The appellant ("Global") enabled casino patrons to use their credit cards to receive cash advances or, more precisely, to purchase cheques from Global which they could negotiate for cash. To this end, the patron first used his or her credit card at a kiosk on the casino premises (or at a cashier cage) to get the cheque-purchase transaction approved by the credit card issuer. The casino cashier then issued, on Global's behalf, a cheque made out by Global to the casino operator, which the casino operator then negotiated for cash (or gaming chips) provided to the patron. At issue was the taxability of the fees paid by Global to the casino operator.
Turning first to the activities of the casino operator in allowing kiosks on its premises and providing support services at the cashier cages, Woods J noted (at para. 70) that "the term ‘arrange for'…has been broadly interpreted," quoted from CRA Policy P-239 (since repealed), and then found (at para. 72) that these activities qualified as arranging for a financial service:
The Casinos are directly involved in the issuance of cheques and are actively engaged in doing so, since they allow kiosks on the premises and provide services such as transaction procedures and initiating transactions on behalf of patrons.
However, allowing kiosks on the casino premises was an excluded provision of property under para. (r.5) (para. 81); and the cashier support services were excluded under para. (r.4), as services provided in conjunction with the issuance of the cheques (a financial service) and consisting primarily of the collecting and providing of information, and document preparation and processing (para. 82). The casino operator's role of cashing the cheques (which was similar to that of a disbursing agent), was encompassed within the broad language of paras. (a) and (d) (para. 76). The above supplies (kiosk provision, cashier services and cheque cashing) were "not so interdependent that they should be considered a single supply" (para. 94), and "none of these elements are a minor part of the supply so as to be incidental" for purposes of s. 138 (para. 96). It was appropriate to allocate 25% of the fees paid to the casino operator as consideration for the exempt cheque-cashing service, and to treat the balance as taxable.