7 November 1989 Income Tax Severed Letter AC74405 - Interest Income of Political Candidates

By services, 22 July, 2022
Official title
Interest Income of Political Candidates
Language
English
Document number
Citation name
AC74405
Severed letter type
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
656318
Extra import data
{
"field_external_guid": [],
"field_proprietary_citation": [],
"field_release_date_new": "1989-11-07 07:00:00",
"field_tags": []
}
Main text
Mrs. P. McNally                              Specialty Rulings
Director                                       Directorate
Enquiries and Taxpayer                       G. Thornley
  Assistance Division                        957-2101

Monica Jones-Kisil

                                             7-4405

Subject: Interest Income of Political Candidates

This is in reply to your memorandum of October 4, 1989, in which you ask us to reexamine the position taken in our letter of September 11, 1989 with respect to interest income generated from political donations and further to our telephone conversation of October 10, 1989 (Thornley/Jones-Kisil) in which it was suggested that the official agent of the candidate might have had a trust relationship with the candidate.

In our September 11, 1989 letter we took the position that interest income earned in the account of an official agent of a candidate is income of the candidate. We took this position because the Canada Election Act, in the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985, clearly states that the agent who is to maintain the bank account referred to in section 217 and 227, Thus in our view there is an agency and not a trust relationship involved.

According to Underhill and Hayton, Law of Trusts and Trustees (14th ed.) 1987, Butterworths, London, at page 5; and Hallsbury's Law of England Fourth Edition, Volume 1, at page 418, agency is a common law relationship arising where an agent has express or implied authority to act on behalf of his principal. In the present instance this authority is given by the candidate appointing an individual as his or her official agent (See section 215 of the Elections Act).

In this respect the Departments has stated its position regarding the distinction between an agency and a trust relationship in the 1988 Revenue Canada, Taxation Round Table. Part of the answer to question 32 of that Round Table is as follows:

          "We would first note that there is a legal distinction
          between an agency and a trust relationship.  Where
          there is an agency relationship, the beneficial owner
          of the property will be subject to income tax without
          regard to the agency relationship."

The only person that benefits from contribution received by a candidate's official agent is the candidate who has the use of such funds for the paying of his election expenses. Only if there is a surplus is there a requirement to turn such funds over to a registered party or the Receiver General. Although it may be common practice to turn over surplus interest earned on contributions along with any surplus contributions, the practice appear to be required by the Canada Elections Act.

With respect to your suggestion, made during a subsequent telephone conversation, that the official agent's band account might be a constructive trust, we quote the following from Black's Law Dictionary:

          "Constructive trust. Trust created by operation of law
          against one who by actual or constructive fraud, by
          duress or by commission of wrong, or by any form of
          unconscionable conduct, or other questionable means,
          has obtained or holds legal right to property which he
          should no, in equity and good conscience, hold and
          enjoy.  Davis v. Howard, 19 Or.App. 310, 527 P. 2d 422,
          424.
          A constructive trust is a relationship with respect to
          property subjecting the person by whom the title to the
          property is held to an equitable duty to convey it to
          another on the ground  that his acquisition or
          retention of the property is wrongful and that he would
          be unjustly enriched if he were permitted to retain the
          property.  Restatement, Second, Trusts 1(e)."

We do not feel that this definition has relevance with respect to the official agent of a candidate.

21(1)(b)

We trust that these further comments will be of assistance to you.

B.W. Dath Director Business and General Division Specialty Rulings Directorate Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs Branch