A claimant of the new residential rental property rebate (NRRPR) is required under s. 256.2(3)(a) to be the “recipient” of the supply of the property meaning, generally, that it is liable for the consideration for the supply under the purchase agreement. A corporation which took title to newly-constructed residential properties which it paid for with its own funds and rented out, was denied the NRRPR because it was not named in the purchase agreement (the builder required that individuals be named as the purchasers, so that the individual shareholders of the corporation were so named).
McPhee J noted that Cheema (dealing with the new housing rebate under s. 254) made a similar finding, and stated (at paras. 44-45):
Similar to section 254, subsection 256.2(3)(a) does not distinguish between beneficial and legal ownership, so it is of no consequence that the three related individuals acquired the Subject Properties as bare trustees of the Appellant. …
Similar to the Cheema decision, it is the relationship between the purchaser and the seller that is relevant to the entitlement to the NRRPR rebate, not the relationship between the co-purchasers.