Tax & Trade Blog

---

NO ITCS FOR CREDIT CARD LOYALTY EXPENSES - FOR BANKS

FCA SKATES FINE LINE: CONCLUDES ITCS FOR PC BANK BUT NOT FOR AMEX!

In a long running tax issue in Canada, the question has been whether Financial Institutions like banks and credit card companies are entitled to take Input Tax Credits (“ITCs”) when incurring Goods and Services Tax (“GST”) on expenses related to associated loyalty point programs. The Tax Court of Canada (“TCC”) has been fairly consistent on this question (answering it in the negative) but the Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) has now come to opposite conclusions in two decisions involving PC Bank and Amex points cards.

In its more recent decision in Amex, the FCA seems to have signalled that ITCs are not going to be available where the primary motivation is driving its own credit card business!

---

TRAILING COMMISSIONS NO LONGER EXEMPT?

CRA REVERSES POSITION ON MUTUAL FUNDS TRAILING COMMISSIONS

For decades, mutual fund trailing commissions paid by mutual fund managers to licensed dealers — and by dealers to their agents — were generally treated as consideration for an exempt financial service and therefore not subject to GST/HST. In a GST/HST ruling released on December 22, 2025, however, the Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”) reversed this longstanding administrative position. A subsequent February 10, 2026 GST/HST Notice confirms and details the CRA’s new position.

Under the revised approach, mutual fund trailing commissions will become taxable effective July 1, 2026. This change will have significant implications for fund managers, dealers, and other stakeholders in the mutual fund industry, and is expected to impose additional GST/HST compliance obligations and burdens.

---

MOVING ASSETS IN TAX DISPUTE? THINK AGAIN!

WHY TRANSFERRING ASSETS CAN MAKE A BAD SITUATION WORSE

When a taxpayer is assessed by the Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”), the instinct to “do something” can be overwhelming. One of the most common reactions is to start moving assets to related parties – for example to spouses or children – in the hopes of keeping them out of the CRA’s reach while the tax dispute plays out.

A recent Tax Court of Canada ("TCC") decision shows why this instinct is a bad idea, and is a lesson for anyone trying to sidestep tax problems: what one does after the fact can often make things worse for all involved!

---

LAWYERS REQUIRED IN MOST LARGE TAX APPEALS

TCC REVIEWS NEW TAX COURT RULES APPLYING TO GENERAL PROCEDURE CASES

In a remarkable decision rendered with a great deal of humility, and with great credit to the Tax Court Justice involved, the Tax Court of Canada (“TCC”) in Tanafranca v. The King (2025 TCC 169) has taken the opportunity to review recent changes to the manner in which large taxpayers may be represented in their Tax Court Appeals.

This case is a reminder for taxpayers that, in General Procedure cases, Experienced Tax Counsel will be required – and usually for good reason.

---

EMPLOYEE OR INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR?

SIGNIFICANT TAX & LEGAL CONSEQUENCES COME WITH MISCLASSIFICATION

One area of Indirect Tax that is often underemphasized and underappreciated by businesses and tax professionals alike is the proper classification of employees and independent contractors. Canada’s rules generally mirror those in the United States, and in both jurisdictions, misclassification of a worker (i.e., classifying the worker as an independent contractor instead of an employee) can give rise to significant tax and legal consequences.

In this Report, we review the Canadian and U.S. rules, and the challenges businesses face in navigating this classification process.