Taxation logo taxation mission text

Since 1927 the leading authority on tax law, practice and administration

No extradition offence

11 October 2010
Issue: 4276 / Categories: Tax cases
Hertel v Government of Canada and another, Queen’s Bench Division

The appellant who had dual German and Canadian nationality had worked in many parts of the world. He was the president and directing mind of a company International Electronics Corporation (IEC) and his brother owned another company Eurocana Hightech Research and Development (Canada) Ltd.

IEC had made a payment of about $3.9 million to Eurocana in the 1980s the amount being described in company documents as ‘R&D’ and recorded as business expenses of IEC.

The Canadian Government said that the payment was however made to provide a benefit to the appellant or his brother and was taxable under s 56(2) of the Canadian tax code. It claimed that the appellant had hidden this liability from the Canadian revenue authorities.

Although at the time the appellant was living in Canada he did not attend any of the court hearing dates ...

If you or your firm subscribes to Taxation.co.uk, please click the login box below:

If you are not a subscriber but are a registered user or have a free trial, please enter your details in the following boxes:

Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this item in full.

Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.

back to top icon