Next Section

Previous Section

 
 APPROACHES..........................3
beneficial ownership. There are two analytical  approaches  to determining whether there has 256
been a change in the beneficial ownership of property. Both  approaches  are discussed below. 258
term and duet  approaches  would maintain the status quo for common law taxpayers, the 1254
 
 APPROPRIATE.........................15
remedy against the trustee personally for breaches of the trust. Where  appropriate , this remedy 156
an  appropriate  approach when it is the beneficiarys liability for tax that is at issue. Thus, the 216
issue has a financial aspect to it, beneficial ownership of trust property is an  appropriate  234
 appropriate  way to describe the person who, in article C.C.Q., is described as a 486
 appropriate  to consider the preferred shares as belonging to the Trust. However, a strict 882
disregarded. As such, a more  appropriate  resolution to the problem contemplated herein would 894
it is  appropriate  to consider an inserted party as a mere collection agent.978
In the Aiken Industries case, the Court considered it  appropriate , in light of the blatant treaty 988
 appropriate  analytical approach to take, but no criteria for determining the existence of such a 1090
broad approach to interpreting the subsection. While the result may be  appropriate  from a tax 1102
policy perspective, it is questionable whether the approach is otherwise  appropriate . The 1104
 appropriate  tax liability is triggered on the death of the settlor of a self-benefit trust. The no 1468
absolute or contingent right requirement as reflected in paragraph ()(a), with  appropriate  1532
date as to the meaning of the term acquired, the  appropriate  solution may be to adopt a 1616
requirement, in the  appropriate  contexts, that no person other than the transferor have any 1692
 
 APPROPRIATION.......................1
 appropriation  in the C.C.Q. In the context of the example under review, it would clearly be 882
 
 APPROVED............................1
also noted that, although the U.S. Supreme Court has  approved  efforts by taxpayers to 974
 
 AREA................................3
relationship in common law, particularly in the  area  of trusts. The area of trusts was fertile 152
relationship in common law, particularly in the area of trusts. The  area  of trusts was fertile 152
is not surprising that the legislature has sought to add at least some certainty to an  area  of law 238
 
 ARGUABLE............................1
context. In the authors view, it is  arguable  that such an approach is inappropriate. The scheme 698
 
 ARGUABLY............................9
beneficial ownership  arguably  results. Where there are no default beneficiaries and a settlor 304
beneficially owned by the person.  Arguably , the settlor of a self-benefit trust is within the ambit 356
subsection (), however,  arguably  leads to a different conclusion. That subsection deems 408
beneficiaries will take.  Arguably , at common law and for tax purposes, an individual 464
beneficially interested in that deemed trust. Although,  arguably , the ITA intends to treat the 744
beneficiary status assuming a sufficiently direct connection and that,  arguably , beneficiary status 752
 Arguably , there is nothing inherently wrong with associating the transfer of the incidents of 1192
In the authors view, the expression beneficial ownership used in subsection () is  arguably  1608
subject to the exercise of any discretion by any person or partnership)  Arguably , it is more 1784
 
 ARGUED..............................1
is therefore  argued  that it is the context in which a trust issue arises that will dictate which of 164
 
 ARGUMENT............................1
no analytical framework in the civil law from which an  argument  either for or against can be 346
 
 ARISE...............................17
In addition, subsection () does not address all of the income tax issues that can  arise  from 76
difficulties can  arise  in applying provisions of the ITA that rely on the application of the concept 90
inconsistent with the tax consequences that would  arise  in any other Canadian province.98
has similarly effected a change in the beneficial ownership thereof. The same result would  arise  298
conditional in that the right to receive trust property will  arise  only as a consequence of the 392
beneficial owners of the trust property, and a change in beneficial ownership would  arise . This 506
analysis is intended to highlight some of the issues that can  arise  when applying certain 718
owned and belong to are also used in the ITA. Some of the issues that can  arise  726
may  arise  in Québec other than those listed where the beneficial ownership relationship is an 1090
harmonization issues that  arise  in the context of the beneficial ownership concept. This may not 1100
Ltd v. The Queen illustrate the issues that may  arise  when private law concepts are applied 1112
that a change in beneficial ownership would  arise  as a result of the transfer.1314
(a) a right that may  arise  as a consequence of the terms of the will or other 1318
(b) a right that may  arise  as a consequence of the law governing the intestacy of an 1322
(a) A right that may  arise  as a consequence of the exercise of a general power of 1382
completely and permanently losing tax revenues that would otherwise  arise  on the death of an 1414
settlors capital interest and to eliminate the double taxation that would otherwise  arise  as a 1460
 
 ARISEN..............................1
Prior to the amendment, the following scenario could have  arisen . An individual, X, owns 1394
 
 ARISES..............................12
circumstances a change in the beneficial ownership of property  arises . 130
is therefore argued that it is the context in which a trust issue  arises  that will dictate which of 164
result is different than the result that would ensue at common law and  arises  solely as a 508
 arises  in relation to a discretionary beneficiary under either a common law or civil law trust if one 532
that  arises  is whether there is a basis for adopting a similar approach to interpreting or applying 696
A related issue that  arises  from the concept of beneficial ownership in relation to the Province of 786
The question  arises , though, as to what is meant by the words belongs to in subsection 826
Again, the question of what is meant by beneficially owned  arises . Consider two 908
as above  arises . X is not at arms length with the trust by virtue of paragraph ()(b) and, 928
in beneficial ownership requirement in the context of subparagraph (.)(b)(ii)  arises  in 1522
ownership was transferred to the trustee  arises . 1704
where the issue to be resolved  arises  therein, and instead using the concepts common law 1842
 
 ARISING.............................5
. Issues  Arising  from the Concept of Beneficial Ownership and Change in Beneficial Ownership18
 arising  from the application of those provisions in the province of Québec and the common law 104
. Issues  Arising  from the Concept of Beneficial Ownership and Change in 714
determination of the tax consequences  arising  from a transaction governed by Québec civil law 1212
implication  arising  from this inclusive definition is that it extends, as well, to persons beneficially 1516
 
 ARM.................................16
vendor does not deal at  arm s length beneficially own more than of the fair market value of 580
corporation, to persons with whom the other corporation does not deal at  arm s length, or to 808
the other corporation and persons with whom the other corporation does not deal at  arm s 810
and the trustee is a person dealing at  arm s length with the brothers. 818
Aco and Bco would be connected with Opco since C and D do not deal at  arm s length with A 832
 arm s length with A and B because of A and Bs relationship with the beneficiaries, being C and 838
person who does not deal at  arm s length with either of Aco or Bco for the reasons described in 844
control of the trust property. Paragraph ()(b) deems the trustee to not deal at  arm s length 860
with the beneficiaries, being C and D, and by extension, to not deal at  arm s length with Aco 860
and Bco because each of those corporations do not deal at  arm s length with C and D. 862
whom are not at  arm s length with X beneficially own more than of the Forco II shares, in 924
as above arises. X is not at  arm s length with the trust by virtue of paragraph ()(b) and, 928
consequently, X and a person not dealing at  arm s length with X together own shares of the 928
available. Immediately after the exchange, X and persons that do not deal at  arm s length with 934
exchanges under subsections .() and .() to persons dealing at  arm s length with the 1638
corporations that are owned by a non  arm s length person. 1792
 
 ARM'S...............................3
at  arm's  length or the vendor together with persons with whom the vendor did not deal at arm's 902
at arm's length or the vendor together with persons with whom the vendor did not deal at  arm's  902
whom the vendor did not deal at  arm's  length beneficially owned shares of the capital stock of 914
 
 AROSE...............................1
As in the case of Aiken Industries, the context in which this decision  arose  must be noted. 1004
 
 ARRANGEMENT.........................9
Where the  arrangement  is such that the person entitled to the benefits to the property is not the 586
grandchildren. The codicil, plus the scheme of corporate  arrangement  with the parent company 664
but instead are considered to belong to the trust  arrangement  itself, then the trust would be a 842
mechanical-like three-country  arrangement . 972
The Court noted the fact that the  arrangement  ostensibly conformed to the literal requirements 972
minimize tax burdens by tax planning, it was necessary, in a treaty  arrangement , to consider the 976
expectations of the contracting countries and, where an  arrangement  has no valid economic or 976
the Court against the efficacy of an  arrangement  which saw a non-treaty country party accessing 982
contingent right to the income or capital from the property subject to the  arrangement  or 1806

Next Section

Top of Section