Articles

In a recent view of the CRA (2019-0806761I7), the CRA considered whether a late-filed “bump” designation pursuant to paragraph 88(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act (Canada) on a vertical amalgamation could be made outside the normal reassessment period in relation to a transfer pricing adjustment that was made during the six- or seven-year extended reassessment period. The CRA’s comments provide welcome guidance.

Author Margaret Nixon, of Stikeman Elliott LLP, reviews the recent decision of the Tax Court of Canada in Prairielane Holdings Ltd. v. The Queen, 2019 TCC 157. In this case, the Court considers the deemed association rule in subsection 256(2.1) of the Income Tax Act and provides useful guidance on the legal principles that are applicable in determining whether one of the main reasons for the separate existence of two or more corporations is the reduction of tax.

The GST/HST holding company rules have long been hotly contested between the CRA and GST/HST registrants. The changes proposed by the Department of Finance may help to provide some clarity to this area, however, the new property test for parent corporations will likely limit the application of these previously broad rules.

This paper surveys a host of potential issues that can arise when a taxpayer disposes of their principal residence following the 2016 amendments to the Income Tax Act. Starting with an overview of the current legislative rules, the paper then goes on to highlight problems including having a non-resident owner, Trusts and principal properties, and dual Canadian-US citizens selling their principal residence in Canada.

This article explores the implication of growing Canadian household debt on estates in the context of the estate administration tax.

When a matter is decided at Tax Court, the winner may be entitled to costs. Recent cases award high costs that better reflect the actual expenses in conducting an appeal, in contrast to the low costs recommended under the Tariff in the Tax Court of Canada Rules.

In Lapierre v The Queen, the Tax Court of Canada considered the Canadian federal income tax treatment of an international civilian consultant's income from employment, concluding that the taxpayer was not eligible for particular deductions available to certain Canadian Armed Forces personnel who perform similar duties.

The author discusses two recent Tax Court of Canada cases considering the application of the general anti-avoidance rule, from which the taxpayers emerged victorious for various reasons.

One of the more interesting tax developments of 2018 was surely the jurisprudence considering whether a taxpayer has realized a tax benefit, one of three requirements for the application of the general anti-avoidance rule. The existence of a tax benefit had only infrequently been disputed by taxpayers, until several of taxpayers disputed it in 2018.

A recent judgement of the Federal Court highlights the need for taxpayers to consider solicitor-client privilege carefully when creating documents that record uncertain tax positions, and limits the applicability of BP Canada, which held that the Minister of National Revenue was not entitled to have access to Tax Accrual Working Papers without restriction.