The appellant (“Victus Academy”) operated a for-profit private school in Kitchener, Ontario that provided students in grades 7 through 12 with both hockey and academic programs within typical school hours. It directly oversaw the academic program, and contracted with two different providers to provide the on-ice training and off-ice conditioning that comprised the hockey programming. The school directly oversaw the academic program. The Minister disallowed ITCs of approximately $28,500 for its two 2016 reporting periods on the basis that Victus Academy was a school authority that made exempt supplies of educational services. The Victus Academy claimed that it was making taxable supplies of the hockey program (thereby entitling in to input tax credits) that were separate from its exempt supplies of the academic programing, and claimed in this regard that the two programs could be purchased separately, were invoiced separately and, as described above, were provided by separate suppliers.
Monaghan J, in dismissing the appeal, found that it was not necessary to decide whether there was a single supply, because even if the academic and hockey program were separate supplies, both were educational services described in Sched. V, Pt. III, s. 2 or s. 3, given that the students came within the definition in Sched. V, Pt. III, s. 1 of “elementary or secondary school student.”
Regarding the s. 2 exemption, she stated (at paras. 39, 40):
Section 2 does not specify the nature of the courses that are exempt. …
… [S]ection 16 of Part III refers to instructing individuals in courses “other than courses in sports, games, hobbies or other recreational pursuits that are designed to be taken primarily for recreational purposes”. This suggests the meaning of “course” in Part III includes training in sports and recreational pursuits.