Global Affairs Canada (“GAC”) recently announced the opening of the tariff-rate quota (the “TRQ”) application period for the 2024-2025 dairy year, which is open from May 1, 2024, to June 15, 2024. We previously talked about the TRQ application process; however, this year’s announcement also comes with changes flowing from New Zealand’s successful challenge of Canada’s dairy TRQ policies.
Tax & Trade Blog
Rob Kreklewetz & John Bassindale
Guest has not set their biography yet
The recent decision of the Tax Court of Canada (“TCC”) in Refind Environment Inc. v. The King (2024 TCC 2) is a poignant reminder of the importance of filing deadlines.
In Refind, the TCC dismissed an application for an extension of time to file a Notice of Objection against assessments under the Excise Tax Act (“ETA”) because the Registrant was one (1) day late in filing their application for an extension of time to the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”)!
On August 21, 2023, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (“CITT”) announced an Expiry Review of its finding made on October 15, 2018, in Expiry Review RR-2017-005, continuing its finding made on December 11, 2012, in Inquiry No. NQ-2012-003 in respect of Carbon Steel Welded Pipe exported from Chinese Taipei, the Republic of India, the Sultanate of Oman, the Republic of Korea, the Kingdom of Thailand and the United Arab Emirates.
On January 23, 2024, the CITT released a Revised Notice of Expiry Review RR-2023-003, updating certain elements of the Expiry Review Schedule. Relevant Questionnaires have also been posted.
If there was such a thing as a “10-Alarm” fire, CRA’s public release of GST Interpretation RITS 202403 would seem to fit that bill.
In this April 2023 Interpretation – issued only a few weeks ago – CRA takes the view that Employers with pension funds invested in an insurer’s segregated funds, are NOT eligible to claim ITCs for the GST/HST payable on the investment management fees (“IM Fees”) paid directly out of those funds.
On one level of analysis, CRA has done an about-face and reversed a prior 2012 Ruling in this area (which seemed to have addressed the same situation). While CRA may disagree with that statement, this does appear to be a potentially significant “reinterpretation”.