Yesterday, Ontario published the regulation that prescribes who can own shares of professional corporations (PCs) controlled by doctors and dentists — see Ontario Regulation 665/05 under the Business Corporations Act (Ontario). (more…)
Rajah v. The Queen, 2005 TCC 637 is not a case that breaks new ground, legally, but it serves as a useful reminder — expressed with the usual clarity and concision that one finds in Mr Justice Bonner’s decisions — that (1) the key question in any dispute about an assessment of tax is whether it is too high; (2) the taxpayer bears the onus of proving that the assessment is too high; and (3) the taxpayer cannot rely on information (supposedly) obtained from the CRA, especially if it is obtained from a nameless agent contacted through the CRA’s 800 number. (more…)
Bill 197, “An Act to Implement Budget Measures”, received Royal Assent last Monday. As a result, after 2005 the Lieutenant Governor in Council can make regulations that will permit the family members of doctors and dentists to hold shares of their professional corporations.
It appears that the government still has not released any details about the rules that will govern family-member shareholders. In particular, regulations have not been released yet, and so it remains unclear whether, for example, family members will be able to hold shares through a trust. Rumour has it that the government has promised to have the regulations in place by January 1, 2006.
Over the last decade or so, thousands have reduced their tax bills by millions of dollars by purchasing prints, paintings, comic books, medical supplies and other items at one price and then donating the items to a charity at another, higher price. The CRA has aggressively attacked these donation arrangements to try to claw back the tax. Will it succeed? It might, if Canada (Attorney General) v. Nash, 2005 FCA 386, is any indication. (more…)
