Limit on the right of appeal

In Skinner v. The Queen, 2009 TCC 269, the taxpayer had reported as income in 2001 a large shareholder loan that had not been repaid. In 2002, the taxpayer attempted to deduct the amount previously included in income because the shareholder loan had been repaid. The Minister reassessed to reduce the taxpayer’s income in 2001 by reversing the inclusion for the shareholder loan. The Minister also reassessed to deny the deduction in 2002 because, after giving effect to the reassessment for 2001, the requirements of paragraph 20(1)(j) had not been met. The taxpayer appealed to the Tax Court of Canada, but the appeal was dismissed essentially on procedural grounds.

ABILs

Given the economic climate, it’s not surprising that we are receiving a lot questions about allowable business investment losses (ABILs). Nor is it surprising that many taxpayers find it difficult to claim ABILs, given the many pitfalls.

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:

Justice

It’s hard educating clients about the tax system and what they’re up against when disputing assessments. Clients will often complain not just about the assessments they are fighting but the attitude of the auditor, the delays caused by the CRA and the unfairness inherent in a tax system that only a very few understand really well. The taxpayers in Lauger v. The Queen, 2007 TCC 650, brought these complaints to Tax Court with them and asked the Court to do the Right Thing. To which the Court, in dismissing the appeals, responded “I must decide whether the assessments are well-founded or not”.