De facto arm’s length

Marissa Halil and Manu Kakkar, “Section 84.1 and Factual Non-Arm’s-Length Considered” Tax for the Owner-Manager 17:1 (January 2017) summarizes Poulin v R, 2016 TCC 154, in which the Court held that conflict between parties and hard bargaining does not mean that they deal at arm’s length with respect to a particular transaction. Rather, the questions are whether the parties had separate interests in the transaction and whether they dealt with each other on ordinary commercial terms in respect of it.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email