Legault v. Agence du revenu du Québec, 2026 QCCQ 1320

The taxpayer, who had spent her childhood in Quebec, had lived abroad in numerous countries from the age of 16 onward, had studied international relations and worked for various international organizations and then, for a number of years, was employed by the Department of Foreign Affairs in various diplomatic functions.

From 2016 to 2020, she served as the Canadian Ambassador Barbados. In December 2020, she returned to Quebec for several days before taking up her position in January 2021 as the Canadian Ambassador to Mali. She was reassessed by the ARQ for her 2018 and 2019 taxation years on the basis that she was a resident of Quebec. For those years, she had filed federal income tax returns (also paying the additional federal tax in lieu of being resident in a province) but had not filed Quebec returns.

In finding that the taxpayer was a resident of Quebec for the two taxation years at issue, Chalifour JCQ first stated (at para. 60, TaxInterpretations translation) that “leaving Quebec for work reasons does not generally constitute a breaking of residence ties with Quebec.” She noted that, although the taxpayer had inhabited a residence belonging to her employer while in Barbados, she had been the owner of a residence in Quebec since 1996 and that, in the same year as the sale of this residence in March 2021, she had purchased another residence in Quebec. Additionally, in September 2019, her daughter, who had been studying in Barbados while staying with her mother, took up her studies in Quebec.

Furthermore, during the 2018 and 2019 taxation years, the taxpayer held a Quebec driver’s licence, owned a vehicle with Quebec registration, stored personal effects in Ontario at the expense of her employer, declared to the Quebec health insurance agency (RAMQ) that she resided in Quebec, held various Quebec credit cards, and maintained a Quebec bank account. It was not decisive that her life partner resided in France rather than Quebec.

The taxpayer, who had spent her childhood in Quebec, then spent most of her time abroad, including being employed by the Department of Foreign Affairs in various diplomatic functions. From 2016 to 2020, she served as the Canadian ambassador to Barbados and then, after several days in Quebec, in January 2021 took up her position as the Canadian ambassador to Mali.

She was reassessed by the ARQ for her 2018 and 2019 taxation years on the basis that she was a resident of Quebec. For those years, she had filed federal income tax returns (also paying the additional federal tax in lieu of being resident in a province), but not Quebec returns.

Before concluding that the taxpayer was factually resident in Quebec during the 2018 and 2019 years, Chalifour JCQ referred to s. 8(1)(c) of the Taxation Act (Quebec) which (similar to ITA s. 250(1)(c)) deemed an individual to be resident in Quebec throughout a taxation year if, at any time in the year, the individual “was an ambassador … of Canada … and was resident in Québec immediately prior to … employment or appointment by Canada.” Regarding this provision, Chalifour JCQ noted that Pellan v. ARQ, 2016 QCCA 263, at para. 43 had found that s. 8 in the specified circumstances deemed government employees who had left Quebec and had become non-residents as a factual matter to continue to be residents, and stated (at para. 49, TaxInterpretations translation) that “for section 8 to apply, the taxpayer must, in fact, no longer reside in Quebec.” As she was going on to find that the taxpayer was factually resident in Quebec, s. 8(1)(c) did not apply.