摘要：This article considers the interpretation and application of the general anti-avoidance
rule (gaar) by the Tax Court of Canada since the Supreme Court of Canada first waded
into the gaar debate in Canada Trustco and Kaulius. More specifically, the authors have
mined the post-Canada Trustco decisions of the Tax Court for emerging trends, uniformity
in the judges’ decisions, and guidance for tax practitioners in developing and implementing
tax plans for their clients.
One surprise in this series of decisions is the level of success enjoyed by taxpayers at
the “avoidance transaction” stage of the gaar test: Evans, Overs, mil Investments, McMullen,
and MacKay were all decided in the taxpayer’s favour at that stage. These cases, along
with Univar, show an inclination on the part of the Tax Court to establish a set of predictable
standards for the interpretation of gaar, in accordance with the Supreme Court’s
preference for certainty, consistency, and predictability in the application of the provision.
However, four other decisions—Desmarais, Lipson, ceco , and Copthorne—represent, to
differing degrees, a departure by the Tax Court from a narrow guideline approach.
The authors conclude that additional standards of gaar interpretation are emerging in
the Tax Court, which, in their view, will assist tax practitioners in the post-Canada Trustco
environment in navigating the often uncertain waters of complex tax planning.
关键词：General anti-avoidance rule n GAAR n statutory interpretation n tax planning
