Wipf v. MNR, (1974) 7 N.R. 72 (FCA)

JudgeThurlow and Ryan, JJ. and Smith, D.J.
CourtFederal Court of Appeal (Canada)
Case DateJanuary 31, 1974
JurisdictionCanada (Federal)
Citations(1974), 7 N.R. 72 (FCA)

Wipf v. MNR (1974), 7 N.R. 72 (FCA)

MLB headnote and full text

Wipf v. Minister of National Revenue

Indexed As: Wipf v. Minister of National Revenue

Federal Court of Appeal

Thurlow and Ryan, JJ. and Smith, D.J.

January 31, 1974.

Summary:

This case arose out of an income tax assessment against several Hutterite farmers in Alberta. The Hutterite farmers agreed to work for a corporation in return for subsistence benefits. The subsistence benefits for the farmers and their families consisted of food, clothing, lodging, medical and dental care, and maintenance when disabled by illness or age. The farmers were assessed by the Minister of National Revenue on the basis that they were entitled to a share of the profits from the farming operations. On appeal to the Tax Review Board the appeal was dismissed and the assessment of the Minister was affirmed.

On appeal to the Trial Division of the Federal Court of Canada the appeal was dismissed and the judgment of the Tax Review Board was affirmed.

On appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal the appeal was allowed and the judgment of the Trial Division set aside. The Federal Court of Appeal held that the value of the subsistence benefits was the full extent of the farmer's income for purposes of the Income Tax Act.

Income Tax - Topic 524

Income from employment - Measure of income where a farmer agreed to work for a corporation in return for his subsistence - Several Hutterite farmers agreed to work for a corporation in return for their subsistence, consisting of food, clothing, lodging, medical and dental care, and maintenance when disabled by illness or age - The farmers were assessed by the Minister of National Revenue on the basis that they were entitled to a share of the profits of the farming operations - The Federal Court of Appeal held that the value of the subsistence benefits was the full extent of the farmer's income for purposes of the Income Tax Act.

Cases Noticed:

Hofer et al. v. Hofer et al., [1970] S.C.R. 958, folld. [para. 3].

Counsel:

J.A. Matheson, for the appellants;

N.A. Chalmers, Q.C. and R. Pyne, for the respondent.

This case was heard by the Federal Court of Appeal at Edmonton, Alberta on January 30 and 31, 1974. Judgment was delivered by the Federal Court of Appeal on January 31, 1974 and the following opinions were filed:

THURLOW, J. - see paragraphs 1 to 7.

RYAN, J. - see paragraphs 8 to 21.

SMITH, D.J. concurred with both THURLOW, J. and RYAN. J.

To continue reading

Request your trial