Blogue

Archives - 2015

Levin v. R. - TCC: Taxpayer not entitled to Canada Child Tax Benefit - children did not reside with him
23 mai 2015 By Bill Innes
catégories:
- Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
- Personal Tax, Estate & Wealth Planning
Précis: Mr. Levin and his former spouse had three children. In 2001 they agreed to joint custody with Mr. Levin having the children 6 days in every 14. This appeal concerned his claim to the Canada Child Tax Benefit (the “Benefit”) for the 2009, 2010 and 2011 base years (he dropped his claim in respect of the 2012 base year).
Levin v. R. - TCC: Taxpayer not entitled to Canada Child Tax Benefit - children did not reside with himPlus >
Comptroller v. Wynne - SCOTUS: Double taxation of out-of-state income by Maryland violates Commerce Clause
22 mai 2015 By Bill Innes
catégories:
- Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
- Other
Précis: Mr. and Mrs. Wynne were residents of Maryland. They had sources of income in a number of states and sought tax credits in Maryland for income taxes paid to those other states. They were granted tax credits against Maryland “state” taxes but not Maryland “county” taxes (“county” taxes being in fact imposed and collected by the State of Maryland).
Comptroller v. Wynne - SCOTUS: Double taxation of out-of-state income by Maryland violates Commerce ClausePlus >
Ironside v. R. - TCC: Court orders hearing whether decision in prior tax years gives rise to issue estoppel - Rule 58
21 mai 2015 By Bill Innes
catégories:
- Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
- Personal Tax, Estate & Wealth Planning
Précis: In 2013 the Tax Court reached a decision dismissing Mr. Ironside’s appeal concerning the deduction in 2003 and 2004 (and resulting losses applied to 2002 and 2006) of legal and other professional fees to defend himself against allegations of committing improper disclosures after being charged in June of 2001 by the Alberta Securities Commission.
Ironside v. R. - TCC: Court orders hearing whether decision in prior tax years gives rise to issue estoppel - Rule 58Plus >
Kuretski v. CIR - SCOTUS: US Supreme Court refuses to review decision challenging status of US Tax Court
20 mai 2015 By Bill Innes
catégories:
- Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
- Other
Précis: Kuretski et al. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service (June 20, 2014 – 2014 #13-1090) was a decision of The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the “DC Circuit”) where taxpayers did not pay their taxes and were eventually assessed by the IRS.
Kuretski v. CIR - SCOTUS: US Supreme Court refuses to review decision challenging status of US Tax CourtPlus >
Guillemette v. R. - TCC: Family members treated in the same way as other workers for EI purposes
19 mai 2015 By Bill Innes
catégories:
- Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
- Employment Insurance/CPP
Précis: Plomberie Yves Guillemette inc. (the “Payer”) employed two of its controlling shareholders, Normand and Sébastien Guillemette. It also employed Jennifer Chabot during a period when she was married to Sébastien Guillemette.
Guillemette v. R. - TCC: Family members treated in the same way as other workers for EI purposesPlus >
Reynolds v. R. - No Canada Child Tax Credit for woman with part time custody of her step-sons
16 mai 2015 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: The appellant had custody of her two step-children approximately 1/3 of the time. The rest of the time they were with their mother.
Reynolds v. R. - No Canada Child Tax Credit for woman with part time custody of her step-sonsPlus >
Diamond D Construction v. R. - TCC: Worker engaged in house framing business was an employee
15 mai 2015 By Bill Innes
catégories:
- Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
- Employment Insurance/CPP
Précis: The appellant was in the business of framing houses. Its owner, Mr. Danwich, hired a friend, Mr. Mercia, as a worker.
Diamond D Construction v. R. - TCC: Worker engaged in house framing business was an employeePlus >
J.J. Smith Cartage v. M.N.R. - TCC: Delivery service truck driver an employee for EI and CPP purposes
14 mai 2015 By Bill Innes
catégories:
- Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
- Employment Insurance/CPP
Précis: The appellant operated an appliance delivery service in Toronto and hired the intervenor, Mondel Samuel, as a driver. The sole issue was whether Mr. Samuel was an employee or an independent contractor for EI and CPP purposes.
J.J. Smith Cartage v. M.N.R. - TCC: Delivery service truck driver an employee for EI and CPP purposesPlus >
Caithkin, Inc. v. R. - FCA: A “bundle of services” did not constitute an “establishment”, therefore no GST exemption
11 mai 2015 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: This is an appeal by the taxpayer of a Tax Court decision blogged earlier on this site. The appellant was a for-profit corporation that, under contract with various Children’s Aid Societies in Ontario (“CAS”), provided foster parents for children in the care of CAS.
Caithkin, Inc. v. R. - FCA: A “bundle of services” did not constitute an “establishment”, therefore no GST exemptionPlus >
White Burgess Langille Inman v. Abbott and Haliburton Co. - SCC: Court rules on test for excluding an expert
10 mai 2015 By Bill Innes
catégories:
- Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
- Other
Précis: In this decision the Supreme Court of Canada upheld a decision of a majority of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal which reversed the decision of a motions Judge to exclude an expert report of a Grant Thornton accountant dealing with alleged negligence on the part of the defendant accounting firm, White Burgess Langille Inman.
White Burgess Langille Inman v. Abbott and Haliburton Co. - SCC: Court rules on test for excluding an expertPlus >