Why would it count as income?
The money was given to her... If you give someone $500.. That person doesn't have to report it as income!?
|
|
|
To be masked or not to be masked
- Thread starter justride
- Start date
Why would it count as income?
The money was given to her... If you give someone $500.. That person doesn't have to report it as income!?
It depends on who it was given to. Was it her, personally, or was it under the name of an organization?
That is an interesting question. I am sure CRA will be paying close attention to her. Was this a business venture? She made herself the face of an organization that was collecting money to accomplish a task and wasn't a registered charity. That sounds like a business. I am sure she would fight back if CRA tried to classify it as income but it would be an interesting fight. Explaining why you are depositing "gifts" from thousands of people that you did not know prior to starting your venture that looks a lot like a business would be interesting to watch.
One of the problems fighting with the CRA, and I have been involved with them, they have about 10,000 accountants that are tax specialists and a gaggle of lawyers that are tax specialists all working on our dime. Defence gets really expensive , really fast.
I wonder if defense lawyers/accountants will accept payment in crypto?
Been there done that, don’t ever want to see another cra agent again in my lifetime
There's also the possibility of investigations yielding charges under CC section 467, though that is really intended for organizations like biker gangs and the Mafia.
If it's a gift...then no. Gifts are not taxable under the CRA rules and regulations.
Now if you make it a recurring $500 payment (weekly / monthly / etc) then there may be some questions.
If my parents decide to give me 100k as a gift today, tax man doesn't touch it as I understand it.
It wasn't a registered charity.. and no receipts were given.
I think you would have to bend the definition pretty far to call that 'protest' a business.
There is avenues and laws the gov can use to confiscate that money.. if found.. but it shouldn't be through the CRA.
I don't think you need to deviate from the definition of business at all. It is incredibly broad (an undertaking of any kind for profit). If she distributed all money, you could argue that there was no profit and therefore no business. The current discussion is if she has money from it in which case it fits the definition of a business with no latitude needed.
I am not saying the CRA is the best avenue to go after her. It's just one of the many tools the government could use to make her life miserable.
What is a business? - Canada.ca
A business is an activity that you intend to carry on for profit and there is evidence to support that intention.
"A business is an activity that you intend to carry on for profit and there is evidence to support that intention.
A business includes:
- a profession
- a calling
- a trade
- a manufacture
- an undertaking of any kind
- an adventure or concern in the nature of trade. "
It's not just a "business" that is required to be fiscally responsible. Charities and other organizations are also.
I don't think you need to deviate from the definition of business at all. It is incredibly broad (an undertaking of any kind for profit). If she distributed all money, you could argue that there was no profit and therefore no business. The current discussion is if she has money from it in which case it fits the definition of a business with no latitude needed.
What is a business? - Canada.ca
A business is an activity that you intend to carry on for profit and there is evidence to support that intention.www.canada.ca
"A business is an activity that you intend to carry on for profit and there is evidence to support that intention.
A business includes:
- a profession
- a calling
- a trade
- a manufacture
- an undertaking of any kind
- an adventure or concern in the nature of trade. "
I understand the definition of a business... I just can't see the 'protest' or whatever you want to call it, falling under that definition.
I think one of the reasons the gov referred to it as "an illegal occupation" instead of a protest is so they could use the laws and tools that allow them to deal with the money flow related to an illegal activity.
You can't call something illegal.. and then tax it as if it's a legit business.
see reply above.
Yes they can and yes they do.
If you create an organization for a purpose like for example holding a protest, then you collect money for that organization, you are subject to the laws that govern that activity.
Even non profit corporations need to keep books and file returns. Condos are non profit and it gets sticky if they make a profit. They can only be reimbursed for expenses.I don't think you need to deviate from the definition of business at all. It is incredibly broad (an undertaking of any kind for profit). If she distributed all money, you could argue that there was no profit and therefore no business. The current discussion is if she has money from it in which case it fits the definition of a business with no latitude needed.
I am not saying the CRA is the best avenue to go after her. It's just one of the many tools the government could use to make her life miserable.
What is a business? - Canada.ca
A business is an activity that you intend to carry on for profit and there is evidence to support that intention.
"A business is an activity that you intend to carry on for profit and there is evidence to support that intention.
A business includes:
- a profession
- a calling
- a trade
- a manufacture
- an undertaking of any kind
- an adventure or concern in the nature of trade. "
There's a thin gray line between doing something nice for someone because it is the right thing to do and doing something for someone because you expect compensation.
In some cases consideration is considered compensation. You don't get paid for the goods or services but there is goodwill value to be cashed in later.
What about a class action lawsuit by the people that thought their donations were going to be passed onto the truckers but now see it in the pockets of the organizers. If I gave to a protest I would expect the moneys to be "In trust" for the specific stated activities. That hasn't happened.
If there is a new cause I'm OK with a pledge but not a donation. If the target is met the pledge is honoured. If the target isn't met the collecting party doesn't get to switch to a cause to which I may disagree.
Some are just dumb enough to try that. "The gov't tried to stop their righteous battle so I donated crypto to get around the man".
Gofundme (and other similar grift platforms) get in trouble on that front repeatedly.
Bad choice of words on my part.
But.. they didn't tax the illegal business... they went after the people that earned income from it.
Those people were convicted of serious charges including laundering...
Lich isn't charged with anything that serious.. nor anything related to financial /laundering crimes (not yet anyway)
Last edited:
It's not over yet.
|
|
|
|
|