Canada: Successful Québec Shuffle - Inter-Provincial Tax Planning Is Alive And Well

Last Updated: February 10 2017
Article by A. Brent Kerr and Braden Lauer

Most Read Contributor in Canada, October 2018

The British Columbia Court of Appeal recently released its judgment in Veracity Capital Corporation v. Canada (National Revenue), 2017 BCCA 3, holding that a tax planning structure commonly referred to as the Québec year-end shuffle did not constitute an avoidance transaction for purposes of the British Columbia general anti-avoidance rule (the “BC GAAR”). This is the first appellate level case addressing a provincial general anti-avoidance rule in Canada.

The Court followed the spirit of the jurisprudence surrounding the application of the federal general anti-avoidance rule: (1) not all loopholes or plans to avoid tax are ipso facto abusive, and (2) our taxation regime is not a harmonious scheme, rather it is a patchwork where provinces have the power to legislate as they please. The Court concluded that taking advantage of the differences between provincial rules to avoid taxation is not on its face abusive tax planning.

Background

In July 2002, in an attempt to avoid most of the B.C. tax on a capital gain that would otherwise apply to a share sale, the shareholders of a company transferred their shares on a rollover basis to a new company (“Veracity”) under s. 85(1) of the Income Tax Act, RSC 1985, c.1 (5th Supp.) (the “federal Act”). In Québec, Veracity had a taxation year ending on August 31, 2002, whereas in B.C. and federally, Veracity had a taxation year ending on June 30, 2003. In order to allocate 100% of the taxable capital gain resulting from the sale of the shares to B.C. for the purposes of the first year-end in Québec, small directors’ fees were paid to the B.C. resident directors in July 2002. After the Québec year-end passed, Veracity purchased units of a listed limited partnership in Québec with a September 30 year end, so that as at September 30, 2002 a pro rata portion of the gross revenues and salary expense of the limited partnership would be allocated to Veracity in its capacity as unit-holder. The result under the inter-provincial allocation rules was that approximately 90% of the taxable capital gain from the sale of the shares was allocated to Québec in respect of the second year-end in B.C. This allocation resulted in the avoidance of $1,175,249 of tax on the taxable capital gain that would otherwise have been taxed in B.C.

The Minister of National Revenue reassessed Veracity for BC provincial tax on its taxable capital gain on the basis that the transactions Veracity undertook to lower its tax liability constituted abusive tax avoidance. The Supreme Court of British Columbia affirmed the Minister’s reassessment in 2015, finding that the B.C. GAAR, as set out in s. 68.1 of the Income Tax Act, RSBC 1996, c. 215 (the “BC Act”) applied to all aspects of the transaction and the relevant tax provisions were abused:

  • The rollover rules were abused because they are intended to facilitate a deferral of tax, not an avoidance of tax;
  • The rules allocating income between provinces were abused because they were “designed to prevent both the over-taxation and the under-taxation of income earned by a corporation which is active in more than one province.” They were not designed to allow a corporation to escape any provincial taxation on that income; and
  • The choice of differing year ends was an abuse because the various provisions in the BC Act, the Québec statute, and the federal Act “did not contemplate taxpayers using different year ends in different jurisdictions for the same income in the same year. Shuffling the year end dates to avoid taxes is an abuse.”

The overriding disposition of the trial court decision was highlighted in its observation that “this is a simple case of a tax not being paid anywhere which ought to have been paid somewhere.” The Court of Appeal strongly disagreed with this statement.

The Court of Appeal’s Decision

The appeal by Veracity to the BCCA was allowed and the tax reassessment by the Minister was set aside.

In discussing the BC GAAR, the Court noted that GAAR provisions are included in federal and provincial income tax statutes to achieve the effect of denying a taxpayer any “tax benefit”, despite the taxpayer having strictly complied with the letter of the statutory provisions in question, where the tax planning is abusive. The jurisprudence has outlined a three step GAAR analysis, but Veracity conceded the first two steps: (1) that their Québec Shuffle created a tax benefit, and (2) that it was not primarily undertaken for bona fide non-tax purposes. As a result, the appeal depended critically on the third step of the GAAR analysis, that is, whether the appellant’s tax avoidance transactions directly or indirectly misused or abused any provisions to which the BC GAAR applied. The Minister had to clearly demonstrate that the transaction resulted in an abuse. The benefit of the doubt is to be given to the taxpayer (Canada Trustco Mortgage Co v Canada, 2005 SCC 54, [2005] 2SCR 601 at para. 65).

The Court of Appeal framed the relevant issues as follows:

1) Does the B.C. GAAR apply to rollover and capital gains computing provisions under the federal Act? Did Veracity misuse or abuse these provisions?

2) Does the B.C. GAAR apply to allocation rules under the federal Act? Did Veracity misuse or abuse these provisions?

3) Does the B.C. GAAR apply to fiscal year-end provisions in various tax statutes? Did Veracity misuse or abuse these provisions?

The Court was critical of a “false premise that permeated the [lower] judge’s overall analysis: it ignored the fact there is no uniform system of provincial taxation and no “moral” or “value” judgment in determining the rationale of income tax legislation.” The Court of Appeal found that:

1) Due to drafting irregularities in the B.C. Act which limit the B.C. GAAR’s scope to the B.C. Act itself, the B.C. GAAR does not apply to corporate rollover and capital gains provisions of the federal Act. Even if these provisions did apply, the purpose object and spirit of the sections were not abused. The Court found that the trial judge erred in principle by applying the premise that taxable capital gains “ought” to have resulted in taxes being paid somewhere.

2) The B.C. GAAR applies to federal allocation rules through a legislative pathway outlined at paragraph 97 of the decision. The purpose of the allocation rules is to “provide a basis for imposing tax liability in the appropriate province.” However, once the allocation has occurred, how the provinces actually tax that income is beyond the purpose, object and spirit of the allocation rules. The Minister did not discharge its high burden of clearly demonstrating Veracity abused the Allocation rules.

3) The B.C. GAAR applies to the fiscal year-end provisions under the B.C. Act. However, the purpose of these provisions, to facilitate the regular and periodic reporting of tax results, was achieved. The Court noted that there is no uniform system of provincial taxation and “the risks of differential treatment have long been recognized.” Veracity’s positions in regards to income reported for two differing year-ends were not contradictory. Rather the reported incomes were compliant responses to two different questions about two different time periods from two different taxation authorities set out under two distinct taxation regimes. Benefitting from these differences was not abusive.

The Court noted that the underlying “loophole” used by Veracity was later closed by the Québec Legislature. This was done by removing the option for electing to have a different fiscal year-end date for Québec tax purposes.  These changes were made retroactive, but only to 2006.  Therefore, Veracity’s transactions were not “caught” by the legislative changes in Québec. The Court was critical that the Minister’s argument might effectively use the B.C. GAAR to “judicially extend” the retroactivity of Québec’s legislative amendments to 2002. The Court stated the importance of caution in respect of judicial innovation, and of being mindful of the Court’s role as distinct from that of Parliament.

Significance

This case will require tax authorities to use more discipline in applying provincial general anti-avoidance rules. The Court held that the BC GAAR does not apply to provisions in the federal Act that are not expressly incorporated into the BC Act, and identified a number of instances in which the trial judge applied the BC GAAR to statutory provisions that were not expressly incorporated into the BC Act. The factually similar Québec trial decision that was relied upon by the trial judge (OGT Holding Ltd. v Québec (Deputy Minister of Revenue), 2006 QCCQ 6328) was distinguished on the basis that, unlike Veracity, the taxpayer in OGT abused a provision of the Québec Act itself, which was within the scope of the Québec GAAR.  The Court observed that the BC Legislature had a choice in drafting the BC GAAR, and could have stipulated that it applied to the misuse or abuse of enactments other than the BC Act. The fact that the BC GAAR is essentially restricted to the BC Act does not allow the courts to add language expanding the application of the provincial GAAR when interpreting it.

The Court also held the premise that a taxable capital gain ought to have resulted in tax being paid somewhere is wrong.  The interprovincial allocation rules do not result in income disappearing, but instead leave it to the provinces to decide how to tax the income that is allocated to them.  The risk of differential treatment between the provinces has long been recognized as having the potential for anomalous results, but it is not abusive tax avoidance for a taxpayer to take the benefit of another province’s advantageous tax treatment.

The right of taxpayers to arrange their affairs to achieve a favourable tax result has been affirmed despite the existence of a provincial GAAR.

The Court summarized the position well in one of the decision’s closing paragraphs:

Legislatures do not intentionally enact loopholes, as the nomenclature implies.  This is especially the case given the well-known precision legislatures bring to tax legislation.  It would be a rare case where a loophole was contemplated by the legislature.  To conclude that transactions benefiting from a loophole are ipso facto abusive for GAAR purposes because the outcome was not the legislature’s intent would, in my view, be inconsistent with the robust and rigorous approach set out by Supreme Court jurisprudence.  Benefiting from unintended consequences from gaps in legislation is not necessarily abusive.  The legislation does not prohibit tax avoidance.  It prohibits abusive tax avoidance, and a textual, contextual and purposive analysis of the spirit, object and purpose of the provisions in each particular case must guide that inquiry. 

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 Mondaq.com.

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

Authors
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
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
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

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 or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq 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 of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions