Numerous Canadian courts have used subsequent legislative amendments (amendments made after the time applicable to a transaction) as an important tool of statutory interpretation. In the tax context over the last decade, subsequent legislative amendments have been held to be particularly relevant to the third stage of the general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR) analysis: whether there has been a misuse or abuse of the object, spirit, and purpose of the provisions of the
Income Tax Act that are relied on by the taxpayer. In this respect, the Minister typically argues that a subsequent amendment is evidence of a pre-existing policy in the Act that the taxpayer has abused. In contrast, from the taxpayer's perspective, amendments arguably demonstrate that a transaction did not offend any unwritten rule or policy at the time it took place. This article provides a brief review of the role of subsequent legislative amendments in the GAAR analysis. Published by LexisNexis in the January 2014 edition of
Canadian Current Tax.
Please note that this publication presents an overview of notable legal trends and related updates. It is intended for informational purposes and not as a replacement for detailed legal advice. If you need guidance tailored to your specific circumstances, please contact one of the authors to explore how we can help you navigate your legal needs.
For permission to republish this or any other publication, contact Amrita Kochhar at kochhara@bennettjones.com.