Canada: International employees with stock options

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Canada: International employees with stock options

AdobeStock_257740958_employees

Under Canada's Income Tax Act, a stock option granted by a corporation to an employee is generally subject to tax in Canada only when the employee exercises the option and acquires the shares (or cash in lieu).

aiken.jpg

jankovic.jpg

Carrie Aiken


Dan Jankovic

This is the case even where the employee is a non-resident of Canada at the time the option is exercised if the option relates to employment services rendered in Canada. A risk of double tax arises for non-resident stock option holders who exercise employment partially in Canada and partially in another country, since each country may seek to tax the benefit on the basis that it relates to employment exercised in its jurisdiction.

To alleviate this risk, the Canadian tax authorities have adopted the principles articulated in paragraphs 12 to 12.5 in the Commentary on Article 15 of the OECD Model Convention to allocate the stock option benefit for Canadian tax purposes. Under the OECD principles, a stock option benefit is generally apportioned to a source country based on the number of days during the vesting period (that is, the required period of employment before the employee can exercise the option) that employment is exercised in that country over the total number of working days in the vesting period.

These principles apply unless the applicable income tax treaty produces a different result. For example, paragraph 6 in Annex B to the Fifth Protocol to the Canada-US tax treaty provides that, where employee services are performed partly in Canada and partly in the US between the grant and exercise of an option, the employee is deemed to have derived the proportion of the benefit in Canada based on the number of days between the date of grant and the date of exercise in which the employee's principal place of employment was situated in Canada.

Carrie Aiken (carrie.aiken@blakes.com)

Tel: +1 403 260 9775

Dan Jankovic (dan.jankovic@blakes.com)

Tel: +1 403 260 9725

Blake, Cassels & Graydon, Calgary office

Website: www.blakes.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

SF: Germany has forgotten to think about digital reporting requirements, a WTS partner claimed at ITR’s Indirect Tax Forum 2025
E-invoicing is currently characterised by dynamism, with fragmentation acting as a key catalyst for increasing interoperability, says Aida Cavalera of the International Observatory on eInvoicing
Pillar two and the US tax system ‘could work in harmony’, Scott Levine tells ITR in an exclusive interview to mark his arrival at Baker McKenzie
Peter White, who has a tax debt of A$2 million, has been banned for five years from seeking registration with Australia’s Tax Practitioners Board (TPB)
Wopke Hoekstra’s comments followed US measures aimed against ‘unfair foreign taxes’; in other news, Grant Thornton and Holland & Knight made key tax partner hires
An Administrative Review Tribunal ruling last month in Australia v Alcoa represents a 'concerning trend' for the tax authority, one expert tells ITR
A recent decision underlines that Indian courts are more willing to look beyond just legal compliance and examine whether foreign investment structures have real business substance
Following his Liberal Party’s election victory, one source expects Mark Carney to follow the international consensus on pillar two, as experts assess the new administration
A German economics professor was reportedly ‘irritated’ by how the Finnish ministry of finance used his data
Countries that care about the fair taxation of tech multinationals and equitable global distribution of wealth should back the UN’s tax framework, writes economist Abdelmalek Riad
Gift this article