Lacroix v. The Queen, 2011 DTC 1167 [at at 919], 2011 TCC 111 -- summary under Subsection 160(1)

By services, 28 November, 2015

The taxpayer's brother, who was insolvent and facing a large tax debt, deposited $15,000 into a bank account of the taxpayer. The brother periodically withdrew from the account to pay for living expenses. Tardif J. found that, while the sister was apparently not aware that she was participating in a scheme to conceal assets from collection (she did not inquire), she was nevertheless liable under s. 160(1).

The taxpayer argued that she held the funds in the capacity of mandatary (the Quebec equivalent of agent). While Tardif J. found that no such relationship was present, he stated at para. 40 that a transfer of property from mandor to mandatary is not a transfer for the purposes of s. 160, as such a transfer does not divest the mandator of ownership of the property transferred.

Topics and taglines
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
334732
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>Lacroix v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2011 DTC 1167 [at 919], 2011 TCC 111",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}