Bifalgorithm post · Un actionnaire vend un immeuble à sa société · Case tabs

Peritos

Peritos (Un actionnaire vend un immeuble à sa société · Case tabs) — "At the hearing before the Tax Court of Canada, the appellant’s expert witness, Benoît Ega…

Ideas in this flowchart

  • Tax Court assessment of the property's value and a possible premium
  • Appellant's expert Benoît Egan considered J.C. Fibers a special purchaser
  • The price paid was fair and reasonable because few alternative sites were available
  • Relocating elsewhere would have cost more than the price paid to the shareholder
  • The property's market value for a typical purchaser was $1,000,000
  • Respondent's expert Gaston Laberge valued the property at $1,000,000
  • Laberge used the cost, parity, and income appraisal methods
  • Laberge did not assess whether the property had a higher value for J.C. Fibers
  • The Tax Court judge found that the property's market value on February 2, 1996, was $1,000,000
  • The judge questioned whether a premium could be added for the non-arm's-length commercial transaction
Feed/

Peritos

No cover

Channel

Un actionnaire vend un immeuble à sa société

1 page

"At the hearing before the Tax Court of Canada, the appellant’s expert witness, Benoît Egan, a chartered appraiser, indicated that the price paid by J.C. Fibers was fair and reasonable as J.C. Fibers was a special purchaser. His report, which was not challenged in this respect, indicated that there were few alternative sites for J.C. Fibers and that it would have cost more than the price paid to its shareholder to locate elsewhere. Mr. Egan conceded, however, that the market value of the property for a typical purchaser was $1,000,000.\n\nThe respondent’s expert witness, Gaston Laberge, put the fair market value of the property at $1,000,000, using the three recognized appraisal methods, namely: the cost method, the parity method and the income method. However, he did not try to determine whether the property might have had a higher value for J.C. Fibers in view of the particular situation in which that corporation found itself.\n\nOn the basis of the opinions of the two expert witnesses, the Tax Court of Canada judge was satisfied that the market value of the property on February 2, 1996, was $1,000,000 (paragraph 14). However, he wondered whether it was possible “to add a premium to this market value to justify the fact that J.C. Fibers paid a price greater than the market value in the context of a genuine commercial transaction between non-arm’s length parties” (paragraph 15)."

Flowchart preview
👍
0
0 comments0 shares

Sign in to view and post comments.