land

By services, 9 May, 2022

Toronto (City) v Municipal Property Assessment Corporation Region 09, 2010 CanLII 151281 (ON ARB) -- summary under Regulation 1102(2)

The appellants take the position that the surface portion of their lands in the City of Toronto, which were used for surface parking and the placement of advertising signs, were to be properly classified for purposes of the Assessment Act (Ontario) in the Commercial Property Class and that the “air rights” above the parking lot surfaces were properly classified in the Commercial Property Class, Vacant Land Subclass – whereas the position of the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (“MPAC”) was that the density potential or development potential defined by the City zoning by-laws

7 October 2016 APFF Financial Strategies and Instruments Roundtable Q. 4, 2016-0651791C6 F - Choix 45(2) et (3) - immeuble à logements -- summary under Regulation 1102(2)

Before indicating that, if a duplex property is used more than 50% for rental use, so that it is not personal-use property, a capital loss realized on a sale of the property and relating to all of the non-depreciable component can be recognized (subject to s. 13(21.1)) as a capital loss notwithstanding its partial personal use, CRA stated:

[A] building and the land on which the building is located are a single property under the private law applicable in Québec.

22 June 2020 External T.I. 2017-0728051E5 F - Land inventory -- summary under Subsection 70(5.2)

Does "land" in s. 70(5.2) include not only vacant land but also land on which other real property is erected, such as houses for sale or condo units? CRA responded:

The Act does not define "land" except for the purposes of subsection 18(2), where subsection 18(3) defines "land" to specifically exclude buildings and other structures … .

For the purposes of the Act, in the absence of a provision similar to the definition in subsection 18(3), a building or other structure affixed to land would generally be considered as part of the land.

By services, 21 July, 2016

Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada v. R., 97 DTC 422, [1997] 3 C.T.C. 2593 (TCC) -- summary under A

Bowman TCJ. followed his earlier decision in Cadillac Fairview in finding that density rights purchased by the taxpayer from a nearby church were an addition to the cost of land rather than building notwithstanding accounting evidence that such expenditures should have been added to the cost of the building and notwithstanding that, unlike the other case, a building actually was constructed, stating (at p. 428):

Density rights...exist independently of their exercise and independently of any present or future building.

By services, 21 July, 2016

Cadillac Fairview Corp. Ltd. v. The Queen, 97 DTC 405, [1996] 2 CTC 2197 (TCC) -- summary under A

The taxpayer expended $11.2 million in obtaining zoning changes that were desirable for the proposed Phase II of the Eaton Centre (i.e., eliminating a requirement that the development have a residential component, and obtaining a "transfer" of density rights from four City of Toronto sites and a Church) represented a cost of modifying restrictions of the rights that the taxpayer, as land owner, was subject to with respect to the use of the land.

Bowman J stated (at pp. 413-414):

By services, 28 November, 2015

Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada v. R., 97 DTC 422, [1997] 3 C.T.C. 2593 (TCC) -- summary under Paragraph 1(q)

Bowman TCJ. followed his earlier decision in Cadillac Fairview Corp. Ltd. in finding that density rights purchased by the taxpayer from a nearby church were an addition to the cost of land rather than building notwithstanding accounting evidence that such expenditures should have been added to the cost of the building and notwithstanding that, unlike the other case, a building actually was constructed.

By services, 28 November, 2015

Re Trizec (1986), 28 DLR (4th) 161 (Man. C.A.) -- summary under Former Business Property

"Land is not, in law, the soil we touch, but the rights attached to it. Such rights include the right to work the soil, to mine beneath the surface and build in the air space above it: the incorporeal rights to light, support and the use of water flowing across land." The appellant was liable for municipal assessment in respect of air rights which it occupied.

land