In Deakin v R, 2012 TCC 270, the taxpayers had been assessed as directors for the failure of a corporation to remit income tax and GST source deductions. It appears that the taxpayers chose to have the corporation use what it had withheld to keep its business afloat rather than remit the money as required by the Income Tax Act (Canada) and the Excise Tax Act (Canada) (¶ 8).
Questions for the CRA
I will be co-chairing the CRA Tax Administration Panel on the second day of the CTF Ontario Conference (on Tuesday, October 30). If you have any burning questions for the CRA that you’d like to have answered, please send them…
Making it easier to collect
Canada v. Barrett, 2012 FCA 33, is an interesting companion to Madison v R, 2012 FCA 80 (discussed here). The upshot of Barrett is that the CRA need not undertake reasonable collection efforts against a corporation before assessing one of…
ATIP problems
The Taxpayers’ Ombudsman has released a report on the CRA access to information program (“ATIP”). The report reads in part as follows:
No fairness for you
In Gallant v R, 2012 TCC 119, the taxpayer filed returns for his 2006 and 2007 taxation years and claimed tuition tax credits, which he calculated in accordance with Schedule 11 to the T1. Unfortunately, Schedule 11 did not get…
Settlement
Taylor v R, 2012 FCA 148, is an interesting case on the enforceability of a settlement or whether the settlement prevented the taxpayer from appealing the reassessments in question to the Tax Court.
Checklists
Some time ago, I read The Checklist Manifesto, and since then I’ve implemented a number of checklists in my practice. I’d like to do more of them because I find them so useful. The trick of course, is to find…
Family break-ups
I presented “Breaking Up Is Taxing To Do: Tax Issues When Couples Divide Property” at the CRA’s Tax Practitioner’s Consultation Group meeting at the Royal Botanical Gardens today. Click here for a copy of my presentation.
Reason and the T1135?
The Tax Court has vacated penalties for failing to file a T1135 on time for a year where tax was otherwise not payable. See Douglas v R, 2012 TCC 73, a decision of Justice Woods under the informal procedure.
Savoy Now Somewhat Shabby
I wrote here about Savoy v R, 2011 TCC 35. The Federal Court of Appeal recently concluded that Savoy was wrongly decided on the question of what the Minister must do to satisfy the requirements of subsection 227.1(2) where a…