Category Archives: Offshore investments

HOW A CANADIAN HOLDCO CAN REDUCE TAXATION OF FAPI

As a general rule, every Canadian resident who is a shareholder of a “controlled foreign affiliate” (“CFA”), will be subject to tax in Canada on that person’s share of the “foreign accrual property income” (“FAPI”) of that CFA[1].

In general, the FAPI of the CFA will consist of income and taxable capital gains from investments. However, certain types of business income may be deemed to be FAPI, and, conversely certain types of investment income and gains may be deemed not to be FAPI.

This will be the case regardless of whether or not any FAPI is actually distributed by the CFA to the Canadian resident in the relevant year. If and when the FAPI is distributed as a dividend, double tax is avoided by allowing a deduction for previously taxed FAPI[2].

FAPI can be taxed in the hands of any Canadian resident, whether individual or corporate.

However, most accountants do not realize that, in any situation where the FAPI has been subject to significant taxation in the hands of the CFA, either in its country of residence, or the country in which the FAPI is earned, there can be a substantial tax savings benefit by holding the CFA shares in a Canadian holding corporation (“Holdco”), as opposed to in the hands of a Canadian resident individual. For individuals who currently own shares of a CFA personally, it is likely that they could begin to enjoy such benefits simply by rolling over the shares in that CFA to a Holdco under subsection 85(1).

Often, when I mention this to fellow accountants, they find it hard to believe. The structure of our tax system is designed so that one is not supposed to enjoy any significant tax deferral or savings benefits with respect to investment income by using a Holdco, assuming it is a “Canadian-controlled private corporation” (“CCPC”).

I try to explain that it relates to the way credit is given for the underlying tax paid by the CFA on the FAPI (“foreign accrual tax” or “FAT”). Even then, they often still don’t get it, and wrongly suggest that the Holdco would just have to pay additional taxes equal to the excess of the relevant CCPC investment income tax rate[3] and the tax rate paid on the income by the CFA.

Well, the fact of the matter is, that is not the way it works.

Let me explain in an example that relates to an actual situation regarding a new Ontario-resident client of mine who had a wholly-owned Australian corporation (“Ausco”) earning nothing but FAPI.

She was quite upset about the fact that she was paying a lot of tax each year on the FAPI earned by Ausco, even though she was not actually taking a cent in dividends.

I explained to her that such was the way FAPI works, but I then asked whether her regular accountants (a big, national accounting firm) had ever explored with her the possibility of rolling over her Ausco shares to a Holdco. She said that they never had.

Here is what I found when I got the relevant information from her 2017 T1 return, and T1134 information return:

FAPI of Ausco                                                                                                    $103,000

Tax paid by Ausco (FAT)                                                                                        29,000

FAPI included in income (net)                                                                                47,900

Tax paid by client (at top tax bracket-53.5%)                                                       $25,627

What if, instead, the Ausco shares had been rolled-over to Holdco before the end of 2017? How much FAPI would have been taxed, and how much tax would be payable?

They sell originals and no viagra brand fake reported. The first step generic viagra sample a chiropractor takes a medical history, performs a physical examination, and may use lab tests to diagnose ED problems. There is a lot of demand for prices viagra these products across the world. So you may be confused in choosing the right one for you.For more There are so brand cialis price many men and women over 40 years of age opt for Rhytidectomy (facelift). The answer: zilch!, nada!, nothing!

How can that be? It all relates to the different amount used as the relevant tax factor (“RTF”) in determining the way credit is given for the FAT[4].

For an individual, the RTF is currently 1.9, whereas for a corporation it is 4[5]. Or, to look at it another way, if the shareholder is an individual, the CFA has to pay taxes at a rate of at least 52.6% on its income for the shareholder to be spared from paying tax on any FAPI; in contrast, with a corporate shareholder, as long as at least 25% is paid, there is no net inclusion.

So, to go back to my client with the Aussie company, as an individual shareholder, she included the $103,000 in income, and deducted 1.9 times the FAT of $29,000, which is $55,100. That left $47,900 to be included in income, giving her an extra tax cost of $25,627.

On the other hand, Holdco as a shareholder would have been able to fully offset the FAPI inclusion because 4 times the FAT exceeds the FAPI.

But, that is not the end of it, the use of a Holdco in the scenario above is not just a corporate-level tax deferral. It can also lead to an absolute savings in tax. This is because of the fact that, if and when the FAPI is paid to the Holdco as a dividend, it passes through Holdco free of Canadian tax[6], and out to the individual shareholder as an “eligible dividend”[7], which currently bears a top tax rate of less than 40% in Ontario. In contrast, if the dividend had been paid directly to her, it would have been taxed at a rate as high as 53.5%[8].

[1] As income from the shares owned, under subsection 91(1) of the Income Tax Act (“the Act”). All statutory references are to the Act.

[2] Subsection 91(5)

[3] Generally around 50%-in Ontario 50.16%.

[4] Actually, via a deduction under subsection 91(4)

[5] See RTF definition in subsection 95(1)

[6] It would be fully offset by a deduction under paragraph 113(1)(b). Since rate of underlying tax exceeds 25%, three times that tax would exceed amount available for dividend.

[7] See paragraph “b” of item “E” in the “general rate income pool” definition in subsection 89(1).

[8] However, with the dividend passing through Holdco, no credit may be obtained for the 5% Australian tax paid. In contrast, an individual shareholder would have been able to claim a foreign tax credit for the 15% Australian tax that would be payable.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR OF THIS ARTICLE 

Michael I. Atlas, CPA,CA,CPA(ILL),TEP

Michael Atlas is one of the most prominent international tax experts in Canada. He advises accounting and law firms all across Canada, as well as select private clients (corporate and personal) worldwide. He can be reached by phone (416.860.9175) or email (matlas@TaxCA.com). 

 

CANADIAN FOREIGN ASSET REPORTING ISSUES WITH VACATION PROPERTIES

Thousands of Canadians own vacation properties in foreign jurisdictions, such as the United States, Mexico, Panama, or various Caribbean islands. With the winters in this country, that should be no surprise! Often there is confusion as to whether or not the ownership of such property needs to be reported to the Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”)… Continue Reading

CANADIANS WITH FOREIGN AFFILIATES TARGET OF 2018 FEDERAL BUDGET

The Federal Budget that was released on February 27, 2018 contained proposals that will definitely make life more difficult for Canadians who have a “foreign affiliate” (“FA”). In general terms, a non-resident corporation will be a FA of a Canadian resident if that Canadian resident owns at least 10% of the shares of any class.… Continue Reading

CANADIAN T1135 REPORTING FOR PART YEAR RESIDENTS

As a general rule, Canadian residents need to file form T1135 with the CRA for any year in which the total “cost amount” of “specified foreign property” exceeds $100,000 at any time in that year[1]. Depending on the circumstances, this form requires various levels of information to be reported with respect to transactions in connection… Continue Reading

HOW CANADIAN COMPANIES CAN USE EXEMPT SURPLUS TO REDUCE TAXABLE GAINS ON SALE OF FOREIGN SUBSIDIARIES

Envision the following situation: Canco, a private corporate based in Ontario, has just gotten an offer to buy its wholly-owned U.S. subsidiary (“Usco”) for $10 million US. This is far more that the management of Canco thought it was really worth, so they jump at the offer. They ask Joe Numbers, their VP Finance to… Continue Reading

CANADA’S OFFSHORE TAX INFORMANT PROGRAM-THE CRA PROVIDES SOME UNIMPRESSIVE STATISTICS ON RESULTS

On January 15, 2014, the CRA launched the Offshore Tax Informant Program (OTIP). As described on CRA’s website, this program “offers financial rewards to individuals with specific and credible information about major cases of international tax non-compliance resulting in more than $100,000 of additional federal tax being assessed and collected.” In that connection, Question 14… Continue Reading

CRA CONFIRMS THAT PENALTIES FOR FAILURE TO FILE FOREIGN PROPERTY INFORMATION FORM CAN BE STATUTE BARRED

Under subsection 233.3(3) of the Income Tax Act (“the Act”), Canadian residents are generally required to file form T1135 for any year in which they have “specified foreign property” with a total cost base of more than $100,000 at any time in the year. This form is generally due at the same time that the taxpayer’s normal… Continue Reading

CANADIAN FOREIGN TAX CREDITS AND TAX TREATIES-MYTH VS. REALITY

CANADIAN FOREIGN TAX CREDITS AND TAX TREATIES-MYTH VS. REALITY Ever since I can remember, I have heard people reiterate what appears to be a common misconception regarding the ability of Canadians to claim a credit, for foreign taxes that they pay, against their Canadian tax liability. This myth seems to be widespread among accountants who… Continue Reading

FOREIGN ASSETS THAT DON’T REQUIRE T1135 REPORTING

In recent years, Canadian taxpayers and their accountants have been increasingly aware of issues relating to CRA form T1135, which is generally required where taxpayers hold “specified foreign property” (“SFP”) with a total cost base of more than $100,000 at any time in a year. This form and the related requirements have been the subject… Continue Reading

CANADIAN TAX IMPLICATIONS OF INVESTMENT IN OFFSHORE MUTUAL FUNDS  

  Many Canadian residents invest in mutual funds established outside of Canada. Often, the motivation for such investments has nothing to do with tax issues. Rather, in many cases, such funds offer better yields or more attractive asset mixes than domestic funds. In certain cases, such funds may not be directly distributed to Canadian residents,… Continue Reading