Kiperchuk v. The Queen, 2013 DTC 1088 [at at 486], 2013 TCC 60 -- summary under Paragraph 251(1)(c)

By services, 28 November, 2015

The taxpayer was the designated beneficiary of her husband's RRSP, and received the RRSP proceeds upon his death, and was assessed for his unpaid taxes under s. 160. In response to a submission of the Crown that the taxpayer was factually not at arm's length with her deceased husband because the relevant time was that at which she was designated as his RRSP's beneficiary, Lamarre J stated (at para. 29) that there was nothing in the wording of s. 160(1):

...that relates the relationship between the transferor and the transferee to any moment other than that of the transfer of the property (or a moment after the transfer in a case where the transferee has since become the transferor's spouse. The subsection refers throughout to the act of transferring and the time of the transfer, without specifying that other moments in time, previous to the transfer, could be contemplated for the purpose of its application to the transferee.

As the transfer to the taxpayer also was not a non-arm's length one under s. 251(1)(a) or (b), s. 160(1) did not apply.

Topics and taglines
Tagline
transfer time was relevant time
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
337566
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em><a id=\"Kiperchuk\"></a>Kiperchuk v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2013 DTC 1088 [at 486], 2013 TCC 60 <strong>[transfer time was relevant time]</strong>",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}