• About
  • Offices
  • Careers
  • News
  • Students
  • Alumni
  • Payments
  • EN | FR
Background Image
Bennett Jones Logo
  • People
  • Expertise
  • Knowledge
  • Search
  • FR Menu
  • Search Mobile
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
View all
Practices
Corporate Litigation Regulatory Tax View all
Industries
Energy Infrastructure Mining Private Equity & Investment Funds View all
Advisory
Crisis & Risk Management Public Policy
View Client Work
International Experience
Insights News Events Subscribe
Arbitration Angle Artificial Intelligence Insights Business Law Talks Podcast Class Actions: Looking Forward Class Action Quick Takes
Economic Outlook New Energy Economy Series Private Equity Briefings Quarterly Fintech Insights Quarterly M&A Insights
Sustainability & the CIO
People
Offices
About
Practices
Industries
Advisory Services
Client Work
Insights
News
Events
Careers
Law Students
Alumni
Payments
Search
Subscribe

Stay informed on the latest business and legal insights and events.

LinkedIn LinkedIn Twitter Twitter Vimeo Vimeo
 

The Role of Subsequent Legislative Amendments in the GAAR Analysis

January 2014

Numerous Canadian courts have used subsequent legislative amendments (amendments made after the time applicable to a transaction) as an important tool of statutory interpretation. In the tax context over the last decade, subsequent legislative amendments have been held to be particularly relevant to the third stage of the general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR) analysis: whether there has been a misuse or abuse of the object, spirit, and purpose of the provisions of the Income Tax Act that are relied on by the taxpayer. In this respect, the Minister typically argues that a subsequent amendment is evidence of a pre-existing policy in the Act that the taxpayer has abused. In contrast, from the taxpayer's perspective, amendments arguably demonstrate that a transaction did not offend any unwritten rule or policy at the time it took place. This article provides a brief review of the role of subsequent legislative amendments in the GAAR analysis. Published by LexisNexis in the January 2014 edition of Canadian Current Tax.

Key Contact

  • Jared A. Mackey Jared A. Mackey, Partner

Related Links

  • Insights
  • Media
  • Subscribe

Related Expertise

  • Tax

Recent Posts

Speaking Engagements

Rethinking Cyber Risk in the Age of AI: What Boards Need to Know

July 08, 2025
       

Announcements

Eighteen Bennett Jones Lawyers Ranked in Lexpert's Special Edition on Health Sciences

July 02, 2025
       

Client Work

Bennett Jones Acts for Canadian Pacific Kansas City Limited in Overturning C$228 Million Judgment

July 02, 2025
       

Announcements

Harinder Basra Appointed Calgary Managing Partner at Bennett Jones

July 01, 2025
       

Announcements

John Manley Appointed Companion of the Order of Canada

June 30, 2025
       

Articles

Ursic v. Country Lumber Ltd.: The Employment and Labour Law Reporter

June 27, 2025
       

Articles

Mareva Injunctions in Canada: Now Easier to Get?

June 25, 2025
       

Announcements

David Wahl Appointed to CIArb Canada Board of Directors

June 23, 2025
       

Client Work

BCI Acquires BBGI Global Infrastructure SA in £1 Billion Take-Private

June 23, 2025
       
Bennett Jones Centennial Footer
Bennett Jones Centennial Footer
About
  • Leadership
  • Diversity
  • Community
  • Innovation
  • Security
Offices
  • Calgary
  • Edmonton
  • Montréal
  • Ottawa
  • Toronto
  • Vancouver
  • New York
Connect
  • Insights
  • News
  • Events
  • Careers
  • Students
  • Alumni
Subscribe

Stay informed on the latest business and legal insights and events.

LinkedIn LinkedIn Twitter Twitter Vimeo Vimeo
© Bennett Jones LLP 2025. All rights reserved.
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Use
Logo Bennett Jones