The new Canada Not-for-Profit Corporations Act came into force October 17, 2011. All federally incorporated not-for-profit corporations must continue into this new Act by October 17, 2014. Failure to continue the not-for-profit corporation will result in dissolution.
The new Canada Not-for-Profit Corporations Act makes positive improvements to the not-for-profit sector particularly in the areas of powers, corporate governance and accountability. Under the old regime, a not-for-profit corporation only had the powers expressly granted to it under its Letters Patent. Under the new Canada Not-for-Profit Corporations Act, a not-for-profit corporation has the powers of a natural person subject only to restrictions in the articles, thus opening opportunities for non-for-profit to engage in activities that might previously have been unable to pursue. Corporate governance has been brought more into line with those applicable to the for-profit sector. Accountability has been made more rational, with greater accountability to members including the right of members to access oppression remedies, and with the mandated requirement for audited financial statements being eliminated for some lower revenue corporations.
The transition by a not-for-profit corporation from the old act to the new Canada Not-for-Profit Corporations Act is made by a continuance. A continuance is filing of Articles of Continuance, along with the new by-laws with the Director for the Canada Not-for-Profit Corporations Act. The Articles of Continuance and new by-laws must be approved by the members by special resolution prior to submission. While there is no fee for the continuance, the process is not trivial and requires significant changes to the by-laws. The good news is that in many cases the by-laws may be significantly reduced because the default provisions of the new Act may be relied upon. A clear understanding of the new Canada Not-for-Profit Corporations Act is required in order to appropriately formulate the new by-laws to preserve the intentions of the members.
We represent the interests of a number of not-for-profit corporations located in Ottawa and elsewhere in the Province of Ontario.
Frequently Asked Questions
I am considering the acquisition of a business. Long term contracts between the business and third parties are important to the business. Do such contracts affect the decision to acquire shares or assets of the business?
There are a number of factors to be taken into account when purchasing an existing business including tax, liability, due diligence and employee matters. Your question relates to the contracts between the business and third parties. These contracts may include rights obtained by the business necessary to carry on the business, such as licenses or franchises, or the benefit of sale or service agreements for the supply of products or services that generate revenue for the business.
A fundamental difference between an asset purchase and a share purchase is that in an asset sale the contracts must be assigned (along with the transfer of assets) while in a share sale the contracts remain intact (since only the shares of the business itself are transferred).A comprehensive review of all important contracts is advisable as early as possible during the due diligence process to determine rights and obligations. If third party consents are required, consideration must be given as to the risk that such consents may not be available in a timely manner, or at all, and whether the transaction may be better structured to avoid the necessity for assignment. In some less common circumstances there is an outright bar to assignment and consents cannot be obtained (this is the case in some government procurements). The acquisition of the business in such circumstances may only be achieved through a share sale to avoid termination of such contract(s). It should also be noted that some contracts contain provisions that deem a change of control from a sale of shares to be equivalent to assignment, and triggering the necessity for third party consent.
My husband and I are the sole shareholders and directors of an incorporated retail business. We have been quite successful and are generating cash excess to business requirements. We do not want to pay the cash out to ourselves now, and pay high rates of tax, but at the same time this cash is a significant part of a retirement fund. We have no creditors, other than trade creditors payable in the ordinary course. How do we protect this cash for our retirement?
You are asking a good question. In the event of an unexpected economic downturn or legal claim against your active business corporation, the excess cash generated in the business could be exposed to potential creditors. Once the liability is crystalized, it may be too late to take action that will protect the cash. You have also correctly identified that the simplest solution –payment of the cash out to yourselves – attracts undesirable tax consequences.
A cost efficient solution is the creation of a holding corporation. The holding corporation structure, when designed properly, allows excess money from your active business corporation to be paid by dividend to the holding corporation, tax free. The holding corporation is a separate legal entity, and is generally insulated from claims against your active business corporation.
Care is required that the desired tax treatment is achieved in the structuring of the holding corporation. There are other financial planning considerations, such as ensuring the availability of the lifetime capital gains exemption, which must be addressed by the new structure. This type of corporate structuring may also be implemented as part of a broader strategy for business succession and included as part of your estate planning.
I have a corporation the shares of which are held only by me and members of my immediate family. Do I really need to have annual minutes?
If your corporation is audited by the CRA and matters, such as the declaration of dividends, have not been formally documented by a written resolution of the directors or in annual minutes, the consequence can be severe. There are other risks that may be avoided by having minutes prepared annually. This is analogous to your dentist who encourages you to have good dental hygiene and periodic check-ups so that small problems do not become big problems. Practicing good corporate hygiene just makes good sense.
The minimum legal obligation of a corporation is to hold an annual meeting of shareholders to consider the financial statements, elect directors and to appoint (or dispense with the appointment of) the auditor. In practice, and as permitted by statute, narrowly held corporations often dispense with an annual meeting in favor of signed resolution of all of the shareholders. The failure to hold annual resolutions, or obtain written resolutions in lieu, can lead to legal action from disgruntled shareholders.
The practice of holding annual meetings (or resolutions in lieu) also tends to ensure that corporate matters requiring attention are addressed, such as share transfers, changes to directors, and address changes, which if left unaddressed could become significant problems.
An effective method of ensuring good “corporate hygiene” is for the corporation to instruct its accounting advisors to provide legal counsel with an annual letter of instructions to document applicable financial matters.
It is not uncommon that a new client brings us a minute book that has not been properly organized, or that has not been updated for many years. It is not a cause for embarrassment. We strongly encourage that the minute books be updated before an issue arises, such as a CRA audit.