Blogue

Duguay v. R. - TCC: Donation to charity in exchange for lower rent not a true gift

30 septembre 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: The appellant was living in an apartment owned by a registered charity. He personaly paid for $20,000 in renovations to the apartment. The charity gave him two cheques, each for $10,000 to reimburse his renovation costs. He endorsed one of the cheques back to the charity for which he was issued a $10,000 donation receipt. The receipt was disallowed and he appealed to the Tax Court.
Duguay v. R. - TCC: Donation to charity in exchange for lower rent not a true giftPlus >

9091-2239 Québec Inc. v. R. - TCC: Court varies alternative audit calculation to reduce GST

30 septembre 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: The taxpayer ran a pizza shop. A GST auditor used an alternative audit method to determine that it had under-reported GST by roughly $24,000. The Court varied the method used by the auditor and arrived at a figure of roughly $13,000 of under-reported GST. The Court sustained penalties on the lesser amount. There was no order as to costs since this was an informal procedure appeal.
9091-2239 Québec Inc. v. R. - TCC: Court varies alternative audit calculation to reduce GSTPlus >

RAR Consultants Ltd. v. R. - TCC: Taxpayer cannot claim ITCs of sister company

29 septembre 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: The taxpayer attempted to claim ITCs for services rendered by a third party suppliers to one of its sister companies. The Tax Court dismissed the appeal holding that the claim for ITCs was not assignable. There was no order as to costs since this was an informal procedure appeal.
RAR Consultants Ltd. v. R. - TCC: Taxpayer cannot claim ITCs of sister companyPlus >

van der Steen v. R. - TCC: Unrelated donor to charity could give evidence of donation arrangement

29 septembre 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: This is a decision on two technical procedural points during the course of a trial involving an alleged charitable donation tax scheme. On the first point the Crown was permitted to call an unrelated donor to the same charity to establish the “workings, scope, extent and duration of” the donation arrangement [para. 1]. However the evidence of that donor was not admissible to determine whether the taxpayer had made the disputed donation.
van der Steen v. R. - TCC: Unrelated donor to charity could give evidence of donation arrangementPlus >

Harder v. R. - TCC: Computerized “netted out” support - no tax credits for second child

22 septembre 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: The taxpayer paid an amount to his former spouse which represented a netting of their individual child support obligations for the two children of the marriage (based on their individual levels of income). The calculation was done by their respective lawyers using a program called “Divorce Mate”. Since the taxpayer was the only person paying support he was not entitled to dependent tax credits in respect of one of the children. Both parents could claim dependent tax credits in respect of one child only where both were actually making payments.
Harder v. R. - TCC: Computerized “netted out” support - no tax credits for second childPlus >

Kvas v. R. - TCC: No subsection 160(1) transfer to shareholders from dissolved corporation

22 septembre 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: This case involved the appeals of the Kvas brothers from subsection 160(1) assessments alleging that each of them had received transfers of property on or about December 31, 2008 from Commercial Interior Alterations Inc. (“CIA”), a corporation of which they had been the shareholders. The difficulty was that CIA had been dissolved in January of 2008, i.e., roughly 11 months before the alleged transfers and 6 years before the issuance of the assessments. The Tax Court was asked to determine whether subsection 160(1) assessments could be raised in respect of a transfer from a non-existent entity.
Kvas v. R. - TCC: No subsection 160(1) transfer to shareholders from dissolved corporationPlus >

News Alert: The Bahamas Leak Brings Attention Back to Tax Havens

22 septembre 2016 By Taxnet Pro

On September 21, 2016 the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), the same organization that released the “Panama Papers” in April 2016, released the Offshore Leaks Database, an online collection of records and documents that include details on offshore company directors and owners in the Bahamas that the ICIJ imply are involved in aggressive tax planning, tax evasion, and tax haven secrecy.
News Alert: The Bahamas Leak Brings Attention Back to Tax HavensPlus >

Monjazeb v. R. - TCC: Audio engineer an employee for EI and CPP purposes

20 septembre 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: Mr. Monjazeb was an audio engineer working for PCS Pacific Cabling Solutions Ltd. (“PCS”). Initially he clearly wanted to be an independent contractor and submitted invoices for his work on a periodic basis and charged GST. After the end of his employment with PCS he claimed to have been an employee. CRA initially sided with him but after an internal appeal concluded that he was an independent contractor. Mr. Monjazeb appealed that decision to the Tax Court.
Monjazeb v. R. - TCC: Audio engineer an employee for EI and CPP purposesPlus >

Sistema Toronto Academy Inc. v. R. - TCC: Music teachers were employees for EI/CPP purposes

16 septembre 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: The taxpayer was a non-profit organization that provided after school music education to disadvantaged students. It hired professional musicians to provide that education. This issue was whether those musicians were independent contractors or employees. Applying the well know tests of intention, control, tools, chance or profit/risk of loss and sub-delegation the Court held that the workers were engaged in pensionable and insurable employment and confirmed the Minister’s decision.
Sistema Toronto Academy Inc. v. R. - TCC: Music teachers were employees for EI/CPP purposesPlus >

Borgstadt v. R. - TCC: Taxpayer was shared-custody parent of older autistic child

15 septembre 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: The taxpayer had two teen-aged children, one of whom, the son, was autistic. She claimed that even though her son divided his time between her home and that of her ex-spouse, she bore the brunt of his special needs and should therefore be entitled to a full Canada Child Tax Credit. CRA limited her claim in the case of both children to 50% of the Canada Child Tax Credit and she appealed to the Tax Court in respect of her son.
Borgstadt v. R. - TCC: Taxpayer was shared-custody parent of older autistic childPlus >

Nouvelles récentes

Archives