Corollary

In Vankerk v R, 2006 FCA 96 (which I wrote about here), the Court held that a taxpayer could not deduct a loss incurred in connection with an “investment” in a business that turned out to be a fraud. A taxpayer cannot deduct a loss where there is no source of income. The corollary appears to be that a taxpayer who realizes a gain where there is no source should not be required to include the gain in income for tax purposes. In Johnson v R, 2011 TCC 540, the taxpayer was one of the lucky few to receive more than she “invested” in a Ponzi scheme. The Tax Court held that the taxpayer’s gain should not be included in the her income for tax purposes because there was no source of income.

This entry was posted in Cases. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Corollary

  1. John Loukidelis says:

    January 23, 2012 update: The Crown filed an appeal from this decision on December 23, 2011 (Federal Court of Appeal file number A-491-11).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>