Maxi Maid Services Ltd. v. The Queen, 2012 DTC 1174 [at at 3435], 2012 TCC 178 (Informal Procedure) -- summary under Subsection 227(9)

By services, 28 November, 2015

Partway through 2008, the taxpayer ceased to pay wages to a worker and purported to pay dividends instead. On learning in 2009 that it was not in a position to have paid dividends, the taxpayer prepared a T4 slip for 2008 for the amounts so paid and remitted applicable source deductions on a late basis. The Minister assessed penalties pursuant to s. 227(9)(b) on the taxpayer for the failure to remit source deductions on a timely basis.

C. Miller J. found that penalties were not warranted. First, s. 227(9) only applies to source deductions which were made but not remitted. Failures to make timely source deductions are caught instead by s. 227(8).

Second, the taxpayer's director's uncontradicted evidence was that the payments were dividends at the time, and the onus was on the Minister to establish that source deductions should have been withheld. C. Miller J. stated (at para. 12): "there is no proof that the so-called dividend draws were just a figment of [the director's] imagination." The taxpayer therefore had a due diligence defence.

Topics and taglines
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
336515
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>Maxi Maid Services Ltd. v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2012 DTC 1174 [at 3435], 2012 TCC 178 (Informal Procedure)",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}