Élise Rivest

The appellant appealed assessments for unpaid employment insurance premiums and penalties for the 2013-2015 period.

The Minister determined that the appellant's workers, who provided merchandising and display assembly services, were engaged in insurable employment under contracts of service.

The Tax Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, finding that despite the parties' subjective intention to create independent contractor relationships, the appellant and its clients exercised significant direction and control over the workers, establishing a relationship of legal subordination.

The Court also found that non-arm's length workers were deemed to deal at arm's length as they worked under substantially similar conditions.

Finally, the Court upheld the penalties for failing to remit premiums, as the appellant failed to establish a due diligence defence.

The appellants were directors of a logging corporation that failed to remit employee source deductions and net HST.

Following the loss of its primary logging and road-maintenance contracts, the corporation experienced severe financial hardship.

The directors liquidated personal assets to pay the corporation's commercial creditors but failed to satisfy its tax obligations.

The Minister assessed the directors for the unremitted amounts under the Income Tax Act and the Excise Tax Act.

On appeal, the Tax Court of Canada dismissed the appeals, finding that the directors failed to establish the due diligence defence.

The Court held that the directors' actions were curative rather than preventative, and that they had impermissibly financed the corporation's operations using unremitted Crown funds.