Canada: Government’s mandate to improve integrity of Canadian tax system continues with enactment of Bill C-4

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Canada: Government’s mandate to improve integrity of Canadian tax system continues with enactment of Bill C-4

diep.jpg

caines.jpg

Nancy Diep


Ian Caines

On December 12 2013, Canada enacted Bill C-4, implementing a variety of income tax measures announced in the March 2013 federal budget. One of the stated themes of the budget was improving the integrity of the Canadian tax system and Bill C-4 included a number of new anti-avoidance measures, including an extension of Canada's thin-capitalisation rules and new rules regarding derivative forward agreements (DFAs) and synthetic disposition arrangements (SDAs). Before Bill C-4, Canada's thin-capitalisation rules, which prevent foreign investors from taking profits out of Canada entirely in the form of tax-deductible interest rather than after-tax dividends, only applied to direct and indirect debts of Canadian resident corporations. Effective for taxation years beginning after 2013, Bill C-4 extends these rules to Canadian resident trusts, as well as to debts of non-resident corporations and trusts that carry on business in Canada. For non-resident corporations and trusts, the rules use a notional equity amount based on the cost of property used in such businesses.

The new rules for DFAs and SDAs are targeted at arrangements that synthesise the economic results of certain transactions (for example receipt of certain income streams in the case of DFAs and disposition of appreciated assets in the case of SDAs) without triggering the full corresponding tax consequences. These rules seek to align such tax and economic results but the rules, though aimed at a narrow range of perceived abuses, are broadly drafted and could potentially apply to many transactions.

Bill C-4 also included rules to enact earlier proposals to deny certain deductions in respect of publicly traded stapled securities.

Foreign entities operating in Canada should confirm that their arrangements comply with the expanded thin-capitalisation rules, and should be mindful of the potential impact of the other anti-avoidance rules.

Nancy Diep (nancy.diep@blakes.com)

Tel: +1 403 260 9779

Ian Caines (ian.caines@blakes.com)

Tel: +1 416 863 5277

Blake, Cassels & Graydon

Website: www.blakes.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

ITR’s data has highlighted the US firm’s ambition to become America’s ‘premier’ tax player via a concerted partner recruitment strategy
Jaap Zwaan’s arrival continues a recent streak of A&M Tax investing in the region; in other news, the US and Japan struck a deal that significantly lowered tariff rates
In a world where international tax concepts rely on human activity, Leonard Wagenaar poses existential questions about the future of such ideas when AI is ever-present
France v Axa provides a practical illustration of how the burden of proof is applied in TP matters under French law, ITR also heard
In an exclusive interview with ITR, Ian Gary calls for a central public CbCR database and bemoans the US’s lack of involvement in international tax transparency
Reckitt Benckiser is to divest its Essential Home business, which includes more than 70 brands, to private equity firm Advent International
In the first of a new series of weekly opinion pieces, ITR Editor Tom Baker reflects on the OECD’s attempts to sanitise the US’s brazen pillar two negotiations
The threat of 50% tariffs on Brazilian goods coincides with new Brazilian legal powers to adopt retaliatory economic measures, local experts tell ITR
The country’s chancellor appears to have backtracked from previous pillar two scepticism; in other news, Donald Trump threatened Russia with 100% tariffs
In its latest G20 update, the OECD also revealed tense discussions with the US where the ‘significant threat’ of Section 899 was highlighted
Gift this article