The Excise Tax Act has a couple of “closely related” provisions, which ameliorate the effects of the GST/HST, namely those found in sections 150 and 156 of the ETA. Amendments to the ground rules for how these provisions operate were announced in the 2016 federal budget, and more recently came into force on March 22, 2017. These amendments add a new “qualifying voting control” test for both elections.

Every importer wants to know how much it is going to cost to import goods into Canada. To answer this question, the importer needs to ask questions about (1) the H.S. tariff classification of the good being imported into Canada, (2) the origin of the good being imported into Canada, (3) the applicable tariff rate of the good being imported into Canada and (4) the value of the good being imported into Canada.

In Fairmont Hotels Inc. (2016 SCC 56) and Jean Coutu Group (2016 SCC 55) the Supreme Court of Canada added some much-needed clarity to the law of rectification. Although the result might be disappointing for taxpayers and tax practitioners alike, these decisions bring Ontario back in line with the rest of Canada by establishing that an application for rectification must be supported by a detailed intention.

Mistakes happen. While the majority of Canadian companies want to comply with Canada’s export controls and economic sanctions laws, violations can occur. Often when there is an economic sanctions violation, there is also an export controls violation at the same time. Sometimes, there are export controls violations without an economic sanction violation.

The Department of Finance (Canada) released a consultation paper on July 22, 2016 outlining a series of proposed reforms to the provisions of the Excise Tax Act (Canada) that govern the GST/HST liability of financial institutions including many investment funds.

The Supreme Court of Canada rendered its first customs tariff decision in Canada v. Igloo Vikski Inc. (2016 SCC 38). The decision provides guidance on applying the General Rules for the Interpretation of the Harmonized System, particularly in the context of how the rules inform one another.

Administrative decision-makers are authorized by statute and given varying degrees of discretion. If a decision-maker has broad discretionary power and can show that the facts were considered when coming to a decision, it is extremely difficult – if not impossible – to overturn the decision in a judicial review application.

ean-Guillaume Shooner and Nicholas Grenier of Stikeman Elliott say the Federal Court of Appeal decision in Attorney General of Canada v. Bri-Chem Supply Ltd. clarifies the hierarchy between all courts and tribunals.

In Club Intrawest v The Queen,¹ the Tax Court of Canada considered certain intricate and novel issues. The court grappled with whether Club Intrawest made supplies, the nature of Club Intrawest’s supplies, the place of these supplies, and whether a single supply could have a dual tax status.

Human rights are about each of us living in dignity and the human rights project is about standing up to injustice and showing solidarity in the face of oppression. Due to economic globalization, operations of transnational corporations have an impact on local and international markets and affairs of state.