Leafs Legends Take On Tax Giant: Marleau, Muzzin Join Tavares In CRA Battle
Former Toronto Maple Leafs stars Patrick Marleau, Jake Muzzin, and John Tavares are among several former NHL players who are taking on the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) in a tax battle. The players are disputing the CRA's assessment that they owe millions of dollars in back taxes on signing bonuses they received while playing in the United States.
The Players' Argument
The players argue that the signing bonuses were not taxable in Canada because they were paid in U.S. dollars and the players were not resident in Canada at the time the bonuses were received. The CRA, however, argues that the bonuses were taxable in Canada because the players were employed by Canadian teams and the bonuses were paid for services rendered in Canada.
The case is being closely watched by the NHL and the NHL Players' Association (NHLPA). If the players are successful in their appeal, it could have a significant impact on how NHL players are taxed on signing bonuses in the future.
The CRA's Position
The CRA has a long-standing policy of taxing NHL players on signing bonuses, regardless of where the bonuses are paid or where the players are resident at the time the bonuses are received. The CRA argues that signing bonuses are a form of income that is earned by NHL players in exchange for their services. As such, the CRA believes that signing bonuses are taxable in Canada, even if the players are not resident in Canada at the time the bonuses are received.
The CRA's position is supported by a number of court decisions. In a 2014 case, the Tax Court of Canada ruled that a signing bonus paid to a Canadian NHL player was taxable in Canada, even though the player was not resident in Canada at the time the bonus was received.
The Players' Counterarguments
The players are arguing that the CRA's position is unfair and that it is not supported by the law. The players argue that signing bonuses are not income that is earned in exchange for services rendered in Canada. Rather, the players argue that signing bonuses are a form of compensation that is paid to players for signing a contract with a team.
The players also argue that the CRA's position is discriminatory. The players argue that they are being treated differently than other Canadian taxpayers who receive bonuses from their employers. For example, a Canadian who receives a signing bonus from a U.S. employer is not required to pay taxes on the bonus in Canada.
The Broader Implications
The outcome of this case could have a significant impact on how NHL players are taxed on signing bonuses in the future. If the players are successful in their appeal, it could lead to a change in the CRA's policy on taxing signing bonuses. This could result in NHL players saving millions of dollars in taxes.
The outcome of this case could also have a broader impact on the taxation of professional athletes in Canada. If the players are successful in their appeal, it could lead to other professional athletes challenging the CRA's policy on taxing signing bonuses.
Conclusion
The case of Marleau, Muzzin, and Tavares v. The CRA is a complex and important case that could have a significant impact on the taxation of NHL players in the future. The outcome of this case will be closely watched by the NHL, the NHLPA, and the CRA.
0 Comments: