The Bowman Moot Problem 2020

Canada v. Rio Tinto Alcan Inc., 2018 FCA 124

  1. The reasons and judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal in Canada v. Rio Tinto Alcan Inc., 2018 FCA 124 are appealed to the Bowman Supreme Moot Court for Tax Appeals.
  2. The questions in issue on appeal are:
    • Whether the investment bankers’ fees, referred to by the Tax Court judge as “Oversight Expenses”, incurred by Alcan Inc. in the context of the acquisition of Pechiney S.A. and in the context of the spin-off of Novelis Inc., are deductible as current expenses under subsection 9(1) of the Income Tax Act (Canada)?
    • Whether such investment bankers’ fees are also deductible under paragraph 20(1)(bb) of the Income Tax Act (Canada)?
  3. All other issues raised before the Tax Court of Canada and the Federal Court of Appeal are not appealed from.
  4. The Moot is intended to promote advocacy pertaining to substantive tax law issues, not to questions relating to administrative law or the standard of review. Participants are expected to make very short written submissions and refer the judges to their factum when they state orally the applicable standard of review. We have done our best to inform the judges that the standard of review is not at issue and have advised them to refrain from asking any questions pertaining to it.
  5. The moot problem is an actual case, and therefore the parties’ factums are to be original works, as opposed to any copy or mere imitation of existing filed court materials.