA: Appeal dismissed – appellant’s activities did not meet the Northwest Hydraulics test for SRED expenditures
18 mai 2021 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: The Tax Court rejected the taxpayer’s appeal of the denial of its SRED claim and the taxpayer appealed that decision to the Federal Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal found that the taxpayer had not met the “scientific method” test set out in the Northwest Hydraulics decision by Bowman J. (as he then was) and dismissed the appeal with costs fixed in the amount of $1,670.
Kam-Press Metal Products Ltd. v. R. – FCA: Appeal dismissed – appellant’s activities did not meet the Northwest Hydraulics test for SRED expendituresPlus >
Nonis v. R. – TCC: Minister’s allocation of employment income earned in Canada by a non-resident was not reasonable – taxpayer’s appeal allowed
13 mai 2021 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: Mr. Nonis was an American resident who worked a few days a year in Canada for a period of time. He filed his 2013 and 2014 returns prorated based on the number of days he spent in Canada in those years. This was accepted by the Minister. For 2015 and 2016 he followed the same proration method but the Minister rejected it and imposed the ratios used in 2013 and 2014 even though Mr. Nonis spent fewer days in Canada in 2015 and 2016: 37 days and zero days, respectively. Bocock J. allowed Mr. Nonis’ appeal holding that the Minister’s alleged discretion to use a notional proration was not a reasonable statutory construction under the circumstances.
Nonis v. R. – TCC: Minister’s allocation of employment income earned in Canada by a non-resident was not reasonable – taxpayer’s appeal allowedPlus >
Sweetman v. R. – TCC: Taxpayer’s motion to have appeal held in abeyance until Minister corrects alleged “failures” denied – taxpayer part of Global Learning Gifting Initiative (“GLGI”)
12 mai 2021 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: Mr. Sweetman was part of the Global Learning Gifting Initiative (“GLGI”). He chose not to be part of the test case litigation: Mariano v. The Queen and pursued his appeal as a self-represented litigant. He took a motion to have his appeal held in abeyance pending the Minister correcting what Mr. Sweetman alleged were a number of “failures” on the Minister’s part. Graham J. would have no part of Mr. Sweetman’s line of arguments and dismissed the motion with costs payable in the cause.
Sweetman v. R. – TCC: Taxpayer’s motion to have appeal held in abeyance until Minister corrects alleged “failures” denied – taxpayer part of Global Learning Gifting Initiative (“GLGI”)Plus >

Archives - mai 2021

catégories

Archives