Greer v. The King, 2023 TCC 100 -- summary under Subparagraph 152(4)(a)(i)

By services, 1 August, 2023

Spiro J applied the presumption in s. 181(3) of the Business Corporations Act (NB) that an entry in a share register is, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, proof that the holder shown in the register is the owner of the share, to find that the transfer of four properties (valued by Spiro J at over $2.4 million) by a corporation to the taxpayer, who was shown in the register as holding one of the 1000 shares, gave rise to a corresponding shareholder benefit under s. 15(1).

The Minister had initially assessed the wrong taxation year of the taxpayer (2006), but later reassessed his 2005 taxation year (the correct year) beyond the normal reassessment period. Spiro J found that this reassessment was not statute-barred under s. 152(4)(a)(i). Spiro J referred to the taxpayer’s experience in the real estate area, and stated (at para. 79):

The Appellant knew or ought to have known that acquiring more than $2.4 million of corporate property from HGSL for no consideration was a shareholder benefit. His failure to consult a tax professional before filing his 2005 return reflects a lack of reasonable care and was, therefore, negligent. The Appellant did not thoughtfully, deliberately, and carefully assess the situation before filing his return.

Topics and taglines
Tagline
failure to consult a tax professional was indicative of negligence
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
679673
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
679674
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}
Workflow properties
Workflow state