The taxpayer participated in a donation scheme whose particulars reflected numerous differences with the program described in the promoters' s. 237.1 application for a tax shelter identification number, including:
- the identity of parties (e.g. trust settlors and vendors) and their locations (e.g. Belize v. Barbados);
- the nature of the donated property (e.g. copies of software v. software licences; different versions numbers); and
- monetary values (e.g. different bulk rates, different alleged fair market values of the software).
The Minister argued that these differences meant that the program in which the taxpayer participated should not be regarded as the program for which the promoter obtained the identification number. Before finding against the taxpayer on the ground that no "gift" had been made, Hogan J found that the changes, although material, did not prevent the taxpayer from claiming charitable receipts. Tax shelter participants do not have the opportunity to compare a program's details to the details disclosed in the s. 237.1 application. Hogan J stated (at para. 9):
A literal interpretation of the provisions relied on by the respondent would impose on promoters of tax shelters an obligation to abandon an existing registration and reapply for a new number each time a change was made to the arrangement. ... In my opinion, if Parliament had favoured a dynamic reporting regime, it would have introduced a registration system that affords taxpayers the possibility of determining whether changes have been properly disclosed to the CRA by promoters.
See also the summary under s. 118.1 - "total charitable gifts."