Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 24 MAY 2013

Daishowa-Marubeni: A Tree Fell In The Forest And The SCC Caught It!

A discussion on a recent case where the Court analyzes the difference for tax purposes between liabilities and embedded obligations, considers the law of contingent liabilities, the role of tax symmetry in the Income Tax Act, the role of the parties’ agreement and the role of accounting treatment in reaching the conclusion that embedded obligations are not liabilities that form part of proceeds of disposition.

CanadaTax

In Daishowa-Marubeni International Ltd. v. The Queen, 2013 SCC 29, Justice Rothstein marries tax philosophy and tax practice by asking and answering the question:

If a tree falls in the forest and you are not around to replant it, how does it affect your taxes?1

The Court analyzes the difference for tax purposes between liabilities and embedded obligations, considers the law of contingent liabilities, the role of tax symmetry in the Income Tax Act (Canada) (the "Act"), the role of the parties' agreement and the role of accounting treatment in reaching the conclusion that embedded obligations are not liabilities that form part of proceeds of disposition.

The relevant facts before the Court are as follows:

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from