Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T11:09:29.008Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Administration of the Canadian Income Tax Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2014

C. Fraser Elliott
C. Fraser Elliott*
Affiliation:
Ottawa
Get access

Extract

To administer the Canadian Income Tax Law, Canada is divided into nineteen districts. The districts are irregular in shape and of different areas. Their shape was influenced by the desire to have a district follow the railway lines. Recognition was given also to the main centres and provinces. In the beginning, sub-offices were required to serve the people, but experience has shown that they are not a necessity and most of them have been closed. The districts have remained unchanged for about ten years. Each is in charge of an inspector directly responsible to Ottawa.

The amount of the revenue collected in each district is not a true criterion of the wealth of the particular district. Some small districts have the head office of a few large corporations in them. The district of London, Ontario, for instance, has in it such companies as the Ford Motor Car and Imperial Oil. Their income is derived from world-wide sources. Consequently on a revenue collection basis the district appears to have more wealth in it than it really has. It is the same with Toronto and Montreal.

Usually a company files and pays its tax in the district where it has its head office, although the business of the company may be located in some other district. For example, the mines of northern Ontario are located in the Ottawa district but their corporate head offices are in Toronto, so they file and pay their taxes there. There is not any compulsion to pay in any particular district. Districts are established for the convenience of the public and returns can be filed in the district most convenient for the taxpayer.

Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science/Revue canadienne de economiques et science politique , Volume 4 , Issue 3 , August 1938 , pp. 377 - 390
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 1938

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 23-24 Geo. V, c. 41.

2 25-26 Geo. V, c. 40.

3 Revised Statutes of Canada, 1927, c. 97 (hereafter referred to as R.S.C.), s. 33.

4 R.S.C., s. 35(2).

5 R.S.C., s. 39.

6 23-24 Geo. V, c. 41, s. 15.

7 23-24 Geo. V, c. 41, s. 39A.

8 R.S.C., s. 72.

9 R.S.C., s. 71.

10 R.S.C., s. 3.

11 R.S.C., s. 10.

12 R.S.C., s. 10.

13 10-11 Geo. V, c. 49, s. 1; R.S.C., s. 2(b).

14 14-15 Geo. V, c. 46, s. 5; R.S.C., s. 19.

15 14-15 Geo. V, c. 46, s. 4(d); R.S.C., s. 6(d).

16 16-17 Geo. V, c. 10, s. 8; R.S.C., s. 18.

17 16-17 Geo. V, c. 10, s. 8(10); R.S.C., s. 17.

18 16-17 Geo. V, s. 8(9); R.S.C., s. 16.

19 7-8 Geo. V, 1917, c. 28, s. 3(b); R.S.C., s. 4(n).

20 20-21 Geo. V, c. 24, s. 4.

21 16-17 Geo. V, c. 10, s. 8(11); R.S.C., s. 14.

22 16-17 Geo. V, c. 10, s. 3; R.S.C., s. 21.

23 R.S.C., s. 2(i).

24 16-17 Geo. V, c. 10, s. 3(11); R.S.C., s. 6(e).

25 R.S.C., s. 31.

26 I Edw. VIII, c. 38, s. 10.

27 13-14 Geo. V, c. 52, s. 2; R.S.C., s. 5(b).

28 United States v. Isham, 84 U.S. 496 (21 L.Ed. 728).

29 Wiggin v. Commissioner, 46 F. (2d) 743.