R. v. Adams (K.), (2001) 237 N.B.R.(2d) 201 (PC)

• Judge: Brien, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of New Brunswick (Canada)
• Case Date: January 17, 2001
• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Citations: (2001), 237 N.B.R.(2d) 201 (PC);2001 NBPC 8

R. v. Adams (K.) (2001), 237 N.B.R.(2d) 201 (PC);

    237 R.N.-B.(2e) 201; 612 A.P.R. 201

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

....................

Temp. Cite: [2001] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. MY.026

R. v. Keir Adams

(2001 NBPC 8)

Indexed As: R. v. Adams (K.)

New Brunswick Provincial Court

Brien, P.C.J.

January 17, 2001.

Summary:

An accused pleaded guilty to wilfully evading the payment of $22,561 for federal income tax by failing to report income for the taxation years 1994 and 1995 (Income Tax Act, s. 239(1)(d)). The accused also pleaded guilty to wilfully evading the pay­ment or remittance of $16,096 for G.S.T. for the same years (Excise Tax Act, s. 327(1)(c)).

The New Brunswick Provincial Court imposed penalties of $18,000 for the Income Tax Act offence and $12,000 for the Excise Tax Act offence.

Income Tax - Topic 9681

Tax evasion and tax avoidance - Punish­ments - General - An accused was con­victed of tax evasion offences under the Income Tax Act and the Excise Tax Act - The New Brunswick Provincial Court stated that it was entitled to consider the imposi­tion of administrative penalties when de­termining the appropriate sentence - See paragraph 34.

Income Tax - Topic 9685

Tax evasion and tax avoidance - Punish­ments - Sentence - Fines - An accused pleaded guilty to tax evasion offences under the Income Tax Act and the Excise Tax Act - The New Brunswick Provincial Court stated that the Income Tax Act did not require the court to use a percentage basis to determine the appropriate penalty - If a fine was levied, it should be levied according to the principles of sentencing - A fine should fall within the requirements of the Act, but be set according to what the court considers to be the appropriate penalty - The use of percentages could be misconstrued as an assessment of the de­gree of culpability in comparison to that found in other cases - In sentencing, the court often had to consider factors which did not lend themselves to easy compari­son or specific degrees - See paragraphs 37 and 38.

Income Tax - Topic 9686

Tax evasion and tax avoidance - Punish­ments - Sentence - Fines - Tax sought to be evaded - An accused pleaded guilty to wilfully evading the payment of $22,561 for federal income tax by failing to report income for the taxation years 1994 and 1995 (Income Tax Act, s. 239(1)(d)) - The accused also pleaded guilty to wilfully evading the payment or remittance of $16,096 for G.S.T. for the same years (Excise Tax Act, s. 327(1)(c)) - The ac­cused was motivated by a desire to main­tain his lifestyle through competitive time - Had been married for 52 years and raised a family of eight - Would have to pay administrative penalties - The New Bruns­wick Provincial Court imposed pen­alties of $18,000 for the Income Tax Act offence and $12,000 for the Excise Tax Act of­fence.

Sales and Service Taxes - Topic 5401

Goods and services tax - Offences and penalties - General - [See Income Tax - Topic 9681 ].

Sales and Service Taxes - Topic 5405

Goods and services tax - Offences and penalties - Failure to remit - [See Income Tax - Topic 9686 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Ramm (1958), 120 C.C.C. 44 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 4].

R. v. Bell, [1925] S.C.R. 59; 43 C.C.C. 286, refd to. [para. 4].

R. v. Horowitz (1971), 71 D.T.C. 5350 (Ont. Co. Ct.), refd to. [para. 5].

Curley v. R. (1969), 7 C.R.N.S. 108 (Que. C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Grégoire (1972), 72 D.T.C. 6219 (Que. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Gaudet (Y.) (1998), 202 N.B.R.(2d) 301; 516 A.P.R. 301 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Sumarah and North Star Shipping Ltd., [1970] 5 C.C.C. 317 (N.S. Co. Ct.), refd to. [para. 34].

Counsel:

P. McPhail, for the prosecution;

M. Richard and J. Blackier, for the de­fence.

On January 17, 2001, Brien, P.C.J., of the New Brunswick Provincial Court, heard this matter and delivered the following oral reasons for judgment.