All material subject to strictly enforced copyright laws. © 2022 ITR is part of the Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC group.

McKesson saga continues with new filing by taxpayer

McKesson has filed a supplementary memorandum of fact and law after the Court of Appeal deemed its initial memorandum too lengthy. The controversial transfer pricing case, involving a trial judge’s recusal, appears unlikely to come to a conclusion anytime soon.

On January 5, McKesson filed its Supplementary Memorandum of Fact and Law.

McKesson filed an initial Memorandum of Fact and Law on June 11 2014 which claimed that Justice Boyle, of the Tax Court of Canada, “erred” in his findings concerning a receivable sales agreement between McKesson Canada and its parent company (MIH) in Luxembourg.

In 2002, MIH bought receivables from McKesson for $460 million and purchased all eligible receivables daily, for the next five years, subject to a $900 million cap. McKesson used a discount rate of 2.206%.

Justice Boyle said an arm’s-length rate in the range of 0.959% to 1.17% would have been appropriate and dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal.

On September 4 2014, Justice Boyle filed his recusal. The 47 page recusal stated that McKesson’s appeal contained “clear untruths” and made “allegations of impartiality”.

Supplementary memorandum of fact and law

McKesson filed the supplementary memorandum at the request of the Court of Appeal who found their initial memorandum “unnecessarily lengthy”.

The supplementary memorandum states that the reasoning behind Boyle’s recusal endangered “the appearance of fairness on appeal”.

The memorandum goes on to say that the recusal reasons:

· Are an improper attempt to influence the Court of Appeal;

· Undermine the solicitor-client relationship;

· Retrospectively reveal the trial judge’s disposition against the Appellant;

· Fundamentally misconstrue the Appellant’s arguments on appeal; and

· Raise an inescapable inference of animus against the Appellant.

The Crown has yet to file a responding memorandum.

While an outcome in the McKesson Canada Corp. versus The Queen is unlikely to happen anytime soon, one thing is clear - this has to be one of the most controversial and drawn out transfer pricing cases to date.

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The UN may be set to assume a global role in tax policy that would rival the OECD, while automakers lobby the US to change its tax rules on Chinese materials.
Companies including Valentino and EveryMatrix say the early adoption of EU public CbCR rules could boost transparency of local and foreign MNEs, despite the short notice.
ITR invites tax firms, in-house teams, and tax professionals to make submissions for the 2023 ITR Tax Awards in Asia-Pacific, Europe Middle East & Africa, and the Americas.
Tax authorities and customs are failing multinationals by creating uncertainty with contradictory assessment and guidance, say in-house tax directors.
The CJEU said the General Court erred in law when it ruled that both companies benefitted from Italian state aid.
An OECD report reveals multinationals have continued to shift profits to low-tax jurisdictions, reinforcing the case for strong multilateral action in response.
The UK government announced plans to increase taxes on oil and gas profits, while the Irish government considers its next move on tax reform.
War and COVID have highlighted companies’ unpreparedness to deal with sudden geo-political changes, say TP specialists.
A source who has seen the draft law said it brings clarity on intangibles and other areas of TP including tax planning.
Tax consultants say companies must not ignore financial transactions in their TP policies as authorities, particularly in the UK, become more demanding.