Canada: Unsuccessful Interest Relief Application

Relief from interest accrual requested under the Income Tax Act (Canada) ("ITA") in a complex and protracted dispute was recently rejected in Walsh v Canada, 2017 FC 411 ("Walsh"), a judicial review ("JR") decision of the Federal Court ("FC") issued in April 2017.   The bases for the JR were that the CRA omitted to properly consider:

  • the extraordinary impact of inconsistent/contradictory assessments; and
  • the delays in advancing the tax appeal.

The underlying tax issues giving rise to the relief request began with Glenn Walsh's reliance on an aggressive tax product that was ultimately not defensible:

  • in 1998, Walsh entered into a "departure trade" assisted by CIBC;
  • in a departure trade, an interest deduction is created to reduce the income tax burden of a taxpayer who is emigrating from Canada;
  • the scheme typically works as follows – the departing taxpayer borrows substantial funds and earns deductible interest before departure; the interest is deductible because the borrowings are reinvested (with the lender); but interest earned on the investment is non-taxable in Canada because it is received after the taxpayer emigrates;
  • more specifically, in Walsh's case, the departure trade was executed as follows:
    • Walsh set up a Cayman entity ("Falcon") and CIBC also set up a Cayman entity ("Phoenix");
    • Walsh borrowed over US$690M from CIBC NY at 8.74%, which loan would mature on January 15, 1999, with the first interest payment due on December 31, 1998;
    • Walsh used the loan proceeds to purchase preferred shares of Falcon, which Falcon in turn used to purchase preferred shares of Phoenix;
    • on December 29, 1998, CIBC NY loaned Walsh over $47M to make the first interest payment;
    • a subsequent series of transactions resulted in the borrowings circling back to CIBC NY, thus, the liabilities were resolved, the Falcon shares were redeemed and Phoenix was dissolved; and
    • in his 1998 return of income, Walsh deducted over $47M for interest and carrying charges, to offset income earned through an employee profit sharing plan ("EPSP") and a taxable capital gain of more than $7M was reported on the deemed disposition of the Falcon shares.

The CRA reassessed Walsh's 1998 taxation year in October, 2002 to deny the interest deduction and increase the Falcon capital gain to over $48M.  The CRA also reassessed his 1999 taxation year to deny a loss carry-forward arising from a loss claimed in 1998.  In 2002, the CRA also reassessed corporations Walsh controlled to deny the deductions in relation to the EPSPs.  The appeals by Walsh and the corporations ended up before the Tax Court of Canada ("TCC") by June, 2004.

In 2006, a second set of personal reassessments were issued for Walsh's 1999 taxation year to include more than $54M in income from non-resident corporations after 1998, on the basis he had not ceased to be a resident of Canada in 1998 – a position not consistent with the prior reassessments.  Walsh objected to these reassessments as well.  While the inconsistent assessing position seems peculiar at first glance, it is well-established that where the facts in a case are in dispute, the CRA can adopt inconsistent positions, presumably protectively:  if one position failed and the other succeeded the CRA would then reassess accordingly.  However, the authority to take contradictory positions should not be exercised as a general rule, but rather on an exceptional basis.

The TCC appeals were held in abeyance as a similar departure trade case (Grant1) was litigated.   The second personal reassessments also caused procedural issues that were put on hold while Walsh's appeals were held back.  The taxpayer in Grant lost his appeal and the result was upheld by the Federal Court of Appeal with leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada denied in 2007.  In May, 2007, Walsh's TCC notice of appeal was amended and over approximately three years the case proceeded, before settling in April, 2010.  The settlement resulted in Walsh having a tax liability for the approximately $47M, while the CRA conceded that there would be no deemed dividend on the disposition of the Falcon shares.  The EPSP deductions were also allowed for the corporations, thereby reconciling the inconsistent/contradictory assessing positions.  Reassessments were issued to implement the settlement in July, 2010.  In December, 2012, Walsh requested interest relief in relation to 1998.  Partial interest relief was granted in July, 2013, a second administrative review was requested and the initial CRA decision was upheld in December, 2013.  Walsh applied for JR of that decision and, in November, 2014, the FC sent the matter back to the CRA for reconsideration.  That further reconsideration was not favourable, leading to the further JR application.


Inconsistent / Contradictory Reassessments

Walsh's position was that the inconsistent/contradictory reassessment2 constituted extraordinary circumstances or circumstances beyond his control, those inconsistent positions being:

  • adjustments to the proceeds for the Falcon shares in the 1998 reassessment;
  • the determination Walsh was a resident of Canada in the second 1999 reassessment; and
  • the inclusion of the EPSP amounts in Walsh's 1998 income, but the denial of the deduction for same in the corporations.

The various reassessments resulted in cumulative liabilities of over $110M.  In Walsh's submission, he had no realistic options but to wait for the TCC cases to resolve before being able to act on any of the reassessments and the extraordinarily high reassessments compared to the more moderate settlement amount represented "extraordinary circumstances".  In Walsh's submission, it was unreasonable to not consider the inconsistent/contradictory positions as "extraordinary circumstances" and the CRA always knew that only one assessing position would survive.  Further, while the CRA may be able to take inconsistent assessing positions, the CRA failed to consider the effect on Walsh. 

However, the FC pointed out that Walsh omitted to provide any evidence that he had no realistic options when faced with the inconsistent/contradictory reassessments:  the sums were large, but it was not clear that he could not pay them.  Further, according to the FC, Walsh omitted to provide the CRA with information required to properly assess, could have provided a waiver to avoid the defensive use of inconsistent/contradictory reassessments, or could have produced a settlement offer to deal with his appeals.  Thus, paying $110M was not his only reasonable option – he had others and "sticking to his guns" on the appeals was not a matter beyond his control, but rather part of his overall strategy.  Therefore, the FC found that the circumstances were not "extraordinary".

Undue Delay

Walsh also submitted that there were lengthy delays with his various appeals and that the appeals could not be separately dealt with while the CRA ran its test case (Grant).  However, the FC determined that Walsh was squarely in the category of taxpayer who failed to pay a tax debt pending a decision in a related case (as was the situation in Telfer).3  Walsh would have known that interest was accruing on any balances and the complexity of the situation and the multiple assessments were matters of Walsh's own making, which could not later be relied on to absolve him of paying accrued interest. 

The FC stated that Walsh should not have to pay interest during a period of undue delay attributable to the Crown, but in his case any abeyances were consented to by both sides and, in fact, Walsh requested timetable extensions and it took him over eight months to amend his pleadings. 


The FC found that the CRA's decision to not give interest relief was not unreasonable, thus dismissing Walsh's application.

In my view, the challenge for the taxpayer in Walsh was the effect of Telfer.  In Telfer, the taxpayer's notices of objection were held in abeyance pending the outcome of a test case.  She had been notified in writing by the CRA that interest would accrue on any unpaid balances.  The CRA refused to grant interest relief because there had been no extraordinary circumstances beyond her control and no delay per se since she agreed (or at least acquiesced) to have her objections held in abeyance and had been warned of the interest accrual issue. 

Walsh's representatives did the best with what they had:  Telfer posed a challenge and thus they sought to frame Walsh differently, relying on the "paralysis" associated with the CRA's inconsistent assessing positions and Walsh's lack of options.  The FC did not find Walsh to have been so helpless and, in many ways, the opposite – he was the author of his own misfortune because he:  did not provide enough information to the CRA to avoid inconsistent assessing positions nor did he provide a waiver; engaged in a complex set of transactions leading to complexity of assessing positions; was partially responsible for or acquiescent in the delays that caused the appeals to "drag on"; and strategically waited for the result in Grant.  One wonders if a case with more compelling facts than Walsh might succeed, where a taxpayer's options are truly limited by onerous inconsistent/contradictory assessing positions.


1 Grant v The Queen, 2006 TCC 373 ("Grant").

2 While the CRA's intention was to cover its bases rather than double tax Walsh, that was not communicated by the CRA:  in the absence of such a confirmation, Walsh had no way of knowing how the disputes might ultimately be resolved.

3 CRA v Telfer, 2009 FCA 23 ("Telfer").

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.

Events from this Firm
14 Sep 2017, Seminar, Birmingham, UK

Has Cloud replaced traditional outsourcing models? We will compare cloud to outsourcing, consider whether they have effectively become the same thing for many solutions and assess some of the advantages and disadvantages of each model.

18 Sep 2017, Seminar, London, UK

Our annual event as part of the London Design Festival is now in its fifth year. We would be delighted if you are able to join us again.

21 Sep 2017, Seminar, London, UK

Has Cloud replaced traditional outsourcing models? We will compare cloud to outsourcing, consider whether they have effectively become the same thing for many solutions and assess some of the advantages and disadvantages of each model.

In association with
Related Video
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.