Recently I was asked by a home Seller who was unhappy with his last move only four months before and wanted to sell and buy across the street. His concern was weather he would be subject to Capital gains tax. This is what I found out that may be of assistance in the event your in a similar situation.

SUBJECT: INCOME TAX ACT

110.6; subsections 13(7), 40(4), 40(6), 40(7), 40(7.1), 45(1), 45(2), 45(3), 45(4), 107(2), 107(2.01), 107(4), 110.6(19)

At the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA), we

issue income tax interpretation bulletins (ITs) in order to

provide technical interpretations and positions regarding

certain provisions contained in income tax law. Due to their

technical nature, ITs are used primarily by our staff, tax

specialists, and other individuals who have an interest in tax

matters. For those readers who prefer a less technical

explanation of the law, we offer other publications, such as

tax guides and pamphlets.

While the comments in a particular paragraph in an IT may

relate to provisions of the law in force at the time they were

made, such comments are not a substitute for the law. The

reader should, therefore, consider such comments in light of

the relevant provisions of the law in force for the particular

taxation year being considered, taking into account the effect

of any relevant amendments to those provisions or relevant

court decisions occurring after the date on which the

comments were made.

Subject to the above, an interpretation or position contained in

an IT generally applies as of the date on which it was

published, unless otherwise specified. If there is a subsequent

change in that interpretation or position and the change is

beneficial to taxpayers, it is usually effective for future

assessments and reassessments. If, on the other hand, the

change is not favourable to taxpayers, it will normally be

effective for the current and subsequent taxation years or for

transactions entered into after the date on which the change is

published.

Most of our publications are available on our Web site at:

Introduction (¶s 1-2)

Types of Property That Can Qualify as a Principal

Residence (¶ 3)

Ownership is Required (¶ 4)

The .Ordinarily Inhabited. Rule (¶ 5)

Designation of a Property as a Principal

Residence (¶s 6-7)

Calculating the Gain on the Disposition of a Principal

Residence . The Principal Residence Exemption (¶ 8)

Ownership of a Property by Both Spouses or

Common-Law Partners (¶ 9)

More Than One Residence in a Taxation Year (¶ 10)

Construction of a Housing Unit on Vacant Land (¶ 11)

Property Owned on December 31, 1981 (¶ 12)

Loss on the Disposition of a Residence (¶ 13)

Land Contributing to the Use and Enjoyment of the

Housing Unit as a Residence (¶ 14)

Land in Excess of One-Half Hectare (¶s 15-16)

Disposition of Bare Land in Excess of One-Half

Hectare (¶ 17)

Disposition of Part of a Principal Residence (¶ 18)

Disposition of a Property Where Only Part of It Qualifies

as a Principal Residence (¶ 19)

Principal Residence on Land Used in a Farming

Business (¶s 20-24)

Complete Change in Use of a Property From Principal

Residence to Income-Producing (¶s 25-27)

Complete Change in Use of a Property From

Income-Producing to Principal Residence (¶s 28-29)

Partial Changes in Use (¶s 30-32)

Change in Use Rules Regarding CCA, Deemed Capital

Cost, and Recapture (¶s 33-34)

Personal Trusts (¶s 35-37)

Transfer of a Principal Residence (¶ 38)

Partnership Property (¶ 39)

A Principal Residence Outside Canada (¶ 40)

Non-Resident Owner of a Principal Residence in

Canada (¶s 41-43)

2

Section 116 Certificate for a Disposition of a Principal

Residence in Canada by a Non-Resident Owner (¶ 44)

Appendix A . Illustration of the Rule in Subsection 40(6)

Appendix B . Illustration of Calculation of Gain on

Disposition of a Farm Property

This bulletin replaces and cancels Interpretation Bulletin

IT-120R5, dated November 30, 1999 and applies for the

2001 and subsequent taxation years. Unless otherwise stated,

all statutory references throughout the bulletin are to the

This bulletin discusses the principal residence exemption,

which can eliminate or reduce (for income tax purposes) a

capital gain on the disposition of a taxpayer.s principal

residence.

In order for a property to qualify for designation as the

taxpayer.s principal residence, he or she must own the

property. Joint ownership with another person qualifies for

this purpose.

The housing unit representing the taxpayer.s principal

residence generally must be inhabited by the taxpayer or by

his or her spouse or common-law partner, former spouse or

common-law partner, or child.

A taxpayer can designate only one property as his or her

principal residence for a particular taxation year.

Furthermore, for a taxation year that is after the 1981 year,

only one property per family unit can be designated as a

principal residence.

If the land on which the housing unit is situated is not in

excess of one-half hectare, it usually qualifies as part of the

taxpayer.s principal residence. Land in excess of one-half

hectare may also qualify, but only to the extent that it is

established to be necessary for the use and enjoyment of the

housing unit as a residence.

If the taxpayer.s principal residence is located on his or her

farm, the taxpayer has a choice of two methods for

determining what portion of any gain on a disposition of the

farm can be eliminated by the principal residence exemption.

A complete or partial change in the use of a property from a

principal residence to income-producing, or vice-versa,

results in a deemed disposition of the property by the

taxpayer at fair market value. The taxpayer may be able to

elect that the deemed disposition on a complete change in use

does not apply. A property covered by such an election may

qualify as the taxpayer.s principal residence for up to four

years, or possibly longer in the case of a work relocation.

It is also possible for a personal trust to claim the principal

residence exemption on the disposition of a property.

Modifications to the normal principal residence exemption

rules exist for this purpose.

The above topics are discussed more fully below, as well as

other topics relating to the principal residence exemption.

The appendices to the bulletin contain illustrations of some

of the rules discussed in the bulletin.

exemption are discussed in this bulletin, as indicated in the

be noted that some of these topics are not relevant for all

taxpayers. For example, a resident of Canada who owns only

one housing unit which is situated in Canada on land of

one-half hectare or less and which has been used since its

acquisition strictly as his or her residence, will usually find

that ¶s 14 to 44 have no particular relevance.

residence, he or she can use the principal residence

exemption to reduce or eliminate any capital gain otherwise

occurring, for income tax purposes, on the disposition (or

deemed disposition) of the property. The term .principal

The principal residence exemption is claimed under

where land used in a farming business carried on by the

taxpayer includes his or her principal residence.

Unless otherwise stated, any reference in this bulletin to a

.taxation year. or .year. means a particular taxation year for

which the principal residence exemption is being claimed.

Various references are made throughout this bulletin to a

taxpayer.s spouse or common-law partner and child. For the

1993 to 2000 taxation years, former subsection 252(4) of the

Act extended the meaning of the term .spouse. to include a

common-law spouse of the opposite sex. Effective in 2001,

the extended meaning of spouse in subsection 252(4) has

been replaced with the term .common-law partner. in

subsection 248(1) which can now also include a person of the

same sex. A transitional rule for the 1998, 1999 and 2000

taxation years allowed same-sex couples to elect to be treated

as common-law partners under the Act for those years. For

more information about the meaning of the terms .spouse.

and .common-law partner., see the current version of the

applying the rules in subsections 70(6) and 73(1) as

discussed in ¶ 38, see also the extended meaning of .spouse.

and .former spouse. in subsection 252(3), as it reads for the

particular taxation year being considered. Subsection 252(1),

as it reads for the particular taxation year being considered,

extends the meaning of .child. for purposes of applying all

3

the rules in the Act, including the principal residence

exemption rules, for that year.

It is also possible for a personal trust to claim the principal

residence exemption on the disposition of a property. This is

discussed in ¶s 35 and 38.

qualify as a .principal residence.:

or condominium,

corporation, if such share is acquired for the sole purpose

of obtaining the right to inhabit a housing unit owned by

that corporation. The term .co-operative housing

corporation. means an association, incorporated subject to

the terms and conditions of the legislation governing such

incorporation, and formed and operated for the purpose of

providing its members with the right to inhabit, by reason

of ownership of shares therein, a housing unit owned by

the corporation.

Land on which a housing unit is situated can qualify as part

of a principal residence, subject to certain restrictions

(see ¶s 14 to 23).

for a particular year, he or she must own the property in the

year. The meaning of .ownership of property. for this

purpose is discussed in the current version of IT-437,

ownership of the property qualifies for purposes of the

section 54 definition of .principal residence. whether such

ownership is .jointly with another person or otherwise..

These latter words include sole ownership or a form of

co-ownership such as joint tenancy or tenancy-in-common.

.ordinarily inhabited. in the year by the taxpayer or by his or

her spouse or common-law partner, former spouse or

common-law partner, or child.

The question of whether a housing unit is ordinarily

inhabited in the year by a person must be resolved on the

basis of the facts in each particular case. Even if a person

inhabits a housing unit only for a short period of time in the

year, this is sufficient for the housing unit to be considered

.ordinarily inhabited in the year. by that person. For

example, even if a person disposes of his or her residence

early in the year or acquires it late in the year, the housing

unit can be considered to be ordinarily inhabited in the year

by that person by virtue of his or her living in it in the year

before such sale or after such acquisition, as the case may be.

Or, for example, a seasonal residence can be considered to be

ordinarily inhabited in the year by a person who occupies it

only during his or her vacation, provided that the main reason

for owning the property is not to gain or produce income.

With regard to the latter stipulation, a person receiving only

incidental rental income from a seasonal residence is not

considered to own the property mainly for the purpose of

gaining or producing income.

If the housing unit is not ordinarily inhabited in the year by

any of the above-mentioned persons, it is still possible for the

property (as described in ¶ 3) to be considered to be the

taxpayer.s .principal residence. for the year, by means of an

election under subsection 45(2) or (3). For a discussion of

these provisions, see ¶s 25 to 29.

for a particular year, he or she must designate it as such for

the year and no other property may have been so designated

by the taxpayer for the year. Furthermore, no other property

may have been designated as the principal residence of any

member of the taxpayer.s family unit for the year. For

purposes of the latter rule, which applies if the taxpayer is

designating a property as his or her principal residence for

1982 or a subsequent year, the taxpayer.s family unit for the

year includes, in addition to the taxpayer, the following

persons (if any):

the year, unless the spouse or common-law partner was

throughout the year living apart from, and was separated

under a judicial separation or written separation

agreement from, the taxpayer;

a common-law partnership or 18 years of age or older

during the year; and

partnership or 18 years of age or older during the year,

married, in a common-law partnerhip or 18 years of

age or older during the year.

As discussed in ¶ 2, for the 1993 to 2000 taxation years, a

spouse included a common-law partner of the opposite sex.

Accordingly, these individuals will be considered a family

unit for the purposes of the principal residence exemption for

the 1993 and subsequent taxation years (see Example 2 in

Appendix A). In the case of same-sex common-law partners,

4

they will be considered a family unit for the 2001 and

subsequent taxation years. However, if a same-sex couple

filed a joint election to be treated as common-law partners

for the 1998, 1999 and/or 2000 taxation years, then they will

be considered a family unit for those years.

principal residence for one or more taxation years is to be

made in his or her income tax return for the taxation year in

which he or she has disposed of the property or granted an

option to another person to acquire the property. The

designation form used for this purpose is Form T2091(IND),

accordance with our practice, Form T2091(IND) need not be

completed and filed with the taxpayer.s income tax return

unless

(a) a taxable capital gain on the disposition of the property

remains after using the principal residence exemption

formula (as shown in ¶ 8), or

by the taxpayer, or his or her spouse or common-law

partner; and the property was the taxpayer.s principal

residence for 1994, or it was designated in the year as

the principal residence for any taxation year.

Note that if a taxpayer using the principal residence

exemption formula (as shown in ¶ 8) to eliminate a gain on

the disposition of a property is not, because of the

above-mentioned practice, required to complete and file

Form T2091(IND), he or she is still considered to have

designated the property as his or her principal residence (i.e.,

to have claimed the principal residence exemption for that

property) for the years in question as far as the limitations

discussed earlier in this paragraph are concerned.

from the disposition (or deemed disposition) of any property

that was his or her principal residence at any time after his or

her .acquisition date. (see definition below) with respect to

the property, is equal to his or her .gain otherwise

determined. (see explanation below) less two amounts,

which are described later in this paragraph.

The taxpayer.s .acquisition date. with respect to the property

is the later of the following two dates:

the property or is deemed to have last acquired or

reacquired it. (Note that, by virtue of subsection 40(7.1), if

a subsection 110.6(19) capital gains election was made in

respect of the property, the deemed reacquisition of the

property under that election is not considered to be a

reacquisition for purposes of determining the .acquisition

The taxpayer.s .gain otherwise determined. means the

amount that the gain (if any) from the taxpayer.s disposition

(or deemed disposition) of the property would be.before the

two reductions described later in this paragraph.if the

capital gains election provision in subsection 110.6(19) and

the related provision in subsection 110.6(21) were not taken

into account. Thus, if a subsection 110.6(19) capital gains

election has been made in respect of the property, the

taxpayer.s gain otherwise determined is calculated without

reference to the deemed disposition and reacquisition of the

property under that election. That is, the gain otherwise

determined is calculated without taking into account the

increase to the adjusted cost base of the property under

subsection 110.6(19) or the decrease to that adjusted cost

base under subsection 110.6(21).

The first amount by which the taxpayer.s gain otherwise

by using the following formula:

B

A × .

C

The variables in the above formula are as follows:

A is the taxpayer.s gain otherwise determined, as described

above.

B is 1 + the number of taxation years ending after the

acquisition date for which the property was the

taxpayer.s principal residence and during which he or

she was resident in Canada. (Note that both these

conditions must be satisfied for a particular year in order

for that year to qualify for inclusion in the numerator B.)

C is the number of taxation years ending after the

acquisition date during which the taxpayer owned the

property (whether jointly with another person or

otherwise.see ¶ 4).

For a discussion of the meaning of .resident in Canada., see

reference to a taxation year means .at any time in. rather

than .throughout the whole of. the taxation year.

The second amount by which the taxpayer.s gain otherwise

variable .D. and it is referred to in this bulletin as the

.capital gains election reduction amount.. It occurs only if

(as described above) is before February 23, 1994, and

(see ¶ 7(b)), made a subsection 110.6(19) capital gains

election for the property or for an interest in the

property.if such an election was made, Form T664 or

have been filed.

5

The inclusion of the 110.6(19) election amount of a spouse or

common-law partner of the taxpayer, when calculating the

capital gains election reduction amount for the taxpayer,

ensures that any elected gain reported by the spouse or

common-law partner in 1994 with respect to a property that

was subsequently transferred to the taxpayer through a

spousal or common-law partner roll-over provision after

February 1994, is properly reflected in the ultimate

disposition of the property by the taxpayer. In other words,

in situations where a spouse or common-law partner has

transferred property to the taxpayer subsequent to 1994 and

pursuant to the roll-over provisions of subsection 73(1) or

70(6), the calculation of the capital gains reduction amount

of the taxpayer at the time the property is sold, must include

any 1994 elected gain reported by the spouse or common-law

partner with respect to the transferred property. Qualifying

transfers of property under these subsections are discussed

later in ¶ 38.

The capital gains election reduction amount essentially

represents the total amount of the gains that resulted from the

taxpayer.s and his or her spouse or common-law partner.s

capital gains elections for the property, after taking into

account any reduction in calculating those gains by virtue of

the property having been designated as the principal

residence of the taxpayer or his or her spouse or

common-law partner for any taxation year up to and

including the taxation year that included February 22, 1994.

The capital gains election reduction amount cannot, however,

be more than such gains.after taking into account any

reduction thereto by virtue of the property having been the

principal residence of the taxpayer or his or her spouse or

common law partner for any taxation year up to and

including the taxation year that included February 22,

1994.that would have resulted from such capital gains

elections if the fair market value of the property as at the

end of February 22, 1994 had been used as the designated

proceeds for the property.

The taxpayer calculates his or her capital gains election

T2091(IND) designation form (see ¶ 7).

The remaining discussions in this bulletin regarding

the gain otherwise determined, i.e., the reduction provided

for by means of the above-mentioned formula, A × B/C.

Unless stated to the contrary, it is assumed for purposes of

those discussions that the taxpayer did not make a capital

gains election and thus that there is no second reduction to

the gain otherwise determined, i.e., no capital gains election

reduction amount.

owned both by a taxpayer and his or her spouse or commonlaw

partner in one of the forms of ownership described in ¶ 4,

both spouses or common-law partners will generally have a

gain on the disposition. It should be kept in mind that if one

of the spouses or common-law partners designates the

property as his or her principal residence for any taxation

year after the 1981 year, the other spouse or common-law

partner will be able to designate only that same property as

his or her principal residence for that year if the rule

described in ¶ 6 prevents him or her from so designating any

other property for that year.

taxpayer.s principal residence for a particular taxation year

(see ¶ 6), the principal residence exemption rules recognize

that the taxpayer can have two residences in the same year,

i.e., where one residence is sold and another acquired in the

same year. The effect of the .one plus. in variable B (the

numerator of the fraction) in the formula in ¶ 8 is to treat

both properties as a principal residence in such a year, even

though only one of them may be designated as such for that

year.

constructs a housing unit on it in a subsequent year, the

property may not be designated as the taxpayer.s principal

residence for the years that are prior to the year in which the

taxpayer, his or her spouse or common-law partner, former

spouse or common-law partner, or child commences to

ordinarily inhabit the housing unit. Such prior years (when

the taxpayer owned only the vacant land or the land with a

housing unit under construction) would not be included in the

numerator .B. in the formula in ¶ 8 (or in the years included

in the statement in ¶ 22(b)). However, all years, commencing

with the year in which the taxpayer acquired the vacant land,

would be included in the denominator .C.. Therefore, it is

possible that when the property is later disposed of, only part

of the gain otherwise determined will be eliminated by the

principal residence exemption.

In 1992, Mr. A acquired vacant land for $25,000. In 1995, he

constructed a housing unit on the land, costing $75,000, and

started to ordinarily inhabit the housing unit. In 2001, he

disposed of the property for $150,000. Mr. A.s gain

otherwise determined on the disposition of the property is

equal to his $150,000 proceeds minus his $100,000 adjusted

cost base = $50,000 (assume there were no costs of

disposition). Mr. A can designate the property as his

principal residence for the years 1995 to 2001 inclusive, but

not for the years 1992 to 1994 inclusive because no one lived

in a housing unit on the property during those years. The

principal residence exemption formula in ¶ 8 cannot,

therefore, eliminate his entire $50,000 gain otherwise

6

determined, but rather can eliminate only $40,000 of that

gain:

B 1 + 7 (1995 to 2001)

A × . = $50,000 × ........ = $40,000

C 10 (1992 to 2001)

principal residence for any taxation year after the 1981 year

if another property has been designated for that year as the

principal residence of another member of his or her family

unit (for further particulars on this rule, see ¶ 6). If the

taxpayer disposes of a property he or she has owned (whether

jointly with another person or otherwise) continuously since

before 1982 and the property cannot be designated as the

taxpayer.s principal residence for one or more years after the

1981 year because of the above-mentioned rule, a transitional

provision in subsection 40(6) puts a cap on the amount of the

taxpayer.s gain (if any) on the disposition. Appendix A at the

end of this bulletin provides examples which illustrate how

the rule in subsection 40(6) works.

(i.e., for the personal use and enjoyment of those living in

it).or an option to acquire a property which would, if

acquired, be so used.is .personal-use property.. Therefore,

a loss on the disposition of such a property or option is

of .principal residence., a taxpayer.s principal residence for

a taxation year shall be deemed to include, except where the

property consists of a share of the capital stock of a

co-operative housing corporation, the land upon which the

housing unit stands and any portion of the adjoining land that

can reasonably be regarded as contributing to the use and

enjoyment of the housing unit as a residence. Evidence is not

usually required to establish that one-half hectare of land or

less, including the area on which the housing unit stands,

contributes to the use and enjoyment of the housing unit as a

residence. However, where a portion of that land is used to

earn income from business or property, such portion will not

usually be considered to contribute to such use and

enjoyment. Where the taxpayer claims a portion of the

expenses related to the land (such as property taxes or

mortgage interest) in computing income, the allocation of

such expenses for this purpose is normally an indication of

the extent to which he or she considers the land to be used to

earn income.

unit is situated exceeds one-half hectare, the excess land is

.principal residence. not to have contributed to the use and

enjoyment of the housing unit as a residence and thus will

not qualify as part of a principal residence, except to the

extent that the taxpayer establishes that it was necessary for

such use and enjoyment. The excess land must clearly be

necessary for the housing unit to properly fulfill its function

as a residence and not simply be desirable. Generally, the use

of land in excess of one-half hectare in connection with a

particular recreation or lifestyle (such as for keeping pets or

for country living) does not mean that the excess land is

necessary for the use and enjoyment of the housing unit as a

residence.

Land in excess of one-half hectare may be considered

necessary where the size or character of a housing unit

together with its location on the lot make such excess land

essential to its use and enjoyment as a residence, or where

the location of a housing unit requires such excess land in

order to provide its occupants with access to and from public

roads. Other factors may be relevant in determining whether

land in excess of one-half hectare is necessary for the use and

enjoyment of the housing unit as a residence, such as, for

example, a minimum lot size or a severance or subdivision

restriction (see ¶ 16). In all cases, however, it is a question of

fact as to how much, if any, of the excess land is necessary

for the use and enjoyment of the housing unit as a residence.

taxpayer may be required by a law or regulation of a

municipality or province with respect to residential lots to

acquire more than one-half hectare of the property. Such a

law or regulation could, for example,

(a) require a minimum lot size for a residential lot in a

particular area, or

(b) impose a severance or subdivision restriction with

respect to residential lots in a particular area.

To the extent that a taxpayer, in order to acquire a property as

a residence, is required because of such a law or regulation to

acquire land that exceeds one-half hectare, the land that must

be so acquired is generally considered to be necessary for the

use and enjoyment of the housing unit as a residence

throughout the period that the property is continuously

owned by the taxpayer after the acquisition date. However, it

should be noted that the mere existence of such a municipal

law or regulation on the date the taxpayer acquired the

property does not immediately qualify the excess land for

purposes of the principal residence exemption. For example,

if the taxpayer could have made an application for severance

of the excess land and it is likely that such a request would

have been approved, the taxpayer would generally not be

considered to have been required to acquire the excess land.

Furthermore, regardless of the above, where any portion of

the land in excess of one-half hectare is not used for

residential purposes but rather for income-producing

7

purposes, such portion is usually not considered to be

necessary for the use and enjoyment of the housing unit as a

residence.

one-half hectare and part or all of that excess land is severed

from the property and sold, the land sold is generally

considered not to be part of the principal residence unless the

housing unit can no longer be used as a residence due to the

land sale. If the housing unit can still be so used, such a sale

indicates that the land sold was not necessary for the use and

enjoyment of the housing unit as a residence.

Circumstances or events beyond the taxpayer.s control may

cause a portion of the land to cease to be necessary for the

use and enjoyment of the housing unit as a residence (e.g., a

minimum lot size requirement or severance or subdivision

restriction in effect at the date of acquisition is subsequently

relaxed). If the taxpayer then subdivides the excess land, it

will be considered to have been .necessary. until the time of

its subdivision. After subdivision, each newly created lot is a

separate property and only the property on which the housing

unit is located may continue to be designated as the

taxpayer.s principal residence. Furthermore, it is possible for

the vacant land which previously formed part of the principal

residence to be considered to have been converted to

inventory at the time of the subdivision (see the rules on

partial changes of use in ¶ 30).

taxpayer.s principal residence is disposed of (e.g. the

granting of an easement or the expropriation of land), the

property may be designated as the taxpayer.s principal

residence in order to use the principal residence exemption

for the portion of the property disposed of. It is important to

note that such a designation is made on the entire property

(including the housing unit) that qualifies as the principal

residence, and not just on the portion of the property

disposed of. Accordingly, when the remainder of the

property is subsequently disposed of, it too will be

recognized as the taxpayer.s principal residence for the

taxation years for which the above-mentioned designation

was made. No other property may be designated as a

principal residence for any of those years by the taxpayer (or,

for any of those years that are after the 1981 taxation year, by

the taxpayer or any of the other members of his or her family

unit) as discussed in ¶ 6.

disposed of for a gain will qualify as a principal residence

(see ¶s 14 to 16). If such qualifying portion of the property is

designated as the taxpayer.s principal residence, it will be

necessary to calculate the gain on such portion separately

from the gain on the remaining portion of the property which

does not qualify as the taxpayer.s principal residence. This is

because the gain otherwise determined on the portion of the

property designated as the principal residence may be

reduced or eliminated by the principal residence exemption,

whereas the gain on the remaining portion of the property

results in a taxable capital gain. The allocation of the

proceeds of disposition and adjusted cost base of the total

property between the two portions does not necessarily have

to be on the basis of area.consideration should be given to

any factors which could have an effect on the relative value

of either of the two portions.

Mr. A.s house is on a property with a total land area of

three-quarters of a hectare. He sells the property at fair

market value and realizes an actual gain on the disposition.

The house and one-half hectare of land qualify as his

principal residence for all the years he has owned it. The

extra one-quarter hectare does not qualify as part of his

principal residence for these reasons:

extra one-quarter hectare to be part of the property as a

residence (see ¶ 16).it has always been severable from

the one-half hectare on which the house is situated.

valid reason for considering the extra one-quarter hectare

to be necessary for the use and enjoyment of the house as

a residence (see ¶ 15).

If the extra one-quarter hectare were severed, it would still be

accessible from the road by which the principal residence.s

one-half hectare is accessed. However, it would be difficult

to sell the extra one-quarter hectare on its own because it

forms part of a shallow gully through which a small brook

flows. In fact, the only feasible use for the extra one-quarter

hectare is to enhance the enjoyment of Mr. A.s residence or,

if severed, the residence of his next door neighbour, i.e., by

providing the owner with the enjoyment of such additional

land with its natural beauty. Nevertheless, the extra

one-quarter hectare is not necessary for the use and

enjoyment of Mr. A.s house as a residence. Note that in these

circumstances, the portion of Mr. A.s gain that is considered

to pertain to the extra one-quarter hectare may not simply be

one-third of the gain pertaining to the entire three-quarters of

a hectare of land he sold, but would probably be a lower

amount (a determination of the actual amount in such a case

could require a real estate appraisal).

The comments in this paragraph do not apply if the property

includes land used in a farming business (see instead ¶s 20

to 23).

8

business which he or she carried on at any time and such land

includes property that was at any time his or her principal

gain on the disposition of the land may be calculated using

either of the two methods discussed below. It should be noted

buildings thereon.

as being divided into two portions: the principal residence

portion and the remaining portion, part or all of which was

used in the farming business. The proceeds of disposition and

adjusted cost base of the total property must be allocated on a

reasonable basis between the two portions in order to

determine the gain for each portion. The gain otherwise

determined for the principal residence portion may be

reduced or eliminated by the principal residence exemption

in ¶ 8 (including, if applicable, the capital gains election

the gain on the remainder of the property results in a taxable

capital gain (see, however, ¶ 24). For purposes of

determining what portion of the proceeds of disposition of

the land may reasonably be allocated to the principal

residence, it is our usual practice to accept the greater of the

following two amounts:

(a) the fair market value, as of the date of disposition of the

land, of one-half hectare of land estimated on the basis

of comparable sales of similar farm properties in the

same area (the fair market value of more than one-half

hectare could be used to the extent that such excess land

was necessary for the use and enjoyment of the housing

unit as a residence . see ¶s 15 and 16); and

(b) the fair market value, as of the date of disposition of the

land, of a typical residential lot in the same area.

Whichever basis is chosen, (a) or (b), for allocating a portion

of the proceeds of disposition of the land to the principal

residence, the same basis should be used to allocate a portion

of the adjusted cost base of the land to the principal

residence. For purposes of making this allocation of the

land.s adjusted cost base, the fair market value of the land

referred to in (a) or (b), as the case may be, would be as of

the taxpayer.s acquisition date for the land rather than as of

the date of its disposition.

Appendix B at the end of this bulletin provides an example

which illustrates the use of the first method allowed under

disposition of the total property (including the property that

was the principal residence) without making the allocations

described above or using the principal residence exemption

in ¶ 8. With regard to this election under subparagraph

attached to the income tax return filed for the taxation year in

which the disposition of the property took place. The letter

should contain the following information:

(a) a statement that the taxpayer is electing under

(b) a statement of the number of taxation years ending after

the acquisition date for which the property was the

taxpayer.s principal residence and during which he or

she was resident in Canada (for the meanings of

.resident in Canada. and .during., see ¶ 8); and

(c) a description of the property sufficient to identify it with

the property designated as the taxpayer.s principal

residence.

disposition of the total property is equal to the gain otherwise

determined less the total of $1,000 plus $1,000 for each

taxation year in (b) above. Two points should be noted for

purposes of calculating the gain under subparagraph

reacquired the property or is deemed to have last

acquired or reacquired it. If the taxpayer made a

subsection 110.6(19) capital gains election in respect

of the property, the deemed reacquisition of the

property immediately after the end of February 22,

1994 under that election is considered to be a

reacquisition for purposes of determining the

.acquisition date. when calculating the gain

otherwise determined. The reason for this is that,

although subsection 40(7.1) prevents a subsection

110.6(19) deemed reacquisition from being

considered a reacquisition for purposes of

determining the .acquisition date. used in paragraph

40(7.1) nor any other provision prevents a subsection

110.6(19) deemed reacquisition from being

considered a reacquisition for purposes of

determining the .acquisition date. used in

reacquisition under a subsection 110.6(19) capital gains

election, i.e., immediately after the end of February 22,

1994, the gain otherwise determined is calculated by

taking into account the taxpayer.s cost of the property

under that deemed reacquisition rather than his or her

actual cost at some earlier date. (Variable .A. in

Appendix B at the end of this bulletin provides an example

which illustrates the use of the second method allowed under

9

$1,000 per year, which is to allow for the fact that a portion

of the total property pertains to the principal residence rather

than the farm, is not reduced where part of the residence

itself is used to earn income (e.g., there could be an office in

the house which is used in connection with a business).

However, any gain or recapture of capital cost allowance

pertaining to the portion of the residence (i.e., building) so

used to earn income (either or both of which can occur, for

example, where the use of such portion of the residence is

changed back from income-producing to

non-income-producing . see ¶s 30 and 34) cannot be reduced

by the $1,000 per year exemption.

the disposition of a farm property, a section 110.6 capital

gains deduction (which is a deduction in calculating taxable

income) may be possible on the basis that the property is

qualified farm property. For further particulars on this topic,

principal residence to an income-producing use, he or she is

property (both land and building) at fair market value (FMV)

and reacquired it immediately thereafter at the same amount.

Any gain otherwise determined on this deemed disposition

may be eliminated or reduced by the principal residence

exemption. The taxpayer may instead, however, defer

recognition of any gain to a later year by electing under

subsection 45(2) to be deemed not to have made the change

in use of the property. This election is made by means of a

letter to that effect signed by the taxpayer and filed with the

income tax return for the year in which the change in use

occurred. If the taxpayer rescinds the election in a subsequent

taxation year, he or she is deemed to have disposed of and

reacquired the property at FMV on the first day of that

subsequent year (with the above-mentioned tax

consequences). If capital cost allowance (CCA) is claimed on

the property, the election is considered to be rescinded on the

first day of the year in which that claim is made.

Subsection 220(3.2) of the Act, in conjunction with section

for the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (the CCRA) to

accept a late-filed subsection 45(2) election. Such a late-filed

election may be accepted under certain circumstances, one of

which is that no CCA has been claimed on the property since

the change in use has occurred and during the period in

which the election is to remain in force. For further

particulars on the acceptance of late-filed elections, see the

residence for up to four taxation years during which a

subsection 45(2) election remains in force, even if the

housing unit is not ordinarily inhabited during those years by

the taxpayer or by his or her spouse or common-law partner,

former spouse or common-law partner, or child (see ¶ 5).

However, the taxpayer must be resident, or deemed to be

resident, in Canada during those years for the full benefit of

the principal residence exemption to apply (see the

numerator .B. in the formula in ¶ 8 or the years included in

the statement in ¶ 22(b), as the case may be). It should also

be noted that the rule described in ¶ 6 prevents the designation

of more than one property as a principal residence for any

particular year by the taxpayer (or, for any particular year

after the 1981 taxation year, by the taxpayer or any other

member of his or her family unit). Thus, for example, a

taxpayer.s designation for the same year of one property by

virtue of a subsection 45(2) election being in force, and

another property by virtue of the fact that he or she ordinarily

inhabited that other property, would not be permitted.

Mr. A and his family lived in a house for a number of years

until September 30, 1993. From October 1, 1993 until

March 31, 1998 they lived elsewhere and Mr. A rented the

house to a third party. On April 1, 1998, they moved back

into the house and lived in it until it was sold in 2001. When

he filed his 2001 income tax return, Mr. A designated the

house as his principal residence for the 1994 to 1997 taxation

years inclusive (i.e., the maximum four years) by virtue of a

subsection 45(2) election (which he had already filed with his

1993 income tax return) having been in force for those years.

(He was able to make this designation because no other

property had been designated as a principal residence by him

or a member of his family unit for those years.) He

designated the house as his principal residence for all the

other years in which he owned it by virtue of his having

ordinarily inhabited it during those years, including the 1993

and 1998 years. Having been resident in Canada at all times,

Mr. A.s gain otherwise determined on the disposition of the

house in 2001 was, therefore, completely eliminated by the

principal residence exemption.

Any income in respect of a property (e.g., the rental income

in the above example), net of applicable expenses, must be

reported for tax purposes. However, for taxation years

covered by a subsection 45(2) election, CCA should not be

claimed on the property (see ¶ 25).

limitation for taxation years covered by a subsection 45(2)

election if all of the following conditions are met:

(a) the taxpayer does not ordinarily inhabit the housing unit

during the period covered by the election because the

taxpayer.s or his or her spouse.s or common-law

partner.s place of employment has been relocated;

10

(b) the employer is not related to the taxpayer or his or her

spouse or common-law partner;

(c) the housing unit is at least 40 kilometers farther from

such new place of employment than is the taxpayer.s

subsequent place or places of residence; and

(d) either

housing unit during the term of employment by that

same employer or before the end of the taxation year

immediately following the taxation year in which

such employment terminates; or

employment.

With regard to condition (d), two corporations that are

members of the same corporate group, or are otherwise

related, are not considered to be the same employer.

property (for which an election under subsection 45(2) is not

in force) from income-producing to a principal residence, he

the property (both land and building), and immediately

thereafter reacquired it, at FMV. This deemed disposition can

result in a taxable capital gain. The taxpayer may instead

defer recognition of the gain to a later year by electing under

subsection 45(3) that the above-mentioned deemed

not apply. This election is made by means of a letter to that

effect signed by the taxpayer and filed with the income tax

return for the year in which the property is ultimately

disposed of (or earlier if a formal .demand. for the election

is issued by the CCRA). Also, subsection 220(3.2) of the

late-filed subsection 45(3) election. Such a late-filed election

may be accepted under certain circumstances. For further

particulars on the acceptance of late-filed elections, see the

Even if a subsection 45(3) election is filed in order to defer

recognition of a gain from the change in use of a property

from income-producing to principal residence, the net

income from the property for the period before the change in

use must still be reported. However, for purposes of reporting

such net income, it should be noted that an election under

subsection 45(3) is not possible if, for any taxation year

ending after 1984 and on or before the change in use of the

property from income-producing to a principal residence,

CCA has been allowed in respect of the property to

common-law partner is a beneficiary.

CCA so allowed would cause subsection 45(4) to nullify the

subsection 45(3) election.

election (see ¶ 26), a property can qualify as a taxpayer.s

principal residence for up to four taxation years prior to a

change in use covered by a subsection 45(3) election, in lieu

of fulfilling the .ordinarily inhabited. rule (discussed in ¶ 5)

for these years. As in the case of a subsection 45(2) election,

residence or deemed residence in Canada during these years

is necessary for the full benefit of the principal residence

exemption to apply. Furthermore, the rule described in ¶ 6

prevents the designation of more than one property as a

principal residence for any particular year by the taxpayer

(or, for any particular year after the 1981 taxation year, by

the taxpayer or any other member of his or her family unit).

until mid-1999. Mr. X and his family then lived in the house

until it was sold in 2001. Mr. X has been resident in Canada

at all times. When he filed his 2001 income tax return, Mr. X

designated the house as his principal residence for the 1999

to 2001 taxation years inclusive, by virtue of his having

ordinarily inhabited it during those years. He also designated

the house as his principal residence for the 1995 to 1998

years inclusive (i.e., the maximum 4 years) by virtue of a

subsection 45(3) election, which he filed with his 2001

income tax return (he was able to make this designation

because (i) no other property had been designated by him or

a member of his family unit for those years, and (ii) he did

not claim any CCA when reporting the net income from the

property before the change in use). However, his gain

otherwise determined on the disposition of the house in 2001

could not be fully eliminated by the principal residence

exemption formula in ¶ 8 because he could not designate the

house as his principal residence for the 1993 and 1994 years.

provides for a deemed disposition of the portion of the

property so converted (such portion is usually calculated on

the basis of the area involved) for proceeds equal to its

proportionate share of the property.s FMV. Paragraph

immediately thereafter of the same portion of the property at

a cost equal to the very same amount. Any gain otherwise

determined on the deemed disposition is usually eliminated

or reduced by the principal residence exemption. If the

portion of the property so changed is later converted back to

use as part of the principal residence, there is a second

deemed disposition (and reacquisition) thereof at FMV. A

taxable capital gain attributable to the period of use of such

portion of the property for income-producing purposes can

11

arise from such a second deemed disposition or from an

actual sale of the whole property subsequent to the original

partial change in use. An election under subsection 45(2)

or (3) cannot be made where there is a partial change in use

of a property as described above.

where the partial change in use of the property is substantial

and of a more permanent nature, i.e., where there is a structural

change. Examples where this occurs are the conversion of the

front half of a house into a store, the conversion of a portion

of a house into a self-contained domestic establishment for

earning rental income (a duplex, triplex, etc.), and alterations

to a house to accommodate separate business premises. In

these and similar cases, the taxpayer reports the income and

may claim the expenses pertaining to the altered portion of

the property (i.e., a reasonable portion of the expenses

relating to the whole property) as well as CCA on such

altered portion of the property.

rule, but rather to consider that the entire property retains its

nature as a principal residence, where all of the following

conditions are met:

(a) the income-producing use is ancillary to the main use of

the property as a residence,

(b) there is no structural change to the property, and

(c) no CCA is claimed on the property.

These conditions can be met, for example, where a taxpayer

carries on a business of caring for children in his or her

home, rents one or more rooms in the home, or has an office

or other work space in the home which is used in connection

with his or her business or employment. In these and similar

cases, the taxpayer reports the income and may claim the

expenses (other than CCA) pertaining to the portion of the

property used for income-producing purposes. Certain

conditions and restrictions are placed on the deductibility of

expenses relating to an office or other work space in an

event that the taxpayer commences to claim CCA on the

portion of the property used for producing income, the

deemed disposition rule is applied as of the time at which the

income-producing use commenced.

use of property from principal residence to

income-producing, subsection 13(7) provides for a deemed

acquisition of the property or portion of the property so

changed that is depreciable property. For purposes of

claiming CCA, the deemed capital cost of such depreciable

property is its FMV as of the date of the change in use unless

that FMV is greater than its cost to the taxpayer. In that case,

the deemed capital cost of such depreciable property is equal

to its cost to the taxpayer plus an amount which represents

the taxable portion of the accrued gain on the property

(before any reduction to that gain by means of the principal

residence exemption) to the extent that a section 110.6

capital gains deduction has not been claimed in respect of

that amount (this latter rule has no particular significance for

dispositions of residence properties occurring after

February 22, 1994, because of the elimination of the

$100,000 lifetime capital gains exemption for dispositions

after that date).

Mr. A completely converted his house to a rental property in

January 2001, at which time its cost to him and its FMV were

$60,000 and $100,000 respectively (both amounts pertain

only to the housing unit and not the land). The change in use

resulted in a deemed disposition of the property at FMV

(see ¶s 25 and 26.assume that Mr. A did not make a

subsection 45(2) election in respect of the property because

he wanted to use the principal residence exemption for his

cottage for the years after 2001). Mr. A was able to use the

principal residence exemption formula in ¶ 8 to bring his

gain on the January 2001 deemed disposition of the house to

nil. Mr. A.s deemed capital cost for the house (i.e., for CCA

purposes) at the time of its change in use to a rental property

was $80,000. This amount was calculated by taking the

$60,000 cost and adding $20,000, the latter amount being

one-half of the excess of the $100,000 FMV over the

$60,000 cost. (Note that the $20,000 potentially taxable

portion of the gain was included in Mr. A.s deemed capital

cost for CCA purposes even though he eliminated the gain by

means of the principal residence exemption.)

In the case of a complete change in use of a property from

principal residence to income-producing, a subsection 45(2)

election will cause subsection 13(7), as described above, not

to apply. However, if the election is rescinded in a

subsequent taxation year (e.g., by claiming CCA on the

property.see ¶ 25), a subsection 13(7) deemed acquisition

of depreciable property will occur on the first day of that

subsequent year.

Because a subsection 45(2) election is not available where

there is only a partial change in use of a property from

principal residence to income-producing, subsection 13(7)

applies in such a situation in the manner described above

(except where conditions (a) to (c) in ¶ 32 have been met,

including the condition not to claim CCA on the portion of

the property used to earn income).

of a property from income-producing to principal residence,

there is a deemed disposition at FMV, by virtue of subsection

13(7), of the portion of the property so changed that is

depreciable property. This can result in a recapture of CCA

previously claimed on the property. A subsection 45(3)

election cannot be used to defer such a recapture (e.g., a

12

recapture of CCA claimed for a taxation year ending before

1985.see the comments regarding CCA in ¶ 28).

defined in subsection 248(1) of the Act) to claim the

principal residence exemption to reduce or eliminate a gain

that the trust would otherwise have on the disposition of a

property. For this purpose, the normal principal residence

exemption rules generally apply, subject to the following

modifications:

(a) When a personal trust designates a property as its

principal residence for one or more taxation years, the

trustee of the trust should complete and file Form

calculating a capital gains election reduction amount

(see ¶ 8) for the trust, the trustee should complete Form

with the T1079 designation form.

(b) For each taxation year for which the trust is designating

the property as its principal residence, the trust must

specify in the above-mentioned designation each

individual who, in the calendar year ending in that

taxation year,

spouse or common-law partner, former spouse or

common-law partner, or child who ordinarily

inhabited the housing unit (a subsection 45(2) or (3)

election can be used, however, in essentially the

same manner as, and subject to the limitations

discussed in, ¶s 26 and 29, to remove the requirement

that the .ordinarily inhabited. rule be fulfilled for the

year by one of these persons).

Any individual specified by the trust to be an individual

as described above is referred to as a .specified

beneficiary. of the trust for the year.

(c) For each taxation year for which the trust is designating

the property as its principal residence, there must not

have been any corporation (other than a registered

charity) or partnership that was beneficially interested in

the trust at any time in the year.

(d) For each taxation year for which the trust is designating

the property as its principal residence (including years

before 1982), no other property may have been

designated as a principal residence, for the calendar year

ending in the year, by any specified beneficiary of the

trust for the year, or by any person who throughout the

calendar year ending in the year was a member of such a

beneficiary.s family unit. For this purpose, a specified

beneficiary.s .family unit. includes, in addition to the

specified beneficiary, the following persons (if any):

partner throughout the calendar year ending in the

year, unless the spouse or common-law partner was

throughout that calendar year living apart, and was

separated pursuant to a judicial separation or written

separation agreement, from the specified beneficiary;

who were married, in a common-law partnership or

18 years of age or older during the calendar year

ending in the year; and

common-law partnership or 18 years of age or older

during the calendar year ending in the year,

who were not married, in a common-law

partnership or 18 years of age or older during that

calendar year.

Furthermore, if a personal trust designates a property as its

principal residence for a particular taxation year, the property

is deemed to be property designated, for the calendar year

ending in the year, as the principal residence of each

specified beneficiary of the trust. This deeming rule can be

applied, in conjunction with the other principal residence

exemption rules, to various situations not explicitly described

in those rules.

Personal Trust A owned a house in its taxation year ended

December 31, 2001. The house was ordinarily inhabited in

2001 by Mr. X, a specified beneficiary of Personal Trust A

(and also by his spouse, Mrs. X). The trust has designated the

house as its principal residence for its taxation year ended

December 31, 2001. The house is therefore deemed to have

been designated as Mr. X.s principal residence for 2001.

Personal Trust B owned a cottage (see ¶ 3) in its taxation

year ended December 31, 2001. The cottage was ordinarily

inhabited (see ¶ 5) in 2001 by Mrs. X, a specified beneficiary

of Personal Trust B (and also by Mr. X). As discussed in ¶ 6,

a taxpayer and his or her spouse or common-law partner

cannot designate different properties for the same year.

Therefore, since the house has already been deemed to have

been designated as Mr. X.s principal residence for 2001,

Personal Trust B cannot designate the cottage as its principal

residence for 2001 because that would have resulted in the

cottage being deemed to have also been designated as Mrs.

X.s principal residence for 2001.

personal trust in satisfaction of all or any part of the

beneficiary.s capital interest in the trust and

discussion in ¶ 37 for an exception to this rollover

provision) and

13

subsection 40(7) provides a deeming rule when the

beneficiary disposes of the property. For purposes of

claiming the principal residence exemption, the beneficiary is

deemed by subsection 40(7) to have owned the property

since the trust last acquired it.

The following example illustrates the effect of this deemed

ownership provision in subsection 40(7) (in conjunction with

subsection 107(2)).

A personal trust acquired a residential property on October 1,

1997 for $75,000. On January 10, 1999, the property was

distributed to Mr. X in satisfaction of his capital interest in

the trust. Subsection 107(4) did not apply with respect to this

distribution, and the rollover provision in subsection 107(2)

prevented the gain on the property accrued to January 10,

1999 from being taxed in the hands of the trust. Instead, the

potential for taxing that gain was transferred to Mr. X

because subsection 107(2) deemed him to have acquired the

property at a cost equal to $75,000, i.e., the cost amount of

the property to the trust. Mr. X lived in the residence from

October 15, 1997 until he disposed of the property on

December 1, 2001 for $125,000, incurring no costs in

connection with the disposition. Mr. X.s gain otherwise

determined on the disposition of the property was equal to

his $125,000 proceeds minus his $75,000 adjusted cost base

= $50,000. Subsection 40(7) deemed him to have owned the

property from October 1, 1997 rather than from January 10,

1999. Since Mr. X ordinarily inhabited the residence in all of

the years from 1997 to 2001 inclusive (i.e., all of the years in

which he either owned the property or was deemed to have

owned it), he was able to designate the property as his

principal residence for all those years. Thus, he was able to

use the principal residence exemption formula in ¶ 8 to fully

eliminate his $50,000 gain otherwise determined. However,

if neither Mr. X nor his current or former spouse or

common-law partner, or child had ordinarily inhabited the

residence (see the rule discussed in ¶ 5) until it was

distributed by the trust to Mr. X on January 10, 1999, he

would have been able to designate the property as his

principal residence only for 1999 to 2001. In other words, he

would have been able to use the formula in ¶ 8 to eliminate

only the following portion of his $50,000 gain otherwise

determined:

B 1 + 3 (1999 to 2001)

A × . = $50,000 × ......... = $40,000

C 5 (1997 to 2001)

107(2) from applying with respect to a trust.s distribution, to

a beneficiary, of a property that qualifies for designation as

the trust.s principal residence before the distribution, a

personal trust can use an election under subsection 107(2.01)

of the Act. Under this election, the trust would instead be

deemed, just before the distribution of the property to the

beneficiary, to have disposed of and then to have reacquired

the property at fair market value. This could be done, for

example, in order for the trust to use the principal residence

exemption to eliminate or reduce any gain on the property

accrued to that point in time (see ¶ 35), ideal in

circumstances where the recipient beneficiary is not the

specified beneficiary and has owned another home during the

period in which the trust owned the home being distributed.

The cost of the property to the beneficiary would be that

same fair market value, and the beneficiary would not be

deemed by subsection 40(7) (see ¶ 36) to have owned the

property during the period of time in which it was owned by

the trust prior to the distribution.

(hereinafter referred to as the .transferor.)

partner,

and the subsection 73(1) rollover rule has applied; or

the transferor.s death, to his or her spouse or common-law

partner or to a spousal or common-law partner trust, and

the subsection 70(6) rollover rule has applied.

If the spouse or common-law partner, former spouse or

common-law partner, spousal or common-law partner trust,

joint spousal or common-law partner trust, or alter ego trust

(hereinafter referred to as the .transferee.) subsequently

disposes of the property, subsection 40(4) can apply with

respect to a principal residence exemption, claimed by the

transferee, for the property. For purposes of the transferee.s

claiming the principal residence exemption under either

subsection 40(4):

(a) The transferee is deemed to have owned the property

throughout the period that the transferor owned it.

(b) The property is deemed to have been the transferee.s

principal residence

applied.for any taxation year for which it was the

transferor.s principal residence; and

applied.for any taxation year for which it would

have been the transferor.s principal residence if he or

she had so designated it.

14

(c) If the transferee is a trust, it is deemed to have been

resident in Canada during each of the taxation years

during which the transferor was resident in Canada.

Any year included in the period described in (a) is included

by the transferee in variable C (the denominator of the

fraction) in the formula in ¶ 8. Any year described in (b) is

included by the transferee in variable B (the numerator of the

fraction) in the formula in ¶ 8 or in the years included in the

statement in ¶ 22(b), as the case may be, assuming that the

transferee meets the residence requirement mentioned

therein, as the case may be, for that year. (If the transferee is

a trust, see (c) above with regard to this residence

requirement.)

Mr. X was the sole owner of a house in Canada, which he

had acquired in 1985. In 1990, Mr. X got married and his

spouse, Mrs. X, moved into the house with him. In 1995,

Mr. X died and the house was transferred to a spousal trust

for Mrs. X. The trust was a trust as described in subsection

70(6). The trust.s taxation year-end was December 31. If

Mr. X had not died (and if he had sold his house in 1995), he

could have designated it as his principal residence for any of

the years 1985 to 1995 inclusive.

Under the rollover rule in subsection 70(6), Mr. X was

deemed to have disposed of the house immediately before

his death for proceeds equal to his cost of the house. Thus,

Mr. X had no gain or loss on the deemed disposition of the

house. The spousal trust for Mrs. X was deemed under

subsection 70(6) to have acquired the house, at the time of

Mr. X.s death, at a cost equal to Mr. X.s deemed proceeds,

i.e., at Mr. X.s cost of the house.

In 2001, Mrs. X died and the trust sold the house at fair

market value. Since this amount was greater than the trust.s

deemed cost of the house, the trust had a .gain otherwise

determined. from the disposition, which the trust (i.e., its

trustee) wishes to eliminate by using the principal residence

exemption.

Subsection 40(4) deems the trust to have owned the house in

all the years in which Mr. X owned it, i.e., 1985 to 1995

inclusive, in accordance with the rule described in (a) above.

(The house was, of course, owned by the trust in 1995 in any

event.) This means that the years that the trust must include

in variable C (the denominator of the fraction) in the

principal residence exemption formula in ¶ 8 are 1985 to

2001 inclusive.

Since the trust is a personal trust resident in Canada and also

since Mrs. X lived in the house and qualified as a specified

beneficiary of the trust for the years 1995 to 2001 inclusive

(see ¶ 35), the trust can designate the house as its principal

residence for those years. The trust cannot designate the

house as its principal residence for the years 1985 to 1994

inclusive; however, such a designation by the trust is not

necessary.the house is already deemed by subsection 40(4)

to have been the trust.s principal residence for those years, in

accordance with the rule described in (b) above, because

Mr. X could have designated the house as his principal

residence for those years. Also, in accordance with the rule

described in (c) above, the trust is deemed to have been

resident in Canada for the years 1985 to 1994 because Mr. X

was resident in Canada during those years. Therefore, the

trust is able to include all of the years from 1985 to 2001

inclusive in variable B (the numerator of the fraction) in the

formula in ¶ 8. In other words, the trust is able to use the

principal residence exemption formula in ¶ 8 to completely

eliminate the gain otherwise determined on its disposition of

the house in 2001.

Assume all the same facts as in Example 1, except the

following: Mr. X could not have designated the house as his

principal residence for the years 1985 to 1988 inclusive

because he had already designated his cottage (see ¶s 3

and 5) as his principal residence for those years (see the

designation rules discussed in ¶ 6). Under these

circumstances, the house that was transferred to the spousal

trust for Mrs. X cannot be deemed to have been the principal

residence of the trust for the years 1985 to 1988 inclusive.

Therefore, the trust can only partially eliminate the gain

otherwise determined on its disposition of the house in 2001

by means of the principal residence exemption formula in ¶ 8.

subsection 73(1) of the Act, the following should be noted

for purposes of any subsequent disposition of the property by

the transferee:

the transferor.for one or more years prior to the

transfer.may be needed in order for the property to be

deemed to have been the principal residence of the

transferee for those years by means of subsection 40(4)

(see (b) above). Note that the transferor will not be able to

designate the property as a principal residence for any

particular year if another property is designated as a

principal residence for that year by the transferor (or, if

the year is after the 1981 taxation year, by the transferor

or any of the other members of the transferor.s family

unit).see ¶ 6. If the transferor is able to, and does in fact,

designate the property as his or her principal residence for

one or more years prior to the transfer, this does not

necessarily mean that the transferor must actually file the

designation form with the return for the year of the

transfer (although the transferor may do so).for further

comments on the necessity to file a designation form,

see ¶ 7. The transferor should, in any event, complete the

the transferee disposes of the property (or grants an option

to another person to acquire the property) and wishes to

use the principal residence exemption, the transferee

would need to file the designation forms.i.e., the

transferee.s designation form for any years for which the

transferee is designating the property as a principal

residence and the transferor.s designation form for any

15

years for which his or her designation of the property

causes the property to be deemed to have been the

principal residence of the transferee

common-law partner.only when the situation

described in ¶ 7(a) or (b) exists in connection with

the transferee.s disposition of the property; or

(see ¶ 35(a)).

alter ego trust) from the disposition of the property or

substituted property (which might occur, for example,

because the transferee was not able to completely

eliminate the gain otherwise determined by means of the

principal residence exemption) could be deemed to be the

taxable capital gain of the transferor by virtue of the

attribution rules in section 74.2 of the Act. For a

discussion of these rules, see the current version of

or a share of the capital stock of a co-operative housing

corporation (see ¶ 3) can be a partnership asset, a partnership

is not a taxpayer and it cannot use the principal residence

exemption on the disposition of any such property. However,

a member of the partnership could use the principal residence

exemption to reduce or eliminate the portion of any gain on

the disposition of the property which is allocated to that

partner pursuant to the partnership agreement, provided that

the other requirements of the section 54 definition of

.principal residence. are met (e.g., if the partner resides in

the partnership.s housing unit, this would satisfy the

.ordinarily inhabited. requirement discussed in ¶ 5).

depending on the facts of the case, qualify as a taxpayer.s

principal residence (see the requirements discussed in ¶s 2

to 6). A taxpayer that is resident in Canada and owns such a

qualifying property outside Canada during a particular

taxation year can designate the property as a principal

residence for that year in order to use the principal residence

exemption (see ¶ 8 for the meanings of .resident in Canada.

and .during.). Should a non-resident of Canada who owns a

property outside Canada become a resident of Canada at any

particular time, the provisions of the Act normally apply to

deem that person to acquire the property at that time at fair

market value, thereby ensuring that any unrealized gain on

the property accruing to that time will not be taxable in

Canada. Thereafter, the comments in the first two sentences

of this paragraph may apply.

owned in a particular taxation year by a non-resident of

Canada to qualify as the non-resident.s principal residence

(i.e., satisfy all the requirements of the section 54 definition

of .principal residence. for the non-resident) for that year.

The non-resident.s spouse could be the one, for example,

who satisfies the .ordinarily inhabited. rule.see ¶ 5 (or,

alternatively, a subsection 45(2) or (3) election could make

the designation of the property as the non-resident.s principal

residence possible.see ¶s 26 and 29). However, the use of

the principal residence exemption by a taxpayer is limited by

reference to the number of taxation years ending after the

acquisition date during which the taxpayer was resident in

Canada.see ¶s 8 and 22 (as indicated in ¶ 8, .during. a year

means at any time in the year). Thus, even if a property in

Canada owned by a non-resident qualifies as the

non-resident.s principal residence, the above-mentioned

.residence in Canada. requirement typically prevents the

non-resident from using the principal residence exemption to

eliminate a gain on the disposition of the property.

connection with the principal residence exemption, an

election under subsection 45(2) or (3) could allow a

non-resident owning a property in Canada to defer a taxable

capital gain which would otherwise result from a deemed

disposition of a property on a change in its use (see ¶s 25

and 28).

has rented out the property in a particular taxation year and

has filed a subsection 45(2) or (3) election in respect of

the property, see ¶s 25 and 28 regarding the restrictions

on claiming CCA. These restrictions apply where the

non-resident elects to report the rental income under

section 216. (That election is discussed in the current version

under section 116 of the Act for a property in Canada which

the non-resident proposes to dispose of or has disposed of

within the last 10 days, a prepayment on account of tax must

be made or security acceptable to the CCRA must be given

a similar notification, must be filed in connection with a

16

request for a section 116 certificate. Further particulars

regarding the above are contained in the current version of

otherwise determined on the disposition of the property by

the non-resident is or will be eliminated by the principal

residence exemption, the amount of prepayment on account

of tax to be made or security to be given may be reduced

accordingly. An application for such a reduction should be

made by means of a letter signed by the taxpayer and

attached to the completed Form T2062 or similar

notification. Such letter should contain a calculation of the

portion of the gain otherwise determined that is or will be so

eliminated by the principal residence exemption.

17

If a taxpayer disposes (or is deemed to dispose) of a property which the taxpayer has owned (whether jointly with another person

or otherwise) continuously since before 1982, the rule in subsection 40(6) (see ¶ 12) provides that the gain calculated under the

usual method, using the principal residence exemption formula in ¶ 8, cannot be greater than the maximum total net gain

determined under an alternative method. Under the alternative method, there is a hypothetical disposition on December 31, 1981

and reacquisition on January 1, 1982 of the property at fair market value (FMV). The maximum total net gain determined under

the alternative method is then calculated as follows:

where

the hypothetical disposition at FMV on December 31, 1981,

numerator .B. in that formula, that would result from the hypothetical acquisition at FMV on January 1, 1982 and the

subsequent actual (or deemed) disposition, and

deemed) disposition, i.e., the excess (if any) of the FMV on December 31, 1981 over the proceeds (or deemed proceeds) from

the subsequent actual (or deemed) disposition.

The examples which follow illustrate the rule in subsection 40(6). It has been assumed in these examples that, on each actual

disposition, no costs were incurred in connection with that disposition.

Mrs. X acquired a house in 1975 for $50,000. She and her husband lived in it until February 1996, when she sold it for $115,000,

resulting in an actual gain of $65,000 ($115,000 . $50,000). Ever since the sale of the house in 1996, Mr. and Mrs. X have been

living in rented premises. In filing her 1996 income tax return, Mrs. X designated the house as her principal residence for 1975 to

1995 inclusive, and thus her gain otherwise determined was completely eliminated by the principal residence exemption formula

in ¶ 8:

Gain otherwise determined ($115,000 . $50,000) $ 65,000

Reduce by principal residence exemption:

B 1 + 21 (1975 to 1995)

A × .. = $65,000 × ...........

C 22 (1975 to 1996) 65,000

Gain $ NIL

Mr. X acquired a lot in 1975 for $7,000 and built a cottage on it in 1979 for $13,000. Mr. and Mrs. X used the cottage as a

seasonal residence from 1979 to 2001 inclusive. In the fall of 2001 Mr. X sold the cottage for $65,000, resulting in an actual gain

of $45,000 ($65,000 . ($7,000 + $13,000)). In filing his 2001 income tax return, Mr. X designated the cottage property as his

principal residence for 1979 to 1981 inclusive, as well as for 1996 to 2001 inclusive. He could not designate the property as his

principal residence for 1975 to 1978 inclusive because it was only a vacant lot and thus no one .ordinarily inhabited. it in those

years (see ¶ 11); nor could he designate the property as his principal residence for 1982 to 1995 inclusive because of his wife.s

designation of the house as her principal residence for those years (see ¶ 6). As a result, not all of his $45,000 gain otherwise

determined was eliminated by the principal residence exemption formula in ¶ 8. However, because the property had been owned

by Mr. X continuously since before 1982, subsection 40(6) applied for purposes of computing his gain. The fair market value of

the cottage on December 31, 1981 was $30,000.

In addition to the above facts, assume also that Mr. X did not make a subsection 110.6(19) capital gains election with respect to

the cottage (see the discussion of this election in ¶ 8) because he had already used up his $100,000 lifetime capital gains

exemption before 1994. Therefore, he had no capital gains election reduction amount (as described in ¶ 8) with respect to the

cottage.

18

The calculations under subsection 40(6) in connection with Mr. X.s 2001 gain on the cottage were as follows:

USUAL METHOD FOR CALCULATING GAIN:

Gain otherwise determined ($65,000 . $20,000) $ 45,000

Reduce by principal residence exemption:

B 1 + 9 (1979 to 1981 and 1996 to 2001)

A × .. = $45,000 × ............... 16,667

C 27 (1975 to 2001)

Gain $ 28,333

ALTERNATIVE METHOD . CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM TOTAL NET GAIN:

Pre-1982 gain:

Gain otherwise determined ($30,000 . $20,000) $ 10,000

Reduce by principal residence exemption:

B 1 + 3 (1979 to 1981)

A × .. = $10,000 × ......... 5,714

C 7 (1975 to 1981)

Gain $ 4,286

Post-1981 gain:

Gain otherwise determined ($65,000 . $30,000) $ 35,000

Reduce by principal residence exemption:

B 6 (1996 to 2001)

A × .. = $35,000 × ........ 10,500

C 20 (1982 to 2001)

Gain $ 24,500

Post-1981 loss:

N/A $ NIL

Pre-1982 gain + post-1981 gain . post-1981 loss

= $4,286 + $24,500 . $Nil

= $28,786.

RESULT: Mr. X.s gain remained at the $28,333 calculated under the usual method since that amount did not exceed the

maximum total net gain of $28,786 calculated under the alternative method.

Assume the same facts in Example 1 except that the couple are in a common-law relationship rather than a married couple.

In filing his 2001 income tax return, Mr. X designated the cottage property as his principal residence for 1979 to 1992 inclusive,

as well as for 1996 to 2001 inclusive. He could not designate the property as his principal residence for 1975 to 1978 inclusive

because it was only a vacant lot and thus no one .ordinarily inhabited. it in those years (see ¶ 11); nor could he designate the

property as his principal residence for 1993 to 1995 inclusive because of his common-law partner.s designation of the house as

her principal residence for those years (see ¶ 6). As a result, not all of his $45,000 gain otherwise determined was eliminated by

the principal residence exemption formula in ¶ 8.

The calculations under subsection 40(6) in connection with Mr. X.s 2001 gain on the cottage were as follows:

USUAL METHOD FOR CALCULATING GAIN:

Gain otherwise determined ($65,000 . $20,000) $ 45,000

Reduce by principal residence exemption:

B 1 + 20 (1979 to 1992 and 1996 to 2001)

A × .. = $45,000 × ................ 35,000

C 27 (1975 to 2001)

Gain $ 10,000

ALTERNATIVE METHOD . CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM TOTAL NET GAIN:

Pre-1982 gain:

Gain otherwise determined ($30,000 . $20,000) $ 10,000

Reduce by principal residence exemption:

B 1 + 3 (1979 to 1981)

A × .. = $10,000 × ......... 5,714

C 7 (1975 to 1981)

Gain $ 4,286

19

Post-1981 gain:

Gain otherwise determined ($65,000 . $30,000) $ 35,000

Reduce by principal residence exemption:

B 17 (1982 to 1992 and 1996 to 2001)

A × .. = $35,000 × ............... 29,750

C 20 (1982 to 2001)

Gain $ 5,250

Post-1981 loss:

N/A $ NIL

Pre-1982 gain + post-1981 gain . post-1981 loss

= $4,286 + $5,250 . $Nil

= $9,536.

RESULT: Although Mr. X.s gain calculated under the usual method was $10,000, such gain could not exceed the maximum total

net gain of $9,536 calculated under the alternative method. Therefore, the gain was reduced to $9,536.

20

Assume that a taxpayer resident in Canada sold a 50 hectare farm. The taxpayer owned the farm and occupied the house on it

from July 30, 1993 to June 15, 2001. The house and one-half hectare of the land have been designated as the taxpayer.s principal

residence for the 1993 to 2001 taxation years inclusive. The taxpayer.s calculations of the gain on the disposition of the farm

FIRST METHOD (see ¶ 21)

Proceeds of disposition

Land $ 10,000* $ 90,000 $ 100,000

House 50,000 . 50,000

Barn . 35,000 35,000

Silo . 15,000 15,000

$ 60,000 $ 140,000 $ 200,000

Adjusted cost base

Land $ 2,000* $ 58,000 $ 60,000

House 20,000 . 20,000

Barn . 11,000 11,000

Silo . 4,000 4,000

$ 22,000 $ 73,000 $ 95,000

Gain otherwise determined $ 38,000 $ 67,000 $ 105,000

Less: Principal residence exemption 38,000 . 38,000

Gain $ NIL $ 67,000 $ 67,000

one way (as described in ¶ 21(a)) of assigning values to the principal residence portion of the land would be to simply

use $1,000 (i.e., 1/100 of $100,000) for the proceeds for such portion of the land and $600 (i.e., 1/100 of $60,000) for

the adjusted cost base of such portion. Assume, however, that a typical residential lot in the area, although less than

one-half hectare in this example, had a fair market value of $10,000 as of the date of sale and $2,000 as of the date of

acquisition. As indicated in ¶ 21(b), we would accept the taxpayer.s use of the latter amounts, which in this case would

result in a greater portion of the gain otherwise determined being eliminated by the principal residence exemption.

SECOND METHOD (see ¶ 22)

Proceeds of disposition for total farm property $ 200,000

Adjusted cost base for total farm property 95,000

Gain otherwise determined $ 105,000

Less: Principal residence exemption using

subparagraph 40(2)(c)(ii) election:

$1,000 + (9 × $1,000)

10,000

Gain $ 95,000

RESULT: In this example, the first method results in a lower gain to the taxpayer.

21

reasons for the revisions to an interpretation bulletin. It

outlines revisions that we have made as a result of changes

to the law, as well as changes reflecting new or revised

CCRA interpretations.

This bulletin is being revised to reflect legislative changes

enacted under S.C. 2000, c.12 (formerly Bill C-23) and S.C.

2001, c.17 (formerly Bill C-22). The comments in the

bulletin are not affected by any proposed legislation released

before June 9, 2003.

The bulletin has been revised to reflect the repeal of

subsection 252(4) and the addition of the term .common-law

partner. to the Act. Specific discussions on this topic have

been added to ¶s 2 and 6 of the bulletin.

The discussion in former ¶ 12 on spousal trusts and

subsection 107(4) has been removed since paragraph

104(4)(a) now also refers to joint spousal or common-law

partner trusts and alter ego trusts. A discussion on these

types of trusts and the application of subsection 107(4) to

these trusts is outside of the scope of this bulletin. The

remainder of former ¶ 12 has been moved to ¶ 36.

We have added a comment in ¶ 15 regarding recreational or

lifestyle uses for land in excess of one-half hectare.

¶ 17 has been expanded to clarify the CCRA.s interpretation.

The previous version contemplated that a taxpayer would

subdivide and immediately sell the newly created lots.

Comments have been added to also address the situation

where a taxpayer subdivides his or her property but then

holds the lots for a period of time.

¶ 38 (formerly ¶ 36) now addresses the rules in subsection

40(4) as they relate to alter ego trusts and joint spousal and

common-law partner trusts by virtue of their addition to the

list of qualifying transfers set out in new subsection 73(1.01)

have been removed from ¶ 38 as the rules now apply to the

aforementioned trusts as well.

The various examples in the bulletin and its appendices have

been updated to reflect more current years and current law.

Throughout the bulletin, we have made other changes for

clarification or readability purposes, and we have deleted

items which were redundant or which no longer have any

relevance.

The information contained on this web site is here for example purposes only and you should be consulting with qualified professionals before making any decisions based on information contained here.