18 February 2011 Income Tax Severed Letter 2010-0383151E5 - Partition of property—follow-up on 2009-033864

By services, 21 December, 2016
Official title
Partition of property—follow-up on 2009-033864
Language
English
CRA tags
248(20), 248(21);
Document number
Citation name
2010-0383151E5
Severed letter type
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
394120
Extra import data
{
"field_external_guid": [],
"field_proprietary_citation": [],
"field_release_date_new": "2011-02-18 07:00:00",
"field_tags": []
}
Workflow properties
Workflow state
Workflow changed
Main text

SUMMARY: Partition of property—follow-up on 2009-033864—ITA-248(20), 248(21)—Follow-up letter to a technical interpretation in documentrelating to the partition of property rules in subsecs. 248(20) and (21).

Please note that the following document, although believed to be correct at the time of issue, may not represent the current position of the CRA.

Prenez note que ce document, bien qu'exact au moment émis, peut ne pas représenter la position actuelle de l'ARC.

PRINCIPAL ISSUES: Follow-up to our response in technical interpretation 2009-033864 [2009-0338641R5].

POSITION: The Income Tax Rulings Directorate issues advance income tax rulings and technical interpretations, but does not provide legal advice or opinions to third parties and does not issue rulings on the interpretation or application of common law, civil law or provincial legislation.

REASONS: See response.

XXXXXXXXXX 2010-038315

André Gallant

(613) 957-8961

February 18, 2011

Dear XXXXXXXXXX:

Re: Partition of property

This is a reply to your letter dated October 4, 2010, concerning the partition of property rules in subsections 248(20) and (21) of theIncome Tax Act(“Act”). We apologize for the delay in responding to your request.

Your letter is a follow-up to our response to you of September 1, 2010 (our file 2009-033864) [2009-0338641R5] in which we commented on the application of subsections 248(20) and (21) of the Act to seven hypothetical scenarios. XXXXXXXXXX.

You asked that we expand on the following comments we made in our September 1, 2010 letter:

As indicated above, whether the single property and partition requirements in the preamble of subsection 248(1) are met is a question of fact, the resolution of which also depends on a review of the property laws governing the particular jurisdiction where the land is located. If you have a specific case in mind, we would be prepared to consider it on an advance income tax rulings basis.

[Emphasis added]

You now want us to re-analyze each of the above-mentioned seven scenarios by assuming that all land in question is located in Alberta (and that the applicable law would be the property laws governing Alberta).

Our Comments

As also stated in our last letter to you, written confirmation of the tax implications inherent in particular transactions is given by this Directorate only where the transactions are proposed and are the subject matter of an advance income tax ruling request submitted in the manner set out in Information Circular 70-6R5, Advance Income Tax Rulings, dated May 17, 2002. As indicated in paragraph 22 of IC 70-6R5 [Information Circular 70-6R5], where the particular transactions are completed, the inquiry should be addressed to the relevant Tax Services Office. The Directorate also provides, in writing, technical interpretations of specific provisions of income tax law (IC 70-6R5, paragraph 22).

Your request does not simply concern the interpretation of income tax legislation (subjections 248(20) and (21)) but rather involves a legal determination of the laws governing the Province of Alberta. The Canada Revenue Agency does not provide legal advice or opinions to third parties and does not issue rulings on the interpretation or application of common law, civil law or provincial legislation.

As regards our views on the application of subjections 248(20) and (21), we set them out in our last letter to you XXXXXXXXXX. If you have a specific case in mind, we would be prepared to consider it on an advance income tax rulings basis.

We trust that these comments will be of assistance.

Yours truly,

S. Parnanzone

Manager

For Director

Business and Partnerships Division

Income Tax Rulings Directorate

Legislative Policy and Regulatory Affairs Branch