Articles 2021

This article reviews the recent Tax Court of Canada case Landbouwbedrijf Backx B.V. v. The Queen.

Jenny Mboutsiadis is a tax partner at Fasken.  Prior to joining Fasken Jenny spent 11 years at the Department of Justice. 

On November 30, 2020, the Government released its Fall Economic Statement 2020 titled: Supporting Canadians and Fighting COVID-19. The Statement includes proposals that will impose significant obligations on e-commerce businesses and businesses that import goods into Canada.

On September 14, 2020, the Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) released its decision in Gladwin Realty Corp. v Canada, 2020 FCA 142. The FCA dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal and affirmed the Tax Court of Canada (“TCC”) holding that the General Anti-Avoidance Rule (“GAAR”) applied to the tax plan orchestrated by the taxpayer.

When parties decide to separate, there are a number of decisions that need to be made. Often, the parties are focused on making life-changing decisions such as making new living arrangements, settling on custody and access rights, figuring out what their new lives will look like, taking into account support payments and the division of marital assets. However, the same decisions and agreements made following a separation can affect their tax and financial well being for years to come.

On December 15, the Canada Revenue Agency (the “CRA”) released additional details regarding the availability of employee deductions for work from home expenses and the taxation of certain employer provided employee benefits during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Accountants, valuators and anyone else who provides or assists in providing information (to the CRA or to taxpayers) respecting income tax or GST/HST (“Advisors”) should be aware of their potential liability for “advisor penalties." Advisors generally know that their clients could face gross negligence penalties in appropriate cases of “reprehensible recklessness." However, it is less well known that Advisors risk similar penalties if their actions reach “culpable conduct.”

Most industries across the globe have been affected by recent world events. As lawyers, we've had to address new trends and demands in the market, including greater complexity in Canada/U.S. cross-border personal tax and estate planning.

This article considers the interplay between section 80.4, subsection 15(2) and paragraph 20(1)(j) of the Income Tax Act (Canada).

AgraCity Ltd. successfully appealed to the Tax Court of Canada from the Minister’s reassessment of its 2007 and 2008 taxation years. AgraCity had entered into a service agreement with a non-arm’s length Barbadian corporation to provide promotional and administrative services in respect of herbicide sales to Canadian farmers.