Christie v. The Queen

Christie v. The Queen
Court (s) Database
Tax Court of Canada Judgments
Date
2006-04-26
Neutral citation
2006 TCC 255
File numbers
2005-2330(IT)I
Judges and Taxing Officers
Eric A. Bowie
Subjects
Income Tax Act
Decision Content
Docket: 2005-2330(IT)I
BETWEEN:
PETER CHRISTIE,
Appellant,
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
____________________________________________________________________
Appeal heard on April 24, 2006, at Toronto, Ontario,
By: The Honourable Justice E.A. Bowie
Appearances:
For the Appellant:
The Appellant himself
Counsel for the Respondent:
Carole Calabrese
____________________________________________________________________
JUDGMENT
The appeal from the reassessment of tax made under the Income Tax Act for the 2003 taxation year is dismissed.
Signed at Toronto, Ontario, this 26th day of April, 2006.
"E.A. Bowie"
Bowie J.
Citation: 2006TCC255
Date: 20060426
Docket: 2005-2330(IT)I
BETWEEN:
PETER CHRISTIE,
Appellant,
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
BowieJ.
[1] This appeal is from the Appellant's 2003 income tax assessment. The facts are not in dispute.
[2] In 2003, the Appellant worked for about six months in Canada for a Dutch firm. He was a resident of Canada, and he worked from his home in Canada. He spent about one week of every three in the United States of America, and much of his time while in Canada was spent communicating by telephone and email with people in the USA. His employer had an affiliate in the USA and found it convenient to arrange for him to be paid by that affiliate in US currency. The affiliate withheld income tax as it would for a US resident employee, and remitted it to the US Government. This arrangement was put in place by the Appellant and his employer to conform to their understanding of the requirements of the US and Canadian tax laws and the Canada-US Tax Convention. I have no doubt that they did what they thought the law required.
[3] The Appellant's employment income paid by the US affiliate in 2003 was U$60,000, from which U$18,000 was withheld and remitted. When filing his income tax return for 2003, he claimed foreign tax credits of $25,226 to reduce his tax payable in Canada to nil. He was originally assessed on that basis, but by a reassessment in September 2004 the Minister of National Revenue disallowed the foreign tax credits.
[4] Thereafter, the Appellant applied for and received a full refund of the tax withheld at source. This was paid to him by way of a cheque for U$18,021 from the United States Treasury.
[5] The basis of the Appellant's appeal to this Court is that between the time that tax was withheld from him and the time he obtained the refund, the Canadian dollar had increased in value relative to the US dollar, with the result that the U$18,000 that was deducted at source from his salary was worth $25,226 at the then prevailing rate of exchange, but when he received the refund in November 2004, it was worth only C$21,770. It is this difference that he seeks to recover by this appeal.
[6] While I have some sympathy for the position in which the Appellant finds himself, there is no remedy for his problem available in this Court. He does not dispute the correctness of the assessment from which he appeals, nor is there any basis on which he could do so. His loss results from the fact that his employer, apparently with his concurrence, chose to pay him from the United States and to remit withholdings to the wrong government. Mr. Christie's appeal was essentially to an equitable jurisdiction that this Court simply does not have. It has been held many times that the Court has no power to grant relief except in accordance with the statute - it cannot make exceptions on grounds of fairness or equity: see Chaya v. The Queen.[1]
[7] As the assessment is correct, the appeal must therefore be dismissed.
Signed at Toronto, Ontario, this 26th day of April, 2006.
"E.A. Bowie"
Bowie J.
CITATION:
2006TCC255
COURT FILE NO.:
2005-2330(IT)I
STYLE OF CAUSE:
Peter Christie and Her Majesty the Queen
PLACE OF HEARING:
Toronto, Ontario
DATES OF HEARING:
April 24, 2006
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:
The Honourable Justice E.A. Bowie
DATE OF JUDGMENT:
April 26, 2006
APPEARANCES:
For the Appellant:
The Appellant himself
Counsel for the Respondent:
Carole Calabrese
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the Appellant:
Name:
N/A
Firm:
N/A
For the Respondent:
John H. Sims, Q.C.
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, Canada
[1] 2004 DTC 6676 @ 6677.