Subject To Tax: The Wereldhave Case

Under Canadian Tax Law, there is an election for companies to defer recaptures and capital gains of property that was involuntarily or voluntarily disposed of. In this research paper, we attempt to prove that the election is a useful taxation strategy for businesses so that they are not subject to pay taxes on capital gains or recaptures until such a time where they may acquire an eligible replacement property that will help them earn business income. We will provide facts, definitions, and examples to illustrate the use of this election throughout the paper by explaining the capital cost allowance system, the offset available to business for capital gains and recaptures, the election process, the rules regarding replacing former business

The court observed that the ‘legal meaning’, i.e. meaning the legislature is taken to have intended, may not correspond to the literal or grammatical meaning. As four justices put

The appellants complain that the tax court fail to apply debt-equity principles. The secondary inquiry cannot be reached unless the first question concerning whether an economic

In order to deduct her moving expenses, she must meet certain conditions outlined in Reg. 1.217-2 (c). Helen meets the first two requirements (relevance to work test and distance test) without any issue. The third requirement has not yet been met yet though. This requirement is a minimum period of employment. Since she is a full-time employee, she must work full-time in this general location for at least 39 weeks during the 12 month period after the move. This does not mean she is not required to remain employed at her current place of work to meet this test. Even though she does not meet this requirement yet, she can deduct these expenses on the current years return or the year the reimbursement is paid to her by her employer. If she recognizes the expenses on this year’s return and does not end up meeting the requirement, she will have to include the deductions she took on this year’s return in next year’s gross income.

The pool cost the petitioner over $19,000, and we cannot accept his contention that such amount was spent primarily for therapy for his leg in view of the limited need for such therapy and the alternatives which were then available.

I appreciate the opportunity to advise you regarding the tax treatment for your loss of $25,406 in 2015 from your dog breeding activities. I understand that you decided to start breeding purebred terriers to keep yourself busy after your divorce with your husband in January. There are two possible ways to treat the loss under rulings in the Internal Revenue Code. One option is to treat your dog breeding activity as a business and deduct the losses on Schedule C, Profit or Loss from Business, of your individual income tax return. The second option is to treat your dog breeding as an activity not engaged in for profit, which does not allow you to deduct the

Explain the argument over whether or not this should be considered a tax instead of

“This case presents a constitutional question never addressed by this Court: whether a statutory scheme

I believe that religious facilities should no longer be tax exempt. It is  unjust and unfair for religious facilities to remain tax exempt . Ever since the roman ages  religious facilities  have been tax exempt, meaning that they don’t pay property tax or any tax at all. The 1954 federal Johnson Amendment prohibits a pastor from talking about candidates from the pulpit in light of Scripture. Thus, based on what a pastor says about an election from the pulpit, the tax code allows the government to tax a church. For over two-hundred years in america has been tax exempt, because of this the annual donations they rain  in per year in the United States alone is about one-billion dollars. Religious facilities, like every other non-profit organization

The estate tax is a tax upon your right to transfer property at the time of your death. It is often called the death tax and it has been a partisan point of disagreement for quite some time. As the tax only applies to estates of $5.45 million and over, this tax only applies to the wealthy. Enacted in 1916 to help finance World War I, the estate tax has come under more scrutiny lately because of our government’s financial situation and the one-hundredth anniversary (Caron 825). The intellectual world is divided on whether to repeal, reform, or keep unchanged the estate tax. Some even argue that transfers of wealth should not be taxed at all. This essay will contend that the current estate tax should be replaced with a lifetime accessions tax to encourage donors, reduce concentrations of wealth, and safeguard equality of opportunity. Before arguing for the lifetime accessions tax, this paper will outline the history of the estate tax, the purposes of taxing wealth transfers, and compare the lifetime accessions tax to other proposed alternatives.

4 Every tax ought to be so contrived as both to take out and to keep out of the pockets of the people as little as possible over and above what it brings into the public treasury of the

Under Art. 267, only ‘court or tribunal’ of a member state may initiate preliminary reference to the ECJ, however through succeeding case law this has been expanded by allowing entities whose members may not be judges, ‘provided that those entities have the power to adjudicate disputes’12. This concept of a court or tribunal has been interpreted widely as it is a matter of union law13. The Advocate-General in De Coster14 criticised the court’s approach and criteria to the interpretation as he deemed it confusing. The court in this instance accepted the reference, as ‘it was a permanent body established in law, that it gives legal rulings and that the jurisdiction is compulsory’15. The court in further cases has treated tribunals as not only tax appeal like in the case above but also; customs, social security and immigration.

The leading cases, CIR v Mitsubishi Motors Ltd [1995] and Commissioner of Taxation v James Flood Pty Ltd [1953] that reflect a taxpayer

Chief Justice M. Hameedullah Beg., Justice N. L. Untwalia, Justice P. N. Bhagwati, Justice P. S. Kailasam, Justice S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer and Justice Y. V. Chandrachud.

The idea that morally dubious goals may be legitimate inside capitalism will be discussed in light of a tax avoidance case study. Apple, a multinational technology company, has avoided paying its fair amount of income tax for years. This paper will consider the structural embeddedness of Apple’s legitimised goal—the maximisation of profit—through the ‘Double Irish Dutch sandwich’ tax haven model. Durkheim’s theory of collective conscience was used in explaining the legitimisation of the company’s profits-driven goal, and how its amorality becomes apparent outside the economical sphere. This paper will also discuss the interconnected nature of the harm and benefits in the deal made between Ireland and Apple. The association between legitimations of Apple’s conduct and its socially challenging behaviour has been analysed to be ambiguous in the letter of the law. The conclusion will shed light on the morally grey area of a company’s responsibility to its shareholders versus the needs of the community.