Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    can.legal    |    Debating Canuck legal system quirks    |    10,932 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 10,029 of 10,932    |
|    Alan Baggett to All    |
|    Art from the Archive: Toni Onley versus     |
|    14 Jul 15 03:12:30    |
      From: AlanBaggett@volcanomail.com              Art from the Archive: Toni Onley versus Revenue Canada : CRA SOTW              June 10, 2015. 11:23 am        I'm on Twitter @KevinCGriffin              1983       Toni Onley knew how to get media attention.       He was known as the millionaire artist who drove a Rolls Royce and owned and       piloted several planes. He did not fit the conventional, romantic image of the       poor, struggling artist.              Onley was successful and let everyone know it. In 1983, he took on Revenue       Canada over a tax ruling he said would unfairly affect his income. He always       made it clear that he was out to get a ruling changed to benefit himself in       taking on the tax        department. But he pointed out that what he was doing could help other artists       across the country in similar positions.              Revenue Canada would only allow him to give away his art up to a value of 20       per cent of his income. Because Onley was so successful, he had already used       up his 20 per cent and didn't have any left over for other projects including       one to fund a hospital        he was building in India. The 20 per cent limit wouldn't apply if he donated       works to an institution such as the National Gallery but that was incredibly       time consuming and slow and required getting appraisals that could take months.              "I'm making myself a test case," he said in The Vancouver Sun in October. This       tax law was never intended for artists. There is no tax law that applies to       artists, so they lump them with manufacturers. This is ludicrous."              Rather than pay tax on his prints, he said he would burn 1,058 prints - about       half his stock of seascapes and landscapes. Each one had a retail value of       $400 to $1,500.              He was going to make the burning a public event by doing it on Wreck Beach two       days later in front of the media.              The story received media coverage across the country. Former Prime Minister       Joe Clark asked him not to burn his prints. So did Minister of Culture Francis       Fox. Even Prime Minister Trudeau was asked to intervene.              But once Onley got to Spanish Banks - not, as it turned out, Wreck Beach as he       earlier indicated - it was a bit of a letdown. There was no bonfire. Onley       told reporters and camera operators that he wasn't going to burn his prints.              That morning, he said on Jack Webster's Show in BCTV that he had changed his       mind. He believed that burning the prints would have no affect on his tax       status. Getting a second look by officials in Ottawa "was pretty well as much       as I can ask for, I would        think."              At the time, Revenue Canada was auditing him for 1980 and 1981. Also at issue       from Onley's point of view was whether artists could deduct expenses incurred       for the production of unsold work.              "(Revenue Canada wants) a complete inventory so they can attach a value to       that inventory," he said. "It would increase taxes considerably.              "They think I'm a selfish bastard who is trying to get rid of my prints to       escape taxes," he said. "I'm terribly upset at their insensitive response."              "I was not planning to do this for myself. It's for all the other artists who       will be hit by what Revenue Canada is doing."              For the next several years, as the story dragged on, Onley became the artist       The Vancouver Sun called whenever it needed someone to comment on a story       about artists and taxes.              A year later in 1984, Revenue Canada said the department had accepted the idea       that "artists and writes may need more time to turn a profit than ordinary       businesses." The department now believed that "continuous losses for many       years are not alone        sufficient to establish that there is no reasonable expectation of profit."       For Revenue Canada, a reasonable expectation of profit was a criterion for       determining what expenses could be deducted for tax purposes.              I'm on Twitter @KevinCGriffin              ----------------------------------------------------------       Miss a Tax Tale Miss a lot!       Visit the CRA SOTW Library at http://canada.revenue.agency.angelfire.com              ------------------------------------------------------------       Alan Baggett - http://www.taxcollectorsbible.com/ - Tax Collector's Bible              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca