Spencer Landsiedel

The Appellants brought a Rule 58 application to determine a question of law regarding the timing of when two corporations are considered "connected" for the purposes of Part IV tax under paragraph 186(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, in circumstances where a trust designates a taxable dividend to a corporate beneficiary under subsection 104(19).

The Tax Court held that the determination of whether the payer corporation is connected with the beneficiary is made at the time the taxable dividend was actually received by the trust, provided the beneficiary is deemed to have received the amount in the same taxation year.

If deemed received in a subsequent taxation year, the determination is made in that subsequent year.

The Appellant, a Crown corporation operating a ferry service, appealed GST/HST reassessments for reporting periods between 2006 and 2012.

The issue was the Appellant's entitlement to input tax credits for property and services used in its commercial activities, which involved both taxable and exempt supplies.

The Tax Court found that the Appellant's space-based allocation methodology was fair and reasonable, allowing the appeals and referring the reassessments back to the Minister for reconsideration based on the Appellant's calculated percentages.

The appellant appealed a determination by the Minister of National Revenue that a worker was engaged in insurable and pensionable employment.

The appellant argued the worker was an independent contractor.

Applying the Connor Homes two-step test, the Tax Court found that while the parties intended an independent contractor relationship, the objective reality—including the payer's control, provision of tools, and lack of financial risk for the worker—demonstrated an employer-employee relationship.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant credit union appealed assessments requiring it to collect and remit GST on fees received for services provided to mutual fund and securities dealers.

The Tax Court of Canada allowed the appeal, finding that the services provided were not merely preparatory in nature.

The predominant element of the single compound supply was arranging for the sale of financial instruments, which qualifies as an exempt financial service under the Excise Tax Act.

The appellant, K&D Logging Ltd., appealed reassessments of its 2005 and 2006 taxation years denying deductions claimed under subsection 20(21) of the Income Tax Act.

The appellant had advanced funds to a non-resident corporation in 1996 and annually reported interest income based on prescribed rates, despite the loan agreement not specifying an interest rate.

When the loan was repaid in 2006, the appellant claimed deductions for the unpaid interest it had previously reported.

The Tax Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, finding that because the loan was interest-free, the amounts reported were properly characterized as imputed income under subsection 17(1) of the Act, and therefore subsection 20(21) did not apply to permit a deduction.