The taxpayer argued that by borrowing to purchase her home, she was able to retain a rental property. In rejecting this argument and finding that the interest on that borrowing was non-deductible, Bowman TCJ. noted that a similar argument had been rejected in Bronfman and indicated (at p. 1450) that even if the Singleton decision "supported the appellant's position I would be obliged to follow Bronfman with which Singleton is impossible to reconcile".
Topics and taglines
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
336081
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>Meggitt v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2000 DTC 1448, Docket: 1999-1460-IT-I (TCC) (Informal Procedure)",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>Meggitt v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2000 DTC 1448, Docket: 1999-1460-IT-I (TCC) (Informal Procedure)",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}