Strategies for advancing Canadian tax disputes

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

Strategies for advancing Canadian tax disputes

canadaflag100x90.jpg

Taxpayers should familiarise themselves with the different options for overcoming the backlog of cases in the Canada Revenue Agency and Tax Court of Canada, by Carrie Aiken and Dan Jankovic of Blake, Cassels & Graydon

Increasingly, taxpayers are experiencing significant delays and expenses advancing and resolving Canadian tax disputes. Compounding the issue is the fact that the Canadian tax authorities are pursuing more aggressive positions in their assessments of tax, and there is a backlog of cases in both the internal appeals processes of the Canada Revenue Agency and appeals within the Tax Court of Canada. However, there are options available to advance tax disputes more efficiently.

Often, an assessment raises several independent issues on which the Minister of National Revenue is relying to reassess tax. In such a case, defending the multiple issues at the same time may cause additional delays or dilute the main issue. Provided the taxpayer and the Minister consent, subsection 171(2) of the Income Tax Act (Canada) permits the parties to request a hearing of only specific issues as opposed to all the issues at once. This permits tax litigants to be more strategic with their tax disputes. For example, a tax dispute may become less contentious if one of the issues is decided first. This option may also be attractive where one of the issues has larger financial implications. If the Tax Court of Canada disposes of the issue in favour of the taxpayer, the Minister must give effect to its decision (subject to its rights of appeal) on the decided issue without having to wait for the disposition of the other issues.

Questions of law and fact

Section 173 of the Income Tax Act permits the Minister and the taxpayer to put a question of law, a mixed question of law and fact, or a question of fact before the Tax Court of Canada for determination, provided both parties consent to the process. This provision allows a question to be advanced and a determination to be made by the Court at any stage of the tax dispute, including at the audit stage. The strategy is to avoid a full appeal of the issue or a drawn-out process by trying to get a specific matter resolved expeditiously.

Another option is to proceed under rule 58 of the Tax Court of Canada Rules. An application under this rule may be appropriate where one of the parties does not consent to a hearing under section 173 of the Income Tax Act. Under rule 58, the Tax Court of Canada has the power to grant an order that a question of law, fact, or mixed law and fact raised in a pleading be determined before hearing the appeal. This option may be advantageous (and is only available) where the determination of the question may have the result of disposing of all or part of the appeal, substantially shortening the hearing or decreasing costs.

Carrie Aiken (carrie.aiken@blakes.com) is a partner and
Dan Jankovic (dan.jankovic@blakes.com) is an associate in the Calgary office of Blake Cassels & Graydon, the principal Canadian correspondents for the Tax Disputes channel of www.internationaltaxreview.com.



more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Complex and constantly shifting rules on global mobility mean ‘the risk is too great’ for staff to work abroad on personal time, EY’s Maureen Flood tells ITR
While it’s great that the OECD is alive to multinationals’ fears of being caught in a compliance trap, the ‘common understanding’ illustrates a worrying lack of readiness
Rising demand for specialist expertise has fuelled the growth in tax partner headcounts, Cain Dwyer found; in other news, Switzerland has been urged to reconsider pillar two
An OECD report on the taxation of the digital economy is expected by the end of 2026, according to the group of nations
Trophy assets are evolving from personal indulgences to structured investments, prompting family offices to prioritise tax efficiency, governance discipline, and cross-border compliance
As demand for complex, cross-border private client counsel spikes, Patrick McCormick sees opportunity in starting from scratch
As part of an exclusive global alliance, KPMG will become one of Anthropic’s ‘preferred consultants’ for private equity
In the second part of this series, the focus shifts to how taxpayers can manage ongoing risks across the lifecycle of cross-border structures
Jurisdictions have moved to ensure that multinationals are not punished for late GIR filings due to a lack of available filing portals or exchange relationships
HMRC’s push for unified tax adviser registration won’t prevent every instance of improper conduct, but it is good for taxpayers and the UK’s reputation
Gift this article