Tele-Mobile Company Partnership v. Canada, 2013 FCA 149, aff'g 2012 TCC 256 -- summary under Section 181.1

By services, 28 November, 2015

Service Charge $100
Cred 2 Yr -$105 -$5
GST $5
Total current charge owing 0

The taxpayer, a registered cellphone service provider ("TM"), issued invoices similar to the above example. TM offered rebates such as the "Cred 2 Yr" rebate based on the number of years of service which the customers contracted to receive.

The trial judge found that TM was not entitled to input tax credits under s. 181.1 because it was not "sufficiently clear" that the rebate included GST.

Mainville JA varied the trial judge's reasons, which incorrectly implied that an invoice (or other written advice) meets the requirements under s. 181.1 if the invoice is clear enough that the customer has an "opportunity" to calculate the GST component of the rebate - an "actual written indication" is required (para. 35). The requirement for written indications serves two purposes - to allow a customer-registrant to determine if the GST component of a rebate should be treated in accordance with s. 181.1(f), and to inform the customer that the rebate is reduced by its GST component (para. 15).

Topics and taglines
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
332191
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<a id=\"TeleMobile_1811\"></a><strong><em>Tele-Mobile Company Partnership v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2013 FCA 149, aff'g 2012 TCC 256",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": ""
}