CRA Says Crypto Is Not “Goods” for s. 95(3)(b) Exception

CRA concluded that cryptocurrency is not “goods” for purposes of s. 95(3)(b).
A foreign affiliate’s investment management and trading execution services for a Canadian crypto trading business did not qualify for the “services performed in connection with the purchase or sale of goods” exception.
CRA relied on case law suggesting “goods” means tangible movable property.
Because crypto is intangible property, the exception did not apply.
CRA also noted the anti-base-erosion purpose of the rule: it fits where services must be performed outside Canada, which was not the case here.

Note that this post was (partially) written with the help of AI. It is always useful to review the original source material, and where needed to obtain (local) advice from a specialist.