Why a business owner who paid himself dividends got into trouble with the CRA

  • 📰 fpinvesting
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 41 sec. here
  • 2 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 20%
  • Publisher: 63%

Belgique Nouvelles Nouvelles

Belgique Dernières Nouvelles,Belgique Actualités

The Canada Revenue Agency doesn\u0027t consider a dividend a legal remuneration, which can have severe implications. Jamie Golombek explains.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.Section 160, also known as the “joint liability rule,” gives the CRA the power to hold an individual liable for the tax debts of someone with whom they have a non-arm’s length relationship if they’ve been involved in a transaction seen to avoid tax.

Four criteria must be met for the CRA to successfully win a joint-liability assessment: there must have been a transfer of property; the transferor and the transferee must not have been dealing at arm’s length; there must not have been adequate consideration paid by the transferee to the transferor; and the transferor must have had an outstandingThis advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Three of the four section 160 criteria listed above were clearly met, but the taxpayer and the CRA disagreed as to whether or not the taxpayer provided consideration for the property transferred to him by the corporation and, if so, whether the fair market value of that consideration exceeded the fair market value of the property transferred to him.Article content

 

Merci pour votre commentaire. Votre commentaire sera publié après examen.
Nous avons résumé cette actualité afin que vous puissiez la lire rapidement. Si l'actualité vous intéresse, vous pouvez lire le texte intégral ici. Lire la suite:

 /  🏆 43. in BE

Belgique Dernières Nouvelles, Belgique Actualités