Decision 68317
Full Text of Decision 68317
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
|
|
Summary:
The claimant was a 50% owner of 25 head of cattle. The claimant not only was an owner of the cattle, but she also milked the cattle and that milk was sold. Her activity involved in producing the milk from the cows constitutes farming. If the claimant had only had an investment in the cattle, it may be held that she was not farming. But in this case, not only did the claimant own the cattle, but she also produced farm products which were sold. The fact that the claimant works at other places such as the golf course and does the books of the farm does not take away from the fact that she is also self-employed in farming as she is an owner of the cattle and produces farm income.
Decision A-0416.97
Full Text of Decision A-0416.97
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
allocation of earnings |
|
Summary:
The FCA found no reviewable error on the part of the Umpire. The facts support the conclusion that the claimant was an investor and not self-employed within the meaning of the Reg. Case distinguishable from Caron Bernier (A-0136.96).**NOTE: For more information on the facts, refer to CUB 37627.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
farming |
self-employed |
|
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Decision 37627
Full Text of Decision 37627
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
allocation of earnings |
|
Summary:
Claimant owns 50% of the farm. Employed full-time away from the farm and she puts in an insignificant amount of time (12 hrs/year) doing the farm's books. Umpire stated that the claimant, although part-owner in title of a farm, is not self-employed in farmings and does not work on the farm on a regular basis. He did not find that the claimant's involvement in the farm is of such an extent so as to be considered self-employment in farming within the meaning of par. 57(6)(b). Her activities vis-a-vis the farm are that of a concerned investor.**NOTE: The Commission has appealed to the F.C. The claimant is self-employed and however minimal the claimant's participation is in the farming operation, she is subject to an allocation of part of the farming income.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
farming |
self-employed |
|
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Decision 31090
Full Text of Decision 31090
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
allocation of earnings |
|
Summary:
Claimant owns a farm but spends only a few hours a week on it. Income from farming was considered to be earnings pursuant to 57(6)b) of the Regulations. The Board erred in considering it to be investment income.
Decision 25593
Full Text of Decision 25593
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
allocation of earnings |
|
Summary:
I do not think it reasonable to insist that the CEIC should provide extensive advice as to how best claimants can avoid allocation of real income, any more than the officers of Revenue Canada should be regarded as reasonably obliged to advise taxpayers on how they may best minimize their income tax.
I agree that results may be somewhat arbitrary in that he might well have chosen to sell all of his grain in 1 or 2 weeks instead of 8. A more rational system would provide for some kind of averaging of total annual gross income over the entire year. But that is not what the Regulations provide.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
calculation of income |
|
Decision 68742
Full Text of Decision 68742
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
allocation of earnings |
Maternity Benefits |
Summary:
The claimant failed to declare earnings from farming while receiving maternity benefits. She reported her farming income for Income Tax but not for EI. See similar decision CUB 67915A.
Decision 49505A
Full Text of Decision 49505A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
calculation of income |
|
Summary:
Claimant was 100% owner of a cattle operation which had reported a gross income of $130,116 in 1997. No earnings reported while he should have declared 15% of his sales totalling $48,860 for the relevant period. Held that despite claimant more than likely did not make a profit from his farm operation, the Commission is bound by ss. 35(10) of the EIR.
Decision A-0725.99
Full Text of Decision A-0725.99
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
calculation of income |
|
Summary:
Case similar to that of Caron Bernier (A-0136.96). Claimant worked in insurable employment on a farm of which she owned 20% of the shares. Must declare 15% of her income from the farm's operations while she is unemployed. The Court refused to reconsider the decision in the Caron Bernier case because there were no unusual circumstances justifying reconsideration.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
farming |
self-employed |
|
Decision 46122
Full Text of Decision 46122
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
calculation of income |
|
Summary:
See summary indexed under FCA A-0725.99
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
farming |
self-employed |
|
Decision A-0136.96
Full Text of Decision A-0136.96
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
calculation of income |
|
Summary:
Labourer for the farm from 4-07 to 21-10-94, and also engaged in a co-adventure (with 40% of the shares in the business). Advised to declare 15% of her income from the farm. The BOR found that she was not a self-employed worker but simply a worker, and that her income from the farm should not be taken into account. This decision was set aside by the FCA, which ruled that a distinction cannot be made, from the regulatory provision, between the self-employed worker and the worker who operates a business, as the BOR did. The income from the farm that the claimant received after her lay-off, when she continued to render services to the business even though she did not devote more than an hour and a half to it per day, five days a week, have value as earnings and must be deducted from the benefits.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
corporate veil |
|
|
| week of unemployment |
farming |
self-employed |
|
Decision 31814
Full Text of Decision 31814
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
calculation of income |
|
Summary:
A day labourer who worked at Ferme Duregard Inc. between 4-07 and 21-10-94 also has an interest (40% of shares). She was notified that she should declare 15% of farm revenue. Ruled that she was not an independent worker, but simply a worker; farm revenue not considered. Appeal pending before FCA.**S. 57(6)(b) of the Regulations covers only independent workers in the agricultural sector. For the purposes of "revenue", the Act does not cover persons operating a business on their own behalf, as a partner, or as a co-venturer. Commission did not agree. Appeal before FCA.**NOTE: The Commission does not agree with the umpire's decision, whereby only self-employed people in the agricultural sector are subject to s. 57(6)(b) of the Regulations.
Decision 25593
Full Text of Decision 25593
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
calculation of income |
|
Summary:
Apart from the fact that claimant provided no details of this with respect to the weeks in question, insofar as an advance might not be taken into account in the receipts this could work to his advantage.
It is adequately clear from the context that para. 57(6)(b) provides that precisely 15% of gross income shall be allocated, the "only" being there to emphasize that the whole of the gross receipts shall not be so allocated.
As for transportation costs not having been deducted, they represent one of many business costs coming out of the gross income before a net income can be calculated. But the UI Regulations use gross income and treat 15% of that as actual income in lieu of trying to calculate the net income.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
allocation of earnings |
|
Decision 20398
Full Text of Decision 20398
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
calculation of income |
|
Summary:
Ss. 57(6) exists because of the difficulty of separating a farmer's personal living expenses from farm business expenses. It is easier to simply designate a percentage of gross profits rather than determine what amount of income was used personally by the farmer.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
official wordings differ |
|
Decision 15775
Full Text of Decision 15775
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
calculation of income |
|
Summary:
The regulations are explicit. Farmers receiving UI must report 35% of the gross income from the farm as well as any government subsidies received.
Decision 14085
Full Text of Decision 14085
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
calculation of income |
|
Summary:
Formula adopted is not to calculate net income of farming operation, but to impose lump sum formula fixing income at 35% of gross income.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
co-adventure |
|
|
| week of unemployment |
corporate veil |
|
|
| earnings |
income |
in kind |
|
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Decision A-0221.04
Full Text of Decision A-0221.04
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Summary:
The Commission found that the earnings received by the claimant from his greenhouse were farming income and applied subsection 35(10) of the EIR. The Umpire had concluded that the claimant's activities did not constitute farming as the issue of farming had not been raised. The FCA stated that the issue of farming was not properly before the Umpire. The Court concluded that Umpire could not raise on his own the issue of farming. This was a breach of procedural fairness.
Decision 59956
Full Text of Decision 59956
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Summary:
Refer to summary indexed under FCA A-0221.04
Decision 43373
Full Text of Decision 43373
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Summary:
Claimant admits to owning the farm, on a 50% basis with his son and it is the claimant's 50% partner who decides on how the farm is operated and the claimant benefited from this operation. He states that one cannot be self-employed if one has no knowledge or control. Umpire concluded that one can be self-employed and not have control or knowledge of the business. The claimant being self-employed allowed his son to control the operation of the business. The income received by the claimant from the farm operation is income pursuant to the Act.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
farming |
self-employed |
|
Decision A-0416.97
Full Text of Decision A-0416.97
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Summary:
The FCA found no reviewable error on the part of the Umpire. The facts support the conclusion that the claimant was an investor and not self-employed within the meaning of the Reg. Case distinguishable from Caron Bernier (A-0136.96).**NOTE: For more information on the facts, refer to CUB 37627.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
farming |
self-employed |
|
| earnings |
farming |
allocation of earnings |
|
Decision 37627
Full Text of Decision 37627
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Summary:
Claimant owns 50% of the farm. Employed full-time away from the farm and she puts in an insignificant amount of time (12 hrs/year) doing the farm's books. Umpire stated that the claimant, although part-owner in title of a farm, is not self-employed in farmings and does not work on the farm on a regular basis. He did not find that the claimant's involvement in the farm is of such an extent so as to be considered self-employment in farming within the meaning of par. 57(6)(b). Her activities vis-a-vis the farm are that of a concerned investor.**NOTE: The Commission has appealed to the F.C. The claimant is self-employed and however minimal the claimant's participation is in the farming operation, she is subject to an allocation of part of the farming income.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
farming |
self-employed |
|
| earnings |
farming |
allocation of earnings |
|
Decision A-0182.96
Full Text of Decision A-0182.96
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Summary:
The claimant, who was the sole proprietor of the woodlands from which the wood that was sold came, alleged that he was unable to cut wood because of a partial disability, and was assisted by his uncle and his son. Also alleged that he had given the wood to his son and did not receive any profit from it. The BOR found that the claimant participated in the operations to the best of his capacities and had to be regarded as a self-employed person, and that the gains he realized had value as earnings and should have been declared. A straight case of assessment of fact, and both the Umpire and the FCA refused to intervene.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
knowingly |
|
|
| week of unemployment |
farming |
self-employed |
|
Decision 21835
Full Text of Decision 21835
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-1428.92
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
business returns |
family business |
|
Decision A-1428.92
Full Text of Decision A-1428.92
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Summary:
Held that the definitions found in s.16 of the Regulations, since they were enacted strictly for the purpose of this section, cannot be relied upon to determine whether income results from employment within the meaning of s. 57 of the Regulations.
Holding 40% of the shares in the business with her husband, part of the income derived from the maple grove and from the sales and purchases of cattle has been attributed to her. Held that it is impossible to say that the Board's decision is based on an error of law or on unreasonnable conclusions.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
business returns |
family business |
|
Decision 20398
Full Text of Decision 20398
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Summary:
English and French text of ss. 57(6) differ. The English version uses the more limited concept "farming" while the French speaks of "l'agriculture". Lack of parrallelism with s. 16. No doubt that s. 16 is not relevant. "Farming" is closer to the purpose of ss. 57(6).
The operation of a greenhouse for the purpose of growing herbs for sale to local restaurants is much closer to a wholesale retail business than to a farming operation.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
calculation of income |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
official wordings differ |
|
Decision 20266
Full Text of Decision 20266
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Summary:
Farming (or its French equivalent "agriculture") includes cattle breeding. It must therefore be concluded that the claimant is a farmer under the Act.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
farming |
full working week |
|
Decision 14085
Full Text of Decision 14085
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Summary:
Raising chickens and producing eggs is farming operation according to Office du crédit agricole. Can look to definition in Reg. 16(2)(g) even though for other purposes. Farming takes in more than clearing land.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
co-adventure |
|
|
| week of unemployment |
corporate veil |
|
|
| earnings |
income |
in kind |
|
| earnings |
farming |
calculation of income |
|
Decision 13429
Full Text of Decision 13429
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Summary:
The CEIC argues that moneys earned from the sale of milk fell squarely within reg. 57(6)(b), regardless of whether claimant's self-employment was major or minor in extent [p. 8]. I accept that reg. 57(6)(b) makes no differentiation between major and minor self-employment. [p. 9]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
farming |
self-employed |
|
| earnings |
business returns |
as income |
|
Decision 12219
Full Text of Decision 12219
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Summary:
Cash purchase tickets or Wheat Board Advance Payments in Saskatchewan. No other details.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
personal reasons |
business activities |
|
| board of referees |
natural justice |
free of bias |
|
| earnings |
business returns |
family business |
|
Decision 09674
Full Text of Decision 09674
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
definition |
|
Summary:
Contrary to board's decision, income from sale of piglets was income from self-employment in farming within meaning of Reg. 57(6)(b) and must be allocated under 58(7).
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
business returns |
as income |
|
Decision 27670
Full Text of Decision 27670
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
subsidies |
|
Summary:
Held that the contribution to claimant by the Government of Canada pursuant to the terms of an agreement made between them for participation in the Canada Permanent Cover Program instituted for the purposes of soil conservation cannot be classified as subsidy nor income from a farming transaction.
Definition of subsidy in Black's Law Dictionary quoted. The idea of a subsidy, then, is to provide aid or act as a prop. In other words the purpose is to lend support to an enterprise. The money received by claimant cannot be classified as a subsidy.
Decision A-0479.78
Full Text of Decision A-0479.78
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
farming |
subsidies |
|
Summary:
According to the Umpire, partial refund of the cost of machinery under a government program does not comprise a subsidy equivalent to earnings. Application for review dismissed by the FC.
