Canada: Teletech Canada, Inc. V. Minister Of National Revenue – Transfer Pricing Dispute Resolution Gone Wrong

Last Updated: October 23 2013
Article by Melissa Wright

The recent decision of the Federal Court in TeleTech Canada, Inc. v. Minister of National Revenue ("TeleTech") 1 reminds all taxpayers dealing with transfer pricing adjustments of the strict procedural requirements for initiating a request for competent authority relief under the Canada-U.S. Tax Convention (the "Treaty"), and of the domestic remedies that may be available to facilitate the process.

Article IX of the Treaty and the Mutual Agreement Procedure ("MAP") under Article XXVI of the Treaty provide relief to taxpayers where the actions of one or both governments have resulted in taxation not in accordance with the Treaty.  They allow Canada or the U.S. to make corresponding adjustments, resolve Treaty-based disputes themselves or, where applicable, submit matters to binding arbitration.  These Treaty-based and domestic procedures must be carefully and diligently pursued.

TeleTech illustrates the discretion of the Canada Revenue Agency (the "CRA") to deny a request for competent authority assistance.  While TeleTech raises several important issues, this article will focus on the Federal Court's consideration of the potential availability of the extraordinary remedy of mandamus to compel the CRA to accept a taxpayer's request for competent authority assistance.


TeleTech Canada Inc., ("TeleTech Canada"), a wholly-owned subsidiary of TeleTech Holdings Inc. ("TeleTech Global U.S.") (collectively "the Companies"), was involved in the call-centre business.  The Companies underwent a corporate restructuring in 2000 whereby TeleTech Canada became a subcontractor of TeleTech U.S., with the latter providing administrative services to the former.  The pricing of such administrative services was central to the transfer pricing disagreement between TeleTech Canada and the CRA.

According to the taxpayer, certain internal accounting errors were made in the Companies' respective tax filings relating to the pricing of the inter-corporate administrative services and allocation of income between the two countries.  The result was an over-reporting of income for Canadian tax purposes and under-reporting of income for U.S. tax purposes for the 2000-2002 taxation years.2  A transfer pricing study was commissioned by TeleTech U.S. in 2003 to confirm the appropriateness of the revised pricing.

The Companies unilaterally took steps to retroactively reallocate income between TeleTech Canada and TeleTech U.S. by filing amended U.S. tax returns to reflect the revised pricing, requesting a downward adjustment to TeleTech Canada's operating profits, and by initiating requests for competent authority assistance for relief from double taxation.

The key events in TeleTech relevant to the mandamus issue are as follows:

Up to March 2006 - TeleTech U.S. filed amended U.S. tax returns resulting in an upward adjustment of income and sent a request to the IRS for relief under the Treaty from double taxation in the amount of USD $38.3 million.

May 11, 2006 - TeleTech Canada filed a request with the CRA for competent authority assistance (the "First Request") seeking relief from double taxation.

November 10, 2006 - The CRA denied the request (the "First Denial Letter") on the basis that an action by the CRA or IRS that resulted in double taxation was not present.  Had the request been accepted, it may have resulted in a refund being payable to TeleTech Canada in the range of USD $10-12 million.  The CRA advised in the First Denial Letter that it would reconsider its position in the event of future compliance activity by the CRA or the IRS.

December 13, 2006 - The CRA received a letter from the IRS (the "IRS Letter") advising that the IRS had "ultimately assessed" the amended tax returns as filed and therefore actions taken by the CRA and IRS had resulted in double taxation.  The IRS invited the CRA to participate in a MAP.  The CRA did not respond to the IRS Letter and did not notify the Companies of its receipt.

July 2008 - Following an audit, the IRS adjusted TeleTech U.S.' 2001 and 2002 returns resulting in an increase of gross income for both years by a total of USD $11,239,230.  The Companies did not inform the CRA of the results of the audit at this time.

December 17, 2009 - TeleTech Canada submitted a supplemental request to the CRA for competent authority assistance (the "Second Request") and advised of the outcome of the IRS audit.

May 11, 2011 - TeleTech Canada commenced the application for judicial review that was the subject matter of the current case.  This application was commenced on the belief that the CRA was refusing to consider the Second Request.  The application sought an order for mandamus from the Federal Court which, if granted, would compel the CRA to decide TeleTech Canada's application for competent authority assistance.  On consent, the application for judicial review was held in abeyance pending the CRA's determination of the Second Request.  The CRA ultimately denied TeleTech Canada's request (the "Second Denial Letter") on the basis that it had not received notification as required by the Treaty within six years from the end of the taxation years in issue and that TeleTech Canada's tax returns were statute barred from reassessment.

The Availability of Mandamus to Compel the Minister to Accept the Request

For taxpayers, the procedures and deadlines for judicial review depend on whether a taxpayer disagrees with a decision that the CRA has made or if the CRA is refusing to make a decision.  A mandamus order, which compels performance of a legal duty (i.e. compelling a decision to be made), is an extraordinary remedy not subject to any time limitation.  In contrast, to challenge a decision or order that has already been made by judicial review, an application for judicial review seeking certiorari must be filed within thirty days from the date the decision was made.  Generally, if a reviewable error has been committed in reaching a decision and certiorari is granted, the decision or order will be quashed or set aside and the parties restored to their original position.  As such, the Court should be within its jurisdiction to grant an order of mandamus compelling the CRA to consider a taxpayer's request for competent authority assistance.

At the Federal Court, TeleTech Canada argued that the CRA's actions were a continuing refusal to consider its request.  Madam Justice Mactavish disagreed and found that two discrete decisions were made by the First Denial Letter and Second Denial Letter and that each was subject to the thirty-day time limitation.  In her reasoning she emphasized two points.  Firstly, the timing for bringing the application for judicial review application, which was after the Second Request and before the CRA issued its Second Denial Letter.  Secondly, that TeleTech Canada was not seeking a determination by the CRA, but rather a specific outcome (i.e. that the CRA accept its request for competent authority assistance).  Jurisprudence has generally established that mandamus will not be granted to compel a specific decision or outcome where decision-making power is discretionary, as it was in this case under Article IX (1) and (3) of the Treaty.3  Consequently, the application was dismissed.

Seeking a mandamus order by framing the CRA's behaviour as "continuing conduct", and therefore a continuing failure to act rather than a decision not to act, was likely an attempt to bring the application for judicial review under the six-year limitation period contained in Article IX (3) of the Treaty.  The Federal Court noted that TeleTech U.S. may still seek relief from the IRS through Article IX (4) of the Treaty which provides an exception to the six-year limitation rule provided in paragraph (3).  However, the relief granted under paragraph (4), which is not obligatory, would only allow the IRS to grant unilateral relief from double taxation.  In other words, to withdraw the U.S. adjustment to the extent that it would give rise to double taxation.

TeleTech Canada's Application for Judicial Review held to be a Collateral Attack

The Federal Court found that TeleTech Canada's arguments amounted to a collateral attack of a prior decision (e.g. challenging the correctness of a decision through subsequent proceedings that do not have as their target the validity of the relevant decision or action).  Two discrete decisions in relation to the First Request and Second Request were made; each subject to the thirty-day limitation.  TeleTech Canada failed to challenge the First Denial Letter or Second Denial Letter by way of judicial review within the prescribed time limit and, in light of this, the Federal Court did not find in the taxpayer's favour.

Procedural Fairness and Legitimate Expectation

The Federal Court noted that no argument was advanced regarding a breach of procedural fairness or that the First Denial Letter created a legitimate expectation on TeleTech Canada's part that a process would be followed.4

The doctrine of legitimate expectation has been recognized as a means to help the Court determine whether the procedures that were followed by the administrative decision maker respected the common law duty of fairness in the particular circumstances. 5  Legitimate expectations of procedures can arise from assurances or promises of public officials.  The statement in the First Denial Letter that the CRA would reconsider its position in the event of future compliance activity arguably could be seen to have created such a legitimate expectation of procedure in this instance.

It is speculative to postulate whether the argument that the CRA contravened its promise to reconsider would have produced a different outcome for the taxpayer, or whether there were other strategic or legal considerations at play.  However, the fact that the Federal Court itself raised the possibility of this argument suggests that it may have been persuasive in the present circumstances and that the taxpayer may have had success with such an argument in crafting its judicial review application.


1 2013 FC 572.

2 It should be noted that the 2000 taxation year was not at issue in the application for judicial review.

3 Supra note 1 at para. 61.

4 Supra note 1 at para. 70.

5 See Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1992] 2 S.C.R. 817 at para. 28.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.