Income Tax Severed Letters - 2006-04-07

Ruling

2006 Ruling 2005-0151051R3 F - Entente d'échelonnement de traitement

Unedited CRA Tags
248(1) 8(1)

Principales Questions: Dans une situation particulière où une société met en place un régime d'intéressement à l'intention de certains de ses employés, est-ce que: 1) le régime constituera une entente d'échelonnement du traitement; et 2) le régime constituera une convention de retraite.

Position Adoptée: 1) Non. 2) Non.

Raisons: La Loi et positions antérieures.

XXXXXXXXXX 2005-015105

2006 Ruling 2006-0168751R3 - sale of assets; shareholder/key employee bonuses

Unedited CRA Tags
67 18(1)(a) 5(1) 78(4)

Principal Issues: Whether the proceeds from the sale of eligible capital property can be paid to shareholder/managers as a deductible bonus.

Position: Yes.

Reasons: The company is a CCPC paying bonuses to active shareholder/key employees who are residents of Canada to reduce the CCPC's income from the Business and the asset sale to a nominal amount.

2006 Ruling 2006-0169241R3 - Butterfly

Unedited CRA Tags
55(3)(b)

Principal Issues: Whether certain pre-butterfly sales of property by DC to an individual shareholder at FMV for cash will affect the rulings given in a split-up butterfly?

Position: No.

Reasons: These transactions meet the exemption under clause 55(3.1)(a)(iv)(C). Therefore, paragraph 55(3.1)(a) will not apply to taint the butterfly. Moreover, since the transfers are made to an individual shareholder, the transfers will not be part of the "distribution" for the purposes of subsection 55(1). Further, since DC will be related to each Holdco after the reorganization, paragraphs 55(3.1)(c) and (d) will not be applicable.

Technical Interpretation - External

6 April 2006 External T.I. 2005-0163641E5 - Employee Malpractice Insurance

Principal Issues: Whether the cost of medical malpractice insurance that an employee is required to pay by virtue of the conditions of his or her employment, is deductible under subsection 8(1) of the Income Tax Act?

Position: Yes.

Reasons: Consistent with longstanding position of the CRA.

5 April 2006 External T.I. 2005-0145751E5 - Prescribed Prize

Unedited CRA Tags
56(1)(n)

Principal Issues: Whether the XXXXXXXXXX qualifies as a prescribed prize within the meaning of Regulation 7700

Position: Yes.

Reasons: Recognized by the general public and awarded for meritorious achievement in the sciences.

4 April 2006 External T.I. 2005-0147481E5 - Date to Determine Fair Market Value

Unedited CRA Tags
69(1)(b); 48(1); 9(1)(c); (1)(a).

Principal Issues: What is the relevant date for the determination of the fair market value of a property, which is to be sold to a non-arm's length person in a subsequent year.

Position: The FMV is to be determined on the date of disposition, which is generally the date beneficial ownership of the property is transferred.

Reasons: Paragraph 69(1)(b) deems the POD to be the FMV of the property on the date of disposition. By virtue of paragraph (e) of the definition of "disposition" in subsection 248(1) of the Act, a disposition generally does not include a transfer of property where there is no change in the beneficial ownership of the property.

31 March 2006 External T.I. 2005-0161981E5 - Deduction of Payments by Credit Union

Unedited CRA Tags
137(2) 137(4.1) 137(6) 135

Principal Issues: Whether "patronage allocations based on the equity account balance of a credit union member" would be deductible by the credit union in computing its income under either section 137 or 135 of the Income Tax Act.

Position: None. General comments only.

Reasons: Questions of fact.

29 March 2006 External T.I. 2004-0093541E5 - Section 17 and paragraph 20(1)(l)

Unedited CRA Tags
17(1) 20(1)(l)

Principal Issues: Whether subsection 17(1) would apply where interest at a reasonable rate is charged but a deduction is claimed under paragraph 20(1)(l) for the receivable in respect of such interest?

Position: Probably no, depending on a particular situation.

Reasons: Interest has been included in computing the corporation's income as described in subparagraph 17(1)(b)(i), notwithstanding the claim for the paragraph 20(1)(l) deduction.

28 March 2006 External T.I. 2005-0159941E5 - Training Expenses

Unedited CRA Tags
18(1)(b) 8(1)(i) 6(1)(a) 118.5(1)

Principal Issues: Whether the costs incurred for an individual to obtain Master's degree via distance from a university outside Canada would be considered deductible in accordance with IT 357R2.

Position: No

Reasons: Costs of training for self-employed individuals that result in a lasting benefit are generally considered to be capital in nature and therefore not deductible by virtue of paragraphs 18(1)(b).

22 March 2006 External T.I. 2005-0131231E5 F - Perte et avantage au titre du logement

Unedited CRA Tags
6(1)a) 6 (19) 6(21)
“at any time” is intended to accord flexibility as to when the housing loss is computed

Principales Questions:
À quel moment donné doit-on calculer la perte relative au logement selon le paragraphe 6(21) de la Loi?

Position Adoptée:
Il s'agit d'un terme très général. Peut-être à peu près n'importe quand selon la situation présentée.

Raisons:
Le libellé du paragraphe 6(21) n'apporte aucune précision quant à l'expression " moment donné ". Nous croyons que l'intention était de laisser une certaine flexibilité au contribuable de manière à ce que l'on puisse effectuer le calcul de la perte, proposé à ce paragraphe, à un moment quelconque où il est raisonnable de le faire.

16 March 2006 External T.I. 2005-0144881E5 - Qualified Farm Property 110.6(1)

Unedited CRA Tags
110.6(1)

Principal Issues: The individual's father owned land that he farmed on a full-time basis for approximately XXXXXXXXXX years until he ceased farming operations in XXXXXXXXXX . The land has been rented out on a crop share basis ever since. Upon her father's death in XXXXXXXXXX , the individual's mother inherited the land but she did not farm the land. Upon her mother's death in XXXXXXXXXX , the individual inherited the land but she also, has not farmed the land. Issue is whether in this situation, the person who meets the gross revenue test contained in paragraph 110.6(1)(vi) of the definition of "qualified farm property" can be the father of the individual.

Position: Yes.

Reasons: There has been no break in the continuous ownership of the property among qualified persons. If the father has met the gross revenue test in at least two years and the property is transferred to the mother, who later transfers the property to the child, the requirements of clause (a)(vi)(A) of the definition of qualified farm property in subsection 110.6(1) of the Income Tax Act may be met for the child, even though the mother never farmed the property, and the child has not farmed the property. In respect of the individual taxpayer's father, whether the real property was used principally by him in carrying on a farming business, whether he was actively engaged in the farming business on a regular and continuous basis, and whether his particular operation would constitute a farming business at any particular time are all questions of fact that would have to be determined.

16 March 2006 External T.I. 2005-0133301E5 F - Arrérages pension alimentaire reçus par succession

Unedited CRA Tags
56(1)b) 60 b)

Principales Questions: 1. Quel est le traitement fiscal d'une somme reçue par une succession en règlement des arrérages de pension alimentaire?
2. Est-ce que les frais juridiques encourus par la succession sont déductibles?

Position Adoptée: 1. Non déductible par le payeur; non imposable pour la succession;
2. Les frais juridiques ne sont pas déductibles.

Raisons: 1. Le paiement ne remplit pas la définition de pension alimentaire selon le paragraphe 56.1(4) de la loi;
2. En l'absence d'une disposition précise dans la Loi concernant les frais juridiques, comme les alinéas 8(1)b) ou 60 o.1), ces frais ne sont déductibles que dans la mesure où ils sont engagés en vue de tirer un revenu d'une entreprise ou d'un bien et qu'ils ne sont pas des dépenses de nature capitale.

16 March 2006 External T.I. 2005-0142401E5 - Child Support - Deceased payee

Unedited CRA Tags
56(1)(b) 60(b) 56.1(4)

Principal Issues: Whether payments being received by the taxpayer/guardian (sister of deceased former spouse/mother) from the father and the stepfather of a child would be taxable in the hands of the taxpayer.

Position: No.

Reasons: There is no written agreement or order of a competent tribunal under which the taxpayer is named as recipient, and under which the father or the stepfather is directed to make support payments to the taxpayer. The voluntary payments would not constitute a "support amount" as defined under subsection 56.1(4) of the Act. In this particular case, no portion of the amount received by the taxpayer would be considered income in her hands.

Technical Interpretation - Internal

30 March 2006 Internal T.I. 2005-0156181I7 - Conversion of inventory to capital property

Unedited CRA Tags
9 248(1) 54

Principal Issues: An automobile dealership acquires vehicles for sale and places them in inventory. Clients may also select vehicles from this inventory for lease. No separate division for leased assets is kept by the auto dealership. Is there a conversion of the leased asset from inventory to capital asset?

Position: Previous position in IT-102R2 and other Rulings interpretations

Reasons: See paragraphs 4 and 6 of IT-102R2

29 March 2006 Internal T.I. 2006-0171171I7 F - Convention de retraite

Unedited CRA Tags
67 248(1)
plan was not an RCA because benefits were unreasonable
application of a version of the Gabco test

Principales Questions: (1) Est-ce que le régime mis en place pour verser des prestations à des dirigeants de la Société est une convention de retraite?(2) Est-ce que les sommes versées à la fiducie régie par ce régime sont déductibles dans le calcul du revenu de la Société?

Position Adoptée: (1) Non.(2) Non.

Raisons: (1) Les bénéfices à être versés ne seraient pas raisonnables dans les circonstances. Position énoncée lors des congrès 2005 de l'APFF et du CTF. (2) Les sommes versées ne l'ont pas été pour gagner un revenu. De plus, ces sommes ne sont pas raisonnables. Il faut établir ce qu'un homme d'affaire raisonnable aurait accepté de payer en ayant en tête uniquement les intérêts de la société. Quand on évalue le caractère raisonnable d'une dépense, il faut rechercher un élément objectif

28 March 2006 Internal T.I. 2006-0172361I7 - Canadian resource property

Unedited CRA Tags
66(15) 66.4(5) 66.2(5) 59(3.2)(c)

Principal Issues: tax treatment of amounts received as consideration for entering into a petroleum and natural gas lease

Position: disposition of Canadian resource property that should be credited to taxpayer's CCOGPE account

Reasons: review of terms of lease and relevant legislation

28 March 2006 Internal T.I. 2005-0109761I7 F - Commandite reçue par une athlète

Unedited CRA Tags
5 9 56(1)n)
sponsorship received by amateur student athlete was not from a source of income

Principales Questions: (1) Quel traitement fiscal l'Agence du revenu du Canada doit-elle accorder à une commandite de XXXXXXXXXX $ reçue en XXXXXXXXXX par une athlète?
(2) Cette athlète peut-elle réclamer une perte d'entreprise découlant de son activité sportive?

Position Adoptée: (1) Dans le cas présent, la commandite est non imposable.
(2) Non.

Raisons: Puisque l'activité exercée par l'athlète semble comporter un aspect personnel, il est nécessaire que l'activité soit exercée de façon suffisamment commerciale. Si tel n'est pas le cas, l'Agence du revenu du Canada ne peut conclure à l'existence d'une source de revenu.

28 March 2006 Internal T.I. 2005-0151711I7 F - Récompense visée par règlement

Unedited CRA Tags
56(1)n) Reg. 7700
prize to award excellence in teaching materials was a prescribed prize

Principales Questions: Est-ce que un des prix décernés lors du concours des Prix du ministre de l'Éducation du Québec remis en XXXXXXXXXX était une récompense visée à l'article 7700 du Règlement de l'impôt sur le revenu?

Position Adoptée: Oui.

Raisons: 1. Il s'agit d'une récompense. 2. Le prix est reconnu par le public car il est décerné par le Ministre de L'Éducation et aussi en raison du fait que le concours est ouvert à tous les membres du personnel d'un établissement d'enseignement collégial québécois. En plus, le site Web du gouvernement provincial en fait la promotion et des communiqués de presse ont annoncé les lauréats du concours. 3. L'œuvre méritoire a été réalisée dans le domaine XXXXXXXXXX . 4. Selon les renseignements fournis, le prix de 5 000 $ n'est pas un montant décerné en échange de services rendus ou à rendre.