Blogue

Ilijoic v. R. - TCC: Disability payments were employment income not insurance payments

14 avril 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: Ms. Ilijoic received disability payments from Sun Life Assurance Company under a plan arranged by her employer, Dow Chemical Canada ULC:
Ilijoic v. R. - TCC: Disability payments were employment income not insurance paymentsPlus >

Crooks v. R. - TCC: Fractional (1/%) co-owner did not impede GST New Housing Rebate

14 avril 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: In 2010 Ms. Crooks signed an agreement of purchase and sale to buy a residential property for her own use. The transaction closed in 2012 at which time her credit rating had declined and she was told she need a co-owner on title in order to obtain mortgage financing. A friend of hers, Ms. Richards, agreed to go on title and was shown as a 1% owner on the deed and mortgage. CRA assessed Ms. Crooks to deny her the GST New Housing Rebate because Ms. Richards was not a “particular individual” with respect to Ms. Cooks, i.e, was not a family member who would reside in the residence.
Crooks v. R. - TCC: Fractional (1/%) co-owner did not impede GST New Housing RebatePlus >

Menzies v. R. - TCC: Tax Court has no jurisdiction over fairness relief

13 avril 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: The taxpayer originally claimed a partnership loss of roughly $88,000 in her 2001 taxation year. The Minister reduced that loss by roughly $20,000 under the terms of a settlement agreement with the partnership. The taxpayer claimed that the reassessment was ineffective because she did not authorize the settlement and did not receive a copy of the Minister’s Notice of Determination and Notice of Redetermination of Loss (the “Determination”). She also claimed interest relief because of the alleged delay of the Minister in reassessing her 2001 taxation year:
Menzies v. R. - TCC: Tax Court has no jurisdiction over fairness reliefPlus >

French v. R. - FCA: Partial gifts may be possible in leveraged donation situation

13 avril 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: This appeal was one of a group of tax cases involving so-called leveraged donations, i.e., donations funded in part by loans from promoters. In the notices of appeal Mr. French and the other appellants argued that they should be at least entitled to the portion of the donation made with their own cash. They argued that since partial gifts are permissible under the laws of Quebec taxpayers in other provinces and territories should be entitled to the same relief. The Crown succeeded before the Tax Court in having this pleading struck. Mr. French and the others appealed to the Federal Court of Appeal.
French v. R. - FCA: Partial gifts may be possible in leveraged donation situationPlus >

Opportunities for Disabled Fdn. V. R. - FCA: Appeal of revocation of charitable status denied

12 avril 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: The appellant charity had been the subject of three prior audits which led to its entering a Compliance Agreement with CRA in 2006. In 2013 CRA, as a result of an audit of its 2010 taxation year, issued a Revocation Proposal:
Opportunities for Disabled Fdn. V. R. - FCA: Appeal of revocation of charitable status deniedPlus >

Ivan Cassell Limited v. R. - TCC: Taxpayer carried on a “personal services business”

12 avril 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: This was a “personal services business” case framed in the narrowest of possible terms (normally a sign of very seasoned counsel):
Ivan Cassell Limited v. R. - TCC: Taxpayer carried on a “personal services business”Plus >

R & S Industries v. R. - FC: Late filed application for judicial review dismissed

11 avril 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: The taxpayer attempted to file an amended election in Form T2059 in connection with a transfer of property to a partnership. CRA rejected the amendment and the taxpayer applied to the Federal Court for review of that decision. The application was dismissed with costs both because it was itself late-filed and because there was no basis established to reverse CRA’s decision to refuse the late-filed election.
R & S Industries v. R. - FC: Late filed application for judicial review dismissedPlus >

1455257 Ontario Inc. v. R. - FCA: Dissolved corporation needs to be revived to file tax appeal

11 avril 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: The appellant corporation had been dissolved under the provisions of the Ontario Business Corporations Act (“OBCA”). It filed an appeal in the Tax Court which concluded that it could not pursue the appeal until its articles had been revived. The taxpayer appealed the Tax Court decision to the Federal Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal reached the same decision as the Tax Court, although in a somewhat different manner. Thus the appeal was dismissed with costs although the taxpayer was given another 60 days to seek a revival of its corporate status.
1455257 Ontario Inc. v. R. - FCA: Dissolved corporation needs to be revived to file tax appealPlus >

Karam v. R. - FCA: Appeal dismissed from bench - collateral attack on Tax Court Decision

8 avril 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: Mr. Karam was unsuccessful in the Tax Court which concluded that his share of the gain on a sale of real property was business income. He did not appeal that decision but launched a judicial review application in the Federal Court where he sought to restrain the Minister’s collection activity to the amount of “profit” stated in the notice of confirmation he received in response to his notice of objection. Both parties admitted that the “profit” set out in the notice of confirmation was an error and did not reflect the assessment under appeal in the Tax Court. The Federal Court dismissed the application for judicial review as being a collateral attack on the decision of the Tax Court. Mr. Karam appealed to the Federal Court of Appeal which dismissed the appeal from the bench with costs.
Karam v. R. - FCA: Appeal dismissed from bench - collateral attack on Tax Court DecisionPlus >

McGillivray Restaurant v. R. - TCC: Associated corporation appeal dismissed - de facto control by spouse

8 avril 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: This is an appeal of a decision reported earlier on this site. McGillivray Restaurant Ltd. (the “Company”) was incorporated to operate a Keg restaurant franchise in Winnipeg. The majority shareholder of the Company was Mrs. Howard. Her husband managed the Company. He owned two other Keg franchises and was instrumental in obtaining the Company’s franchise. The Tax Court held that he exercised de facto control of the Company making it associated with corporations owned by him for the purposes of the small business deduction. The Company appealed to the Federal Court of Appeal.
McGillivray Restaurant v. R. - TCC: Associated corporation appeal dismissed - de facto control by spousePlus >

Archives - 2016

Archives