Canada: Canadian Supreme Court confirms GAAR test

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: Canadian Supreme Court confirms GAAR test

On December 16, 2011, the Supreme Court of Canada released Copthorne Holdings Ltd. v. Canada (2011 SCC 63), its fourth decision on the general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR). The court unanimously dismissed the taxpayer's appeal, upholding the two lower courts.

Two Canadian corporations which had been parent-child were amalgamated horizontally as a result of two sets of transactions. First the parent sold the subsidiary corporation to its non-resident shareholder resulting in sibling corporations. This reorganisation was designed to allow the PUC of the shares of both corporations to be aggregated by amalgamation, and facilitated unrelated tax planning. Later, the corporations were amalgamated as Copthorne, which then paid a return of capital to the non-resident shareholder free of withholding tax using the PUC.

The minister applied the GAAR asserting that the PUC of the subsidiary's shares should have been cancelled on the amalgamation with its former parent. Copthorne was assessed for the resulting withholding tax.

The court held that the transactions were a single series, and that the sale of the subsidiary corporation was an avoidance transaction (a transaction within a single series that results in a tax benefit and is not undertaken primarily for non-tax purposes). The court determined that the subsequent amalgamation had been undertaken "in contemplation" of the earlier sale and thus met the extended statutory definition of a "series". The court concluded that it was the intention of parliament that "in contemplation" would also apply to past events.

On the final test, the court reaffirmed its earlier jurisprudence and the requirement for a "unified textual, contextual and purposive approach" to determine whether the transaction resulted in a misuse or abuse of the provisions of the tax statute. The allegedly abused provision is examined, with proximate and complementary provisions and extrinsic aids, to determine "what the provision was intended to do". Taking this approach, the court concluded that these transactions abused the PUC computation provision relating to amalgamations. In context, the purpose of this provision was to prevent the duplication of PUC on an amalgamation.

Edward Rowe (edward.rowe@blakes.com) and John May (john.may@blakes.com)

Blake, Cassels & Graydon

Tel: +1 416 863 2400 Fax: +1 416 863 2653

Website: www.blakes.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Awards
Submit your nominations to this year's WIBL EMEA Awards by 6 February 2026
Defending loss situations in TP is not about denying the existence of losses but about showing, through proactive measures, that the losses reflect genuine commercial realities
Further empowerment of HMRC enforcement has been praised, but the pre-Budget OBR leak was described as ‘shambolic’
Michel Braun of WTS Digital reviews ITR’s inaugural AI in tax event, and concludes that AI will enhance, not replace, the tax professional
The report is solid and balanced as it correctly underscores the ambitious institutional redesign that Brazil has undertaken in adopting a dual VAT model, experts tell ITR
The Brazilian law firm partner warns against going independent too early, considers the weight of political pressure, and tells ITR what makes tax cool
The lessons from Ireland are clear: selective, targeted, and credible fiscal incentives can unlock supply and investment
The ITR in-house award winner delves into his dramatic novelisation of tax transformation, and declares that 'tax doesn’t need AI right now'
Recent news of job cuts at EY is symptomatic of how the PwC controversy has tarnished the reputation of the entire ‘big four’
Experts reportedly discussed extending the safe harbour to 2027 to give countries more time to legislate; in other news, Baker McKenzie and Greenberg Traurig made senior tax hires
Gift this article