CRA finds that crypto is not “goods” for s. 95(3)(b) purposes

A foreign affiliate of Canco provided investment management and trading execution services to Canco in relation to Canco’s Canadian cryptocurrency trading business.

Does the exception in s. 95(3)(b) from the application of s. 95(2)(b) for “services performed in connection with the purchase or sale of goods” apply in relation to cryptocurrencies? After referring inter alia to Canadian Wirevision, which essentially found that “goods” referred to “tangible movable property” and to the anti-base erosion objective of the s. 95(2)(b) rules, which would be satisfied where the services, by their nature, were required to be performed outside of Canada, but not here where such services could be performed in Canada, CRA concluded that cryptocurrency, being intangible property, was not “goods.”

Neal Armstrong. Summary of 13 May 2026 IFA Roundtable, Q.2 under s. 95(3)(b).