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 2025

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

Experts from law firm Kennedys outline the key tax disputes trends set to define 2026, ranging from increased enforcement to continued tariff drama and AI usage
They also warned against an ‘unnecessary duplication of efforts’ in UN tax convention negotiations; in other news, White & Case has hired Freshfields’ former French tax head
Awards
Submit your nominations to this year's WIBL EMEA Awards by 16 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'
Gift this article