[Verse 1] When section six says value the benefit received Fair market value seems the way to proceed But what happens when there's no market to find No comparable sales to help us define [Chorus] Fair market value, arm's length deal But when no market exists, what is real? One-third, fifty percent, numbers in the air The Act stays silent, CRA fills the gap there Valuation problem, arbitrary choice Legal fiction speaking with official voice [Verse 2] Mixed-use arrangements pose the hardest test Personal and business use all compressed How do you split what can't be cleanly split When methodology's not in the Act's writ [Chorus] Fair market value, arm's length deal But when no market exists, what is real? One-third, fifty percent, numbers in the air The Act stays silent, CRA fills the gap there Valuation problem, arbitrary choice Legal fiction speaking with official voice [Bridge] No prescribed method in the statutory text CRA invented rules, what comes next? When arm's length markets are just pretend On whose authority do we depend? [Verse 3] The fiction works when markets can be found But breaks apart when there's no solid ground Allocation percentages pulled from thin air Taxpayers wondering if the system's fair [Final Chorus] Fair market value, arm's length deal But when no market exists, what is real? One-third, fifty percent, numbers in the air The Act stays silent, CRA fills the gap there Valuation problem, who decides what's right? Legal fiction fading in the light [Outro] Section six requires the value be known But leaves us guessing when the method's not shown Valuation problem, the gap remains wide Between what's written and what we apply
← 2 The "Primarily for Employer's Benefit" Doctrine | 1 R v. Savage [1983] 2 SCR 428 →