Guilty pleas and the Tax Court

James Rhodes, in a recent post on the Canadian Tax Professionals group on LinkedIn, drew our attention to McIntrye v R, 2014 TCC 111, in which Justice Diane Campbell, among other things, found that the CRA was not bound by an agreed statement of facts (ASF) arrived at as part of a plea bargain and that the CRA, in assessing the taxpayers, was not required to make assumptions that were consistent with the ASF.

Politics and taxes

Sometimes clients with a tax problem will ask whether it would help to have an MP or MPP write to the CRA or the Department of Justice on their behalf. In my experience, MPs and MPPs will almost always refuse, more or less politely, to get involved. It appears that John Duncan agreed to “help out”. He has now resigned from Cabinet as a result.

Don’t assume …

In the Tax Court of Canada, the onus is on the taxpayer to prove the facts on which he or she relies in appealing from a reassessment. Usually, the taxpayer is the party who must “carry the ball”. That doesn’t mean, however, that the government can sit back and do nothing, at least according to Justice Webb in Brewster v R, 2012 TCC 187.

Access to information

PWC has just published a good Tax Memo (2012-27) on taxpayer access to audit and appeals reports and other documents generated by the CRA in the course of issuing a reassessment. I found helpful the references to P-148 and CRA technical interpretation 2011-0403751C6 regarding what the CRA should provide without the taxpayer having to make an access request.