Hit enter after type your search item
Wzy Word


Lady who worn swaps to dash TFSA as a lot as $200K from $5K in a single 365 days suffers triple loss in court docket allure


Most Canadians expend TFSAs as supposed — as fashioned-reason financial savings or investment vehicles to develop funds, tax-free, for future expend. And, no longer like an RRSP or RRIF, when funds are withdrawn from a TFSA, they also are tax-free.

But, in rare instances, tax would perchance perhaps presumably also be levied on a TFSA if it’s sure by the Canada Income Company that a TFSA chronicle holder has got an “support” from their TFSA. The penalty for receiving an support is severe — it’s a 100 per cent penalty tax on the glossy market fee of the support.

One among the instances that would result within the 100 per cent penalty tax entails what are is known as “swap transactions” wherein investments (generally, securities for money) are transferred between the TFSA and its owner, regardless of whether the form of swap become performed at graceful market fee. Because the CRA states in its printed Profits Tax Folio: “The support tax will nonetheless observe in appreciate of any future will enhance within the entire FMV of the property held in connection with the belief which would perchance perhaps presumably be fairly attributable, straight or circuitously, to the swap transaction.”

When the TFSA become first launched support in 2009, swap transactions had been no longer initially section of the TFSA support guidelines but legislative amendments had been introduced on Oct. 17, 2009, a mere ten months after the introduction of the TFSA, basically based on tales that some shrewd customers had already built up six-resolve TFSAs via opportunistically swapping of securities among their accounts.

Final week, the Federal Court docket of Enchantment released its decision within the tax case of a B.C. taxpayer who engaged in varied swap transactions in 2009, sooner than the legislative amendments that would successfully stop all TFSA swap activity.

The taxpayer become described as “an advanced investor with extensive knowledge of the stock market … (who) proved to be highly a certified about her shopping and selling activities.” She had three accounts alongside with her discount brokerage: a non-registered teach shopping and selling chronicle, a self-directed RRSP and a self-directed TFSA. From Might perchance 15 till Oct. 17, 2009, the taxpayer engaged in 71 swap transactions. The swaps enthusiastic transferring listed shares between her TFSA and her non-registered and RRSP accounts.

The taxpayer explained that every swap transaction required that the resources swapped be of equal fee. Her brokerage’s swap valuation guidelines acknowledged that if the stock she become swapping had traded that day, she would perchance perhaps presumably procure “any designate between the excessive and low of the day.” The taxpayer acknowledged “that, in following these pointers, she become at liberty to resolve on the fee of the day that would perchance be most advantageous to her when swapping in or swapping out shares.”

For the entire swap transactions, the fee selected for the shares swapped out of her TFSA become the best designate at which they’d traded throughout the day as a lot as the time of the swap. Conversely, for the shares swapped into her TFSA, the fee chosen become the lowest at which they’d traded.

Because the Federal Court docket of Enchantment observed, “the result of the (taxpayer’s) approach become to inflate the fee of the TFSA in enlighten to have the benefit of a tax-free distribution from her TFSA (versus a taxable withdrawal from her RRSP or a taxable develop within her Canadian shopping and selling chronicle).”

Certainly, by the end of 2009, the taxpayer’s preliminary TFSA contribution of $5,000 become price $205,795. For the years 2010 and 2012, the raise in FMV become $70,841 and $29,217 respectively. (Her TFSA reduced in fee in 2011.)

The subject within the case become whether the taxpayer become at possibility of pay the 100 per cent support tax for the raise in graceful market values in every of 2009, 2010, and 2012 attributable to her swap activity.

While a swap become no longer specifically listed as an “support” sooner than Oct. 17, 2009, an raise in graceful market fee that become both straight or circuitously attributable to transactions “that mustn’t have befell in an start market wherein occasions take care of every other at arm’s dimension and act prudently, knowledgeably and willingly” and that become supposed to have the benefit of the TFSA’s tax exemption become regarded as to constitute an support below the Profits Tax Act.

The CRA argued in Tax Court docket that the taxpayer become ready to shift fee from her RRSP and non-registered chronicle to her TFSA by selecting the fee of the swapped shares “a posteriori.” Attributable to these trades took save off-market and on chronicle of occasions dealing at arm’s dimension mustn’t have agreed to say prices that would ceaselessly downside the holders of the RRSP and the non-registered chronicle, the CRA felt that the taxpayer’s actions resulted in an support below the tax legislation.

The Tax Court docket agreed and in a 2018 decision, concluded that the support tax ($200,795, representing the raise in fee from $5,000), ought to still observe for 2009 but no longer for 2010 nor 2012. It concluded that the raise within the fee of the shares in 2010 and 2012 become attributable to what came about available within the market and become “neither an instantaneous nor an indirect of the swap transactions.”

The taxpayer appealed the Tax Court docket’s decision to impose the support tax for 2009 while the CRA unsuitable-appealed the decrease court docket’s decision no longer to impose the support tax to the desire enhance in graceful market fee in 2010 and 2012.

Final week, in a double (or perchance triple) loss for the taxpayer, the Federal Court docket of Enchantment chanced on the support tax to be relevant in 2009, 2010 and 2012. Because the appellate court docket explained, “For every taxation 365 days into consideration the quiz is how grand of the glossy market fee raise within the TFSA is attributable straight or circuitously to impugned transactions.”

In upholding the support tax for 2010 and 2012 and reversing the Tax Court docket’s decision, the appellate court docket sure the desire enhance within the glossy market fee of the TFSA in 2010 and 2012 had been indeed “circuitously attributable” to the swap transactions undertaken in 2009.


Jamie Golombek, CPA, CA, CFP, CLU, TEP is the Managing Director, Tax & Property Planning with CIBC Monetary Planning & Recommendation Group in Toronto.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This div height required for enabling the sticky sidebar