Tax & Trade Blog

---

CRA INFORMATION REQUESTS - SHOPIFY 2

FEDERAL COURT DISMISSES CRA UNNAMED PERSON REQUIREMENT IN SHOPIFY 2

Among the most important decisions for GST/HST practitioners in 2025 were two Federal Court rulings dismissing applications by the Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”) for unnamed persons requirements (“UPRs”) – a type of information demand in respect of an ascertainable group of unnamed persons that requires Court authorization – directed to Shopify Inc. (“Shopify”).

Below, we review the second of these two Federal Court decisions involving Shopify (Canada v. Shopify Inc., 2025 FC 969 – “Shopify 2”), in which the CRA failed to satisfy the requirement that the target group under its UPR be “ascertainable”.

For our review of the first Shopify decision, click here.

---

CRA INFORMATION REQUESTS - SHOPIFY 1

FEDERAL COURT DISMISSES CRA UNNAMED PERSON REQUIREMENT IN SHOPIFY 1

Among the most important decisions for GST/HST practitioners in 2025 were two Federal Court rulings dismissing applications by the Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”) for unnamed persons requirements (“UPRs”) – a type of information demand in respect of an ascertainable group of unnamed persons that requires Court authorization – directed to Shopify Inc. (“Shopify”).

Below, we review the first of these two Federal Court decisions (Canada v. Shopify Inc., 2025 FC 968 – “Shopify 1”), in which the CRA’s UPR was found not to have the required purpose of verifying compliance with a duty or obligation under Canadian tax law.

For our review of the second Shopify decision, click here.

---

TCC: NEW HOUSING REBATES & SOCIAL JUSTICE

TCC DECISIONS SEEM TO BE RECOGNIZING MODERN HOUSING REALITIES

Homeowners who claim New Housing Rebate often face Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”) review. The central issues in these cases are often whether the homeowners intended to use the subject home as a primary place of residence (or for some other purposes) and whether the home was in fact occupied as a place of residence following construction or renovation.

While the Tax Court of Canada (“TCC”) has traditionally adopted a fairly rigorous approach when interpreting and applying these two requirements, two recent TCC decisions seem to reflect a more flexible approach, perhaps aligning with modern housing realities.

---

CRA REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION

RFI ONE OF CRA'S MOST POWERFUL TOOLS – AND MAY SOON GET MORE POWERFUL

A Request for Information (RFI) is the Canada Revenue Agency’s (CRA) formal written request for answers and documents which it subsequently uses as the factual foundation of its Audit.

In the previous entry in our Tax Audits Series, we provided practical guidance on responding to initial communications from the CRA. In this entry, we dive deeper into RFIs specifically, which are one of CRA’s most powerful tools in the early stages of an Audit.

---

PROCEDURAL RULES TRUMP INDIGENOUS TAX RIGHTS?

FCA: BEFORE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ASSERTED, NORMAL PROCESS TO BE FOLLOWED

Our Indirect Tax Practice often involves the intersection of Indigenous Peoples’ rights, especially under sections 87-89 of the Indian Act, and tax legislation.

Below, we review Zachary v. Canada, 2026 FCA 55 (“Zachary”), a recent Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) decision ruling that despite the substantive rights afforded by the Indian Act and constitutionally to Canada’s Indigenous Peoples, Status Indians are still required to comply with all “procedural” requirements (e.g. time requirements, Notices of Constitutional Questions, etc.) in the applicable taxing legislation before asserting those substantive rights!