Digital Brain
digital brain
digital brain

Budget 2018: Government Proceeds with “Investment Limited Partnership” GST/HST Measures and Holding Corporation Consultations

March 2018 Tax Bulletin 3 minute read

Budget 2018 reaffirmed the Government’s desire to subject certain services rendered by general partners (“GPs”) of “investment limited partnerships” (“ILPs”) to special GST/HST treatment, and signalled its intention to examine the so-called “holding corporation rule”.

“Investment Limited Partnership” Proposals Modified

On September 8, 2017, the Government introduced draft GST/HST amendments that would treat certain services rendered by a GP of an ILP to the ILP as taxable supplies (the “September 8 Proposals”).  For details on these proposals, refer to our October 2017 Tax Law Bulletin A New Tax on Investment Funds: Distributions to General Partners (GPs) of “Investment Limited Partnerships” Possibly Subject to GST/HST.  Under the September 8 Proposals, GST/HST will be imposed on the fair market value (the “FMV”) of administrative and management services provided by a GP to an ILP of which it is a member.

Comments were received by the Government from stakeholders on the September 8 Proposals.  As a result of this consultation, Budget 2018 introduced changes to the proposed legislative amendments.

Budget 2018 addresses concerns that had been raised regarding the retrospective aspect of the September 8 Proposals.  GST/HST is no longer generally proposed to be levied on services rendered by a GP to an ILP before September 8, 2017.  The one notable exception is where the GP charged, collected or remitted GST/HST on account of any such pre-September 8, 2017 services.

Moreover, the FMV of the services rendered by a GP to an ILP is no longer to be determined on the date that the supply is made.  Depending on the particular circumstances, the FMV will instead be determined on (i) the last day of a “billing period” where there is a separate taxable supply of services deemed to be made in respect of the billing period, or (ii) in any other case, the last day of a GST/HST reporting period of the GP.  In the latter case, there is deemed to be a separate taxable supply of services during each reporting period of the GP.

Notwithstanding the Government’s modification of the ILP proposals, issues concerning the computation of FMV remain.  First, there is no clarification as to how FMV should be determined.  Second, the GST/HST imposed on the FMV of supplies made by the GP at the relevant time may not bear any relation to the amounts actually paid to the GP for its services, due to timing differences and other considerations.

Finally, as a result of the ILP proposals, an ILP may be a “selected listed financial institution” (“SLFI”) for HST purposes.  Under the September 8 Proposals, these SLFI measures were to take effect January 1, 2019.  As a result of changes to the proposals included in Budget 2018, an ILP may elect to accelerate the rules applicable to SLFIs.

Consultations on Input Tax Credit (“ITC”) Holding Corporation Rules

At present, holding corporations resident in Canada may register for the GST/HST and claim ITCs to recover GST/HST payable on expenses incurred in relation to shares or indebtedness of an operating corporation engaged in a taxable commercial activity.  The Government intends to consult stakeholders on these rules, particularly two aspects of the rules: (a) the limitation of the rule to corporations, and (b) the required relationship of the subject expenses to the operating corporation.

The expansion of ITC eligibility to situations involving not only corporations, but individuals, partnerships and trusts, would be a welcome development.  From a policy perspective, the legal structure chosen to pursue commercial activities should not prejudice access to, and the availability of, ITCs.

Conversely, consultation on the second area of focus may be an unwelcome development.  Despite jurisprudence taking an expansive view of what expenses may qualify for ITCs, the Canada Revenue Agency’s administrative policy is more restrictive, requiring a direct relationship between the expenses and the operating entity to qualify for ITCs (subject to certain available look-through rules).  In Budget 2018, the Government indicated that it “intends to clarify which expenses of the parent corporation that are in respect of shares or indebtedness of a related commercial operating corporation qualify for input tax credits”.  By this statement, the Government may be signalling that it intends to introduce its currently non-binding restrictive administrative policy into law.

by Jamie Wilks

A Cautionary Note

The foregoing provides only an overview and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are cautioned against making any decisions based on this material alone. Rather, specific legal advice should be obtained.

© McMillan LLP 2018

Insights (5 Posts)

Featured Insight

FSRA Releases Final Innovation Framework and Opens Testing Environment for Auto Insurance Innovations

SRA recently announced their Final Innovation Framework and Test and Learn Environment Guidance, a positive step forward for financial services innovators.

Read More
Jan 26, 2022
Featured Insight

Getting the Deal Through – Cartel Regulations 2022

Lexology Getting the Deal Through – Cartel Regulations 2022 provides a detailed explanation of how cartel regimes work in practice, including recent developments over the past year and an overview of future changes expected in each jurisdiction.

Read More
Jan 26, 2022
Featured Insight

BC Government Published Workplace Safety Order Mandating COVID-19 Safety Plans

On January 20, 2022, the BC Government published the Workplace Safety order mandating COVID-19 Safety Plans for certain BC workplaces.

Featured Insight

The 2022 Construction Labour “Open Period” – What Employers Need to Know

March 1 – April 30, 2022 is the “Open Period” for ICI collective agreements, and many non-ICI agreements, in Ontario. During this period members of construction unions can apply to the Ontario Labour Relations Board to terminate a union’s bargaining rights with their employer, or – more commonly – a rival union can apply to the Board to displace an existing union, in what is commonly known as a “raid”. During the Open Period employers will likely see increased union activity on sites as incumbent unions will seek to maintain member support, and as rival unions may try to gather support for a raid.

Join us on Wednesday, February 2nd for a discussion about what employers should expect and need to know if a decertification application or a displacement application involving their employees is filed at the Board.

Details
Wednesday, February 2, 2022
Featured Insight

PropTech: Property Technology, the New Frontier in Real Property, Part 3: Challenges

In this bulletin, we discuss the risks and challenges of using PropTech by businesses in the real estate space and for consumers of such products.

Read More
Jan 18, 2022