Newbies to Ninjas: Tax courses are targeted to improve efficiency and accuracy of newer preparers completing Personal Tax Returns or Corporate Tax Returns for Owner-Managed and Small Businesses.
These concise online 2.5-hour topic-by-topic course will have your newer tax preparers preparing Personal or Corporate Tax Returns like ninjas!
- T2 Identification and Information
- Net Income and Taxable Income
- Capital Assets
- Small Business Deduction and associated issues
- Dividends Paid and Received
- Corporate Losses
- Shareholder Activity
- Donations, Internet Business Activities, T1135
- CRA Services/Support
Protect your clients and yourself; be aware of 2017 planning strategies and pitfalls. Tax Update 2017 – Fresh Ideas and New Snags, is the 33rd annual installment of the most current tax information and Canada Revenue Agency policies.
This fast-paced and highly detailed course offers hundreds of practical insights and suggestions in a simple and straightforward manner. After many years of receiving top ratings, you can rest assured that this session is sure to offer you a strong and effective base for the upcoming season of planning and compliance.
Updates including (but not limited to): new small business deduction rules; new real estate and principal residence tax rules; remuneration strategies for owner-managers; tax effective remuneration for employees; trust and estate planning rules; 2017 federal and provincial budget changes; planning in the new United States regime; CRA administrative changes and initiatives; divorce and family changes; buying and selling a business; charities and NPOs; employer/employee issues; United States & international initiatives; partnerships; GST/HST; SR&ED; and various personal tax credits and deductions.
Discover which date and location is right for you!
A June 27, 2016 French Technical Interpretation (2016-0637341E5, Gagnon, Robert) examined whether a loan to a limited partner could constitute a draw.
In the case, the limited partnership had a limited partner (LP), entitled to 99% of the partnership’s profit, and a general partner (GP), entitled to 1% of the partnership’s profits. The partnership earned income evenly throughout the year. At the beginning of the year the LP’s ACB was nil. Quarterly, the LP took a loan from the partnership equal to ¼ of the partnership’s annual profits. At the beginning of the following year, the partnership distributed profits in the form of a promissory note. The note and the loan were then immediately set-off.
CRA opined that the loan to the LP could constitute a draw as the scope of Subparagraph 53(2)(c)(v) is very broad. A review of the partnership agreement would be required to determine whether the draw was “on account or in lieu of… partnership profits.” If, the loan did constitute a draw, the ACB would be reduced immediately. As, in this case, the ACB at the start of the year was nil, a reduction would bring the ACB into a negative position, and, therefore, Subsection 40(3.1) would apply to deem the LP to realize a capital gain.
CRA also opined that there is a question as to whether a partner could in fact “loan” money from the partnership as a partnership is not a legal entity in and of itself.
In an October 7, 2016 French Technical Interpretation (2016-0652971C6, Gladu, Guylaine), CRA addressed the impact of clauses in shareholders’ agreements (SA) in a franchise arrangement. Each franchise is held in a corporation owned equally by the franchisor and the manager of the franchise. Where the manager ceases employment, the SA would provide for the franchisor to arrange a sale of the manager’s shares to a third party, who cannot be the franchisor or an associate of the franchisor.
CRA confirmed that the proposed right to locate a purchaser for the manager’s shares would not be considered a right for the franchisor to acquire the shares. Similarly, an automatic redemption would not be considered a right of the franchisor to force a redemption provided that the franchisor cannot control the event that would cause the redemption. As such, the proposed clauses would not cause the corporations to become associated or related.