It’s not often that a CRA audit makes headlines: Canada Revenue probe focuses on some RBC DS clients.
Retail Loses Again
Taxpayers who participated in ‘retail’ donation tax shelters continue to fare poorly in the Tax Court. See Maréchaux v. The Queen, 2009 TCC 587.
Triangles
Don’t forget the triangular amalgamation. While these types of amalgamations are more typical in the public company context, they can be a useful tool for private company deals too.
Eligible Dividends
Last week, I gave a presentation for the Hamilton Law Association on eligible dividends at its annual Corporate Commercial update. You can find a copy of a sample resolution for eligible dividends here. Use at your own risk!
Zapper
The CRA is attempting to hunt down store owners who install software that “suppresses” records of cash sales made through a cash register. Maybe that’s an argument for making a voluntary disclosure now. Visit the taxman before he visits you.
Tax for Trusts
The following article will appear in an upcoming edition of the Hamilton Law Association Law Journal.
Freeze Shares
The following article appeared in the latest edition of the Hamilton Law Association Law Journal.
Records
The latest edition of Taylor Leibow‘s Business Matters has an interesting article about record-keeping and the preparation of death returns. The article points out that poor record-keeping can be problematic in a tax system that expects taxpayers to prove they…
Valuation redux
In a post I wrote about a year ago, I complained about the CRA’s then-recent pronouncements on control premiums. The CRA, at the most recent Canadian Tax Foundation BC Conference, recanted this position, at least in part, as follows:
Space oddity
In Payette v. The Queen, 2009 TCC 348, the taxpayer, a retired accountant, was attempting to develop a novel propulsion system for interstellar exploration. He claimed business expenses and SRED tax credits for his efforts. The Minister was skeptical, perhaps because ‘Mr. Payette was able to prove the concept worked “to my satisfaction but not to anyone else’s”‘. Indeed, the Canadian Space Agency found the following, according to the Court: