Subsection 147.1(1) - Definitions
Compensation
Administrative Policy
1C 98-2 "Prescribed Compensation for Registered Pension Plans".
3 June 1992 T.I. 5-921532
A retiring allowance is not included in "compensation".
Defined Benefit Plan
Articles
Terra L. Klinck, Susie S. Taing, "How Target Benefit Plans Fit Into the Current Income Tax Act Registered Pension Plan Regime", Taxation of Executive Compensation and Retirement, Special Pension Edition, Volume XVII, No. 2, 2013, p. 1068.
Features of target benefit plan (p.1068)
[W]e refer to TB plans as workplace pension plans with the following three characteristics:
- the TB plan includes a benefit formula which is a "target," and is not guaranteed;
- employer contributions (and where applicable, employee contributions) to a TB plan are fixed, whether by collective agreement or otherwise; and
- both past service benefits and future benefits can be reduced while the plan is ongoing and upon wind-up. [fn 2: Alternatively, when assets are more than sufficient to pay the "target" benefit, benefits may be increased and/or ancillary benefits may be added.]
TB plans have characteristics that resemble both defined benefit ("DB") and defined contribution ("DC") plans. The contributions that an employer is required to make to a TB plan are fixed, similar to a DC plan (e.g., a percentage of an employee's earnings or a flat amount per hours worked). Once contribution levels are known, a benefit formula is set. The benefits payable to members from the TB plan are not directly tied to contributions made to the plan, as is the case with a DC plan. Instead, benefits under a TB plan are similar to a traditional DB plan in that the formula for the "targeted" amount of benefits to be paid are known in advance and calculated based on a plan member's years of service (e.g., a flat-rate benefit formula), or years of service and earnings (e.g., a final-average earnings or career-average earnings formula)….
Characterization as defined benefit plan (p. 1069)
TB plans are similar in design to MP plans in that contributions to the TB plan are fixed. From a policy perspective, one can argue that TB plans should be treated the same as MP plans for PA purposes. [fn 8: As discussed below, the MP PA calculation rules apply to SMEPs, which have many of the same design features as a TB plan.] TB plans do not, however, fall within the MP regime. A MP provision is currently defined as the terms of a pension plan (a) which provide for a separate account to be maintained in respect of each member to which contributions are credited, and (b) under which the only benefits payable to a member are benefits determined by the amount in the member's account. [fn 9: Section 147.1 of the Act.]
As TB plans provide a benefit formula that is not solely tied to a DC account balance, a TB plan does not meet the current definition of a MP provision.
DB Provisions
A DB provision is defined under the Act as the terms of a plan under which benefits in respect of each member are determined in any way other than that described in the definition of "money purchase provision." [fn 10: Section 147.1 of the Act.] Based on this definition, a TB plan would fall within the definition of DB provisions under the current RPP regime in the Act.
Subsection 147.1(11) - Revocation of registration — notice of intention
Administrative Policy
4 June 1991 Memorandum (Tax Window, No. 4, p. 29, ¶1279)
A pension plan could be revoked retroactively.
Subsection 147.1(12) - Notice of revocation
Cases
Hodge v. M.N.R., 2009 DTC 6048, 2009 FCA 210
On July 17, 2008, the Minister issued a notice of intent to revoke the registration of a pension plan established by the taxpayer, with the proposed revocation to be as of June 1, 2001 (the date of the plan's initial registration) on the basis that there was no evidence that the plan had ever complied with Regulation 8502(8). On July 13, 2008, the administrator of the plan wrote to the Minister requesting that the revocation of the plan be as of August 31, 2008.
Subsection 147.1(12) authorized the Minister to specify June 1, 2001, as the date on which the Plan's revocation would be effective, as there was no basis for the Court to vary the date of revocation from that specified by the Minister. Giving effective priority to the Minister in determining the date of revocation recognized the Minister's responsibility for administering the Act.