Canada: Supreme Court provides guidance on treatment of assumed liabilities in asset deals

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

Canada: Supreme Court provides guidance on treatment of assumed liabilities in asset deals

stepak.jpg

jones.jpg

Paul Stepak


Josh Jones

The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) tends to hear only a handful of tax cases each year. In its most recent tax decision, Daishowa-Marubeni International Ltd. v. Canada, the court offered some guidance on the treatment of assumed liabilities in the context of a Canadian asset sale. The case relates to the sale of forest tenures by the taxpayer and whether the taxpayer was required to include in its proceeds of disposition an amount for reforestation obligations assumed by the purchaser in connection with the transaction.

The Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) had held that the taxpayer's proceeds of disposition were required to include the agreed value of the reforestation obligations. In reversing the FCA, the SCC held that the reforestation obligations were not a distinct liability that could be separated from the forest tenures (the amount of which would have been included in proceeds).

Instead, they were a cost embedded in the tenures which served to depress their value. Accordingly, the assumption of those obligations by the purchaser did not give rise to additional proceeds of disposition. While not dispositive of the matter, the SCC recognised that an interpretation of the tax statute that promotes symmetry (as between the tax consequences to the purchaser and vendor) and fairness is preferred over one that results in asymmetrical treatment.

It continues to be good practice for parties to a Canadian asset deal to agree on an allocation of purchase price; a negotiated allocation between arm's-length parties should generally be respected by the Canadian tax authorities.

Parties should also be sure that the contract clearly sets out the amount of the purchase price as finally determined, including a clearly specified amount of any itemised liabilities to be assumed. Based on the SCC's decision, obligations assumed by a purchaser that are embedded in the assets purchased may not need to be separately itemised.

Paul Stepak (paul.stepak@blakes.com)

Tel: +1 416 863 2457
Josh Jones (josh.jones@blakes.com)

Tel: +1 416 863 4278

Blake, Cassels & Graydon

Website:www.blakes.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

In looking at the impact of taxation, money won't always be all there is to it
Australia’s Tax Practitioners Board is set to kick off 2026 with a new secretary to head the administrative side of its regulatory activities.
Ireland’s Department of Finance reported increased income tax, VAT and corporation tax receipts from 2024; in other news, it’s understood that HSBC has agreed to pay the French treasury to settle a tax investigation
The Australian Taxation Office believes the Swedish furniture company has used TP to evade paying tax it owes
Supermarket chain Morrisons is facing a £17 million ($23 million) tax bill; in other news, Donald Trump has cut proposed tariffs
The controversial deal will allow US-parented groups to be carved out from key aspects of pillar two
Awards
ITR invites tax firms, in-house teams, and tax professionals to make submissions for the 2027 World Tax rankings and the 2026 ITR Tax Awards globally
Pillar two was ‘weakened’ when it altered from a multinational convention agreement to simply national domestic law, Federico Bertocchi also argued
Imposing the tax on virtual assets is a measure that appears to have no legal, economic or statistical basis, one expert told ITR
The EU has seemingly capitulated to the US’s ‘side-by-side’ demands. This may be a win for the US, but the uncertainty has only just begun for pillar two
Gift this article