S.49(3) did not apply to deem the exercise of employee stock options held by a non-resident former employee to not be a disposition of the options, given that s. 49(3) applied only to capital property, whereas employee stock options are governed by s. 7. However, there was no liability under s. 116(5) to the Canadian corporation that had issued the options as it should not be considered to have acquired the options from the employee and, therefore, had no cost therefor. CRA stated "this is analogous to a situation where a debtor repaid his debt and the debt ceased to exist. That is, the CRA would generally recognize the settlement or extinguishment of the debt as a disposition of property by the creditor but not an acquisition of property by the debtor".
Topics and taglines
Tagline
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
325654
Words and phrases
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
341802
Extra import data
{
"field_editor_tags": [],
"field_roundtable_subquestion": "",
"field_stub": false,
"field_legacy_header": "28 November 2001 Memorandum 2001-009124"
}
"field_editor_tags": [],
"field_roundtable_subquestion": "",
"field_stub": false,
"field_legacy_header": "28 November 2001 Memorandum 2001-009124"
}
Workflow properties
Workflow state