2 total
GAAR does not apply to disallow non-capital losses where de jure control was not acquired.
The Minister reassessed the appellant under the General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR) to disallow the deduction of non-capital losses from prior years.
The Minister argued that the appellant's restructuring circumvented the loss restriction rules in subsection 111(5) of the Income Tax Act by avoiding an acquisition of de jure control while transferring effective control.
The Tax Court of Canada allowed the appeal, finding that the object, spirit, and purpose of subsection 111(5) relies on the bright-line test of de jure control.
Since there was no acquisition of de jure control, the transactions did not abuse the provision, and the GAAR did not apply.
Application for judicial review dismissed; OMDC's decision that website's primary purpose was marketing was reasonable.
The applicant sought judicial review of a decision by the Ontario Media Development Corporation (OMDC) finding its interactive digital media product ineligible for a certificate.
The OMDC determined the primary purpose of the applicant's website was marketing and promotion, rather than to educate, inform, or entertain.
The Divisional Court applied a reasonableness standard of review and upheld the decision, finding it fell within the OMDC's specialized expertise.
The court also dismissed the applicant's argument that the OMDC breached procedural fairness by failing to disclose a 2004 opinion, noting the administrative nature of the decision and the extensive prior communications between the parties.
