Foreword

• Author: Justice Donald Bowman
• Pages: 13-14

xiii

Foreword

It would be impossible in a short foreword to do justice to the breadth, va ri-

ety, and brilliance of t he essays in this book. So I won’t try. ey range from

practical commenta ries (which, as a journeym an trial judge slogging it out

in the trenches, I f‌ind enormously helpf ul) to treatises that a re downright

daunting in their er udition. ere is someth ing here for everyone: legal

theorists, economis ts, tax advisors, tax litigators, a nd judges.

Since it came i nto force, the GAAR — the a f‌fectionate acronym for se c-

tion  of the Income Tax Act — has provoked a plethora of debate and

learned commentar y that has not been seen since t ax reform in . e

dif‌ferences of opinion that have emerged conti nue unabated. Members of

the tax commun ity fall i nto dif‌ferent schools of thought. I won’t say which

one I am in, if any. For one thing, I am not sure mysel f. ere are those who

say the GAAR is a heav y-handed piece of legislative art illery th at puts too

much power in the hands of the tax col lector and that would have been

unnecessar y if the government and the courts had been a l ittle more vigor-

ous in attackin g blatant tax avoidance schemes. It a ll started with Stubart,

you know. en, there are the diehards who thi nk a bit of minor tin ker-

ing with old sect ion  would have suf‌f‌iced. And, of course, there are t he

zealots who hail it a s precisely the ki nd of weapon that the courts a nd the

tax authorities neede d. Some see it as marking the demise of t he smell test.

Others see it as the legi slative vindication and indeed the co dif‌ication of the

olfactory pri nciple that has replaced the chancel lor’s foot as a measure of

judicial enga gement.

Well, however you see it, the GAAR has had a bit of a rough ride both i n

the courts and i n the halls of academ ia. e Supreme Court has st ruggled