Taxpayer’s own arguments confirmed that his application was premature

Canadian citizen taxpayer moved to Chad in 2003 and to Iraq in 2007, returning to Canada in January 2010. Taxpayer filed Voluntary Disclosure Application to Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) and later filed tax returns for 2004 and 2010-2015, as well as forms 1161, 1243, 2061 and NR73. CRA sent letter informing him that he was “factual resident” following his departure from Canada in 2004. After taxpayer followed up several times to dispute whether he was resident of Canada during time period, Minister of National Revenue confirmed its position. Taxpayer applied for judicial review of confirmation letter and Crown brought motion to strike application. Prothonotary struck application, finding that application was premature and outside of Federal Court’s jurisdiction. Taxpayer appealed. Appeal dismissed. Application was premature and therefore should be struck. “Decision” under review was simply CRA letter informing taxpayer that he was resident for income tax purposes, which was factual determination. Letter was but one component of ongoing administrative process. Ongoing process would lead to other decisions, including decision on taxpayer’s Voluntary Disclosure Application. Taxpayer’s own arguments about jurisdiction confirmed that his application was premature. Allowing premature recourse to judicial review of preliminary residency assessments would frustrate special schemes set up by Parliament and cause delay.

Holland v. Canada (Attorney General) (2019), 2019 CarswellNat 6753, 2019 CarswellNat 7422, 2019 FC 1433, 2019 CF 1433, Glennys L. McVeigh J. (F.C.).

Case Law is a weekly summary of notable civil and criminal court decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Canada and all Ontario courts. These cases may be found online in WestlawNext Canada. To subscribe, please visit store.thomsonreuters.ca