FCA appeal settled.
The only documentary support for the discount at which the taxpayer sold receivables to its Luxembourg parent (which Boyle J later found was over twice what could be supported under s. 247(2)) was a study prepared by a securitization specialist (TDSI), which was engaged shortly before the receivables sale agreement was finalized. After noting that no 10% transfer pricing penalty was imposed by CRA, Boyle J stated (at para. 50, f.n. 20):
Given that the TDSI Reports were the only contemporaneous documentation, and given my observations, comments and conclusions on those opinions and the role of TDSI, it appears to me that CRA may need to review its threshold criteria with respect to subsection 247(4). I would not have expected last minute, rushed, not fully informed, paid advocacy that was not made available to the Canadian taxpayer and not read by its parent, could easily satisfy the contemporaneous documentation requirements.