John A. Sorensen

The appellant appealed the denial of a GST/HST New Housing Rebate for a property co-purchased with a friend.

The Minister denied the rebate on the basis that the co-purchaser did not acquire the property for use as his primary place of residence.

The Tax Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant's prior inconsistent statements to the CRA undermined his credibility and established that the co-purchaser was merely a co-signer for mortgage purposes.

The appellant appealed the Minister's reassessment denying its scientific research and experimental development (SR&ED) tax credit for its 2017 taxation year.

The appellant claimed its work on a mobile roller-compacted concrete project constituted experimental development.

The Tax Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant's activities did not meet the criteria for experimental development under the Northwest Hydraulic framework, as there was no technological uncertainty that could not be resolved by routine engineering, no formal hypotheses were tested, and the work consisted primarily of trial and error rather than the scientific method.

The appellant, a commission salesperson at Holt Renfrew, sought to deduct luxury clothing and home office expenses for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 taxation years.

The employer refused to issue a Form T2200, stating she was not required to incur these expenses as a condition of employment.

The Tax Court of Canada dismissed the appeals, finding no express or implied contractual requirement for the appellant to incur the disputed expenses, and further noting the lack of documentary evidence to substantiate the amounts claimed.

The appellants purchased a pre-construction home and made RRSP withdrawals under the Home Buyers Plan in 2021 and 2022.

The Minister assessed the 2022 withdrawals as income, arguing there were insufficient funds in the RRSPs at the end of 2021 to apply the deeming rule in s. 146.01(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act.

The Tax Court allowed the appeals, holding that the deeming rule creates a legal fiction unconstrained by the actual year-end account balance, and referred the assessments back to the Minister.

The appellant appealed the Minister's assessment denying charitable donation credits claimed for the 2007 taxation year in connection with the Global Learning and Gifting Initiative (GLGI) leveraged donation scheme.

The Tax Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant lacked donative intent and was wilfully blind to the fiscal realities of the scheme.

The Court also rejected the appellant's arguments regarding the validity of the trust, the CRA's duty to warn, and allegations of systemic racism and harassment, noting it lacked jurisdiction over several of these claims.

The appellant brought a motion to transfer its appeal regarding Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) determinations from the Informal Procedure to the General Procedure.

The appellant argued that the cumulative disputed amount exceeded the monetary limit for the Informal Procedure.

The Tax Court of Canada held that CEWS determinations are made for each qualifying period individually, and the monetary limit under section 2.1 of the Tax Court of Canada Act applies per period, not cumulatively.

As each disputed amount was below $25,000, the appellant's election for the Informal Procedure was binding.

The motion was dismissed.