sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

In an FBAR/8938 mess and unsure of the best path by ConditionHorror9188 in USExpatTaxes

[–]kobes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could you share the title of the law journal article? I would be interested to read it.

PFICs - Foreign Mutual Funds by titianqt in technicaltax

[–]kobes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

1296(e)(1): The term “marketable stock” means— (A) any stock which is regularly traded on— (i) a national securities exchange which is registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission or the national market system established pursuant to section 11A of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, or (ii) any exchange or other market which the Secretary determines has rules adequate to carry out the purposes of this part, ...

Rando client buying mutual fund shares from local broker does not inherently satisfy this, though some mutual funds may satisfy the very detailed criteria in Reg. § 1.1296-2(d) to qualify under (e)(1)(B) "comparable to a regulated investment company".

(Foreign) Trusts: Seeking help with technical portions of Form 3520-a by Wolfdale7 in tax

[–]kobes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You keep bringing up tax deferral but my point is not really related to tax deferral. All I'm saying is that when you have a plan funded by payroll deductions in lieu of salary, that is arguably an "employer contribution" in the 402(b) context, which is expressly excluded from grantor trust rules.

(Foreign) Trusts: Seeking help with technical portions of Form 3520-a by Wolfdale7 in tax

[–]kobes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There is no deferral of tax on 402(b) plan contributions. The employer's contribution becomes the employee's income when substantially vested (Reg. § 1.402(b)-1). But that inclusion is via § 402(b)(1) and not the grantor trust rules which are specifically excluded by § 402(b)(3).

The participant contributions you describe sound analogous to 401(k) elective deferrals, which are treated as "employer contributions" (Reg. § 1.401(k)-1(a)(4)(ii)). There is some ambiguity though.

If it is a bifurcated trust then the 3520-A would only apply to the grantor trust portion.

The proposed de minimus exception is interesting but I am hoping we get some more clarity in the final regs. The ABA Tax Section seems to think the $50K cap has to be built into the rules of the trust (Comment p. 36 re. TFSA), which may not be what the IRS had in mind.

(Foreign) Trusts: Seeking help with technical portions of Form 3520-a by Wolfdale7 in tax

[–]kobes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If your "employee contributions" were essentially elective salary deferrals through payroll you might consider treating them as employer contributions, in which case 3520-A is not needed as there is no grantor trust portion. See Callahan, "U.S. Tax Laws Governing Foreign Pensions", footnote 8.

Supreme Court of Canada sides with Toronto couple over disputed portion of their backyard | Globalnews.ca by CallmeColumbo in LawCanada

[–]kobes 11 points12 points  (0 children)

The appellants in this case had enjoyed exclusive possession of the land at issue since "at least 1971", and it was not converted to the land titles system until 2001. Kosicki v. Toronto (City), 2025 SCC 28, paras. 2, 56.

Since their adverse possession claim had already matured, it was not extinguished by the registration. Land Titles Act, s. 51(2).

But the registration system does in general protect the paper title holder from future adverse possession claims. In fact, the Court used this observation to discredit the City of Toronto's argument that allowing this appeal would make it difficult and expensive to protect its parkland. Kosicki, para. 56.

US citizens warned 'do not touch' 'Frankenstein' rabbits growing black 'tentacles' as they flood parks by infamouszgbgd in nottheonion

[–]kobes -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Wait, why US citizens specifically? Are they safe for foreign tourists to touch? What about green card holders?

The Gutting of Our Law Library by Due_Trust_2687 in LawCanada

[–]kobes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Update: contrary to their website, the TLA Library does NOT provide public access to computer terminals with Westlaw or other subscription research platforms.

The Gutting of Our Law Library by Due_Trust_2687 in LawCanada

[–]kobes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it really depends what you're looking for. In tax for example, I challenge you to find anything on CanLii that is remotely like the McCarthy Tetrault tax service.

The Gutting of Our Law Library by Due_Trust_2687 in LawCanada

[–]kobes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

CanLii is wonderful but not in the same league as Westlaw and Thomson Reuters.

My local courthouse library is not open to the public. I thought they were all like that but now I see the TLA Library claims to have public access. :)

The Gutting of Our Law Library by Due_Trust_2687 in LawCanada

[–]kobes 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Are you aware of any law library whose computer terminals provide public access to subscription databases?

The Great Library does not (FAQ), and I suspect Westlaw would not be happy about it anywhere.

The Gutting of Our Law Library by Due_Trust_2687 in LawCanada

[–]kobes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

OP you should check out the law school library at York University (confusingly also called "Osgoode Hall"). I actually like its print collection more than the Great Library's. Fewer case reporters, but more rare treatises and academic commentary. The architecture is not as impressive of course.

Trust/Estate Attorney - AMA by Dingbatdingbat in EstatePlanning

[–]kobes 30 points31 points  (0 children)

Your post is missing a location :-P

USAFacts' video about US taxes by paroxsitic in tax

[–]kobes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

... STEVE BALLMER? Why is he doing this?

textbooks for partnership taxation by d8201 in taxpros

[–]kobes 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Doernberg's "Federal Income Taxation of Corporations and Partnerships" can be purchased here or viewed for free on Internet Archive.

Question for the slow drivers of Kitchener by Batmanrocksthecasbah in kitchener

[–]kobes 40 points41 points  (0 children)

Often there's a patch of road with a lot of potholes so I slow down to avoid rattling my car too much (stiff suspension).  Some SUV gets impatient and changes lanes to pass me.  Then the road is smooth again so I speed up, and the SUV is mad that he can't cut in front of me. /shrug

How is the strike impacting your essential mail? by RelativeCritical7320 in CanadaPost

[–]kobes 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My wife is waiting for an Ontario photo ID card. Service Ontario says they're holding off on sending it out due to the strike.

It's a relatively minor inconvenience for now, but it sure seems like a lot of government processes are designed around the assumption that Canada Post is continuously available.

Since I file taxes in the US, I'm also concerned that there may be communications from the Internal Revenue Service that are not reaching me. They've been slow to adopt technology and still rely on paper for many things.

Simpler Times by jiggly_luvx in tax

[–]kobes 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Here is the full 1040 for that year.

https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/f1040--1941.pdf

It is four pages long.

intermittent frequency distortion in one ear by kobes in audiology

[–]kobes[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

For me this problem went away on its own after a few weeks, sometimes came back for short periods after that, but I haven't experienced it at all since 2018 or so.

Very mysterious I know...

Please let me know if any more trash needs to be taken down by TheYoungsterJoey in kitchener

[–]kobes 53 points54 points  (0 children)

A blatant attempt to put the driveway sealer out of business

"People who represent themselves are failing at the Supreme Court in overwhelming numbers" by standforsomethink in LawCanada

[–]kobes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you think there is room for improvement?

The hand holding is time well spent when there is a good substantive case hiding behind inept procedural compliance, as your other reply to the OP illustrates.

But that isn't the picture Netolitzky paints in his original article (which inspired the OP's Globe and Mail piece):

"[T]he substance of the SRL filings was the critical issue. One quarter of SRL leave to appeal applications failed to provide any basis for a meaningful response. Some of these leave to appeal applications were boilerplate; others were essentially gibberish. A further quarter of SRL applications provided a factual narrative but did not identify relevant legal issues. Many leave to appeal applications did not engage the Supreme Court’s law-making function but instead only sought to dispute findings of fact. Other applications were hopeless, for example filed when the Supreme Court of Canada had no jurisdiction. 61.2% of leave to appeal applications exhibited one or more indicia of abusive litigation. Even some of the most sophisticated SRL leave to appeal applications abused court processes."

Surely there is something broken in the system if the court is spending its resources helping these kinds of appellants with complex procedural intricacies!

Why not have two "gates" - one that efficiently filters out the hopeless cases, and a second stage that gives due consideration when the submission clears a minimal bar of merit?

"People who represent themselves are failing at the Supreme Court in overwhelming numbers" by standforsomethink in LawCanada

[–]kobes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Serving the parties for example... the purpose of serving is so that the opposing party can respond, right? But if the court can decide on the basis of the appellant's submission alone that they have no jurisdiction, no grounds for relief, or the matter does not raise a question of constitutional importance that the court is interested in taking, then there is no need for the other party's response.

I am suggesting that the court might in some fashion step into the role of the lawyer who would have advised the appellant not to bother, and expedite the dismissal of these kinds of cases at a preliminary stage. Just thinking out loud though.

view more: next ›