The Customs Value of Heraldic Art
In 1984 Thomas Palmer Howard, Q.C., barrister and solicitor of Montréal, requested a certified painting of his coat of arms from the College of Arms in London. What he wanted was a depiction that could be framed and displayed in a suitable place such as one’s office, library or den. Sometimes in September, F. D’Alton Gooderham, Secretary of the Heraldry Society of Canada, received a call from Revenue Canada, Customs and Excise, wanting to know the significance of these paintings as well as the materials used in their creation. On October 19, Mr. Gooderham received another call this time from Mr. Howard informing him that the Department of Customs and Excise was poised to impose a 25% duty on the painting unless further clarification could be provided. Mr. Howard wrote the department making a number of observations, namely that the painting was a copy of existing arms and in essence a document. Mr. Gooderham then called on me (Auguste Vachon) to find a solution to this impasse as a member of the Heraldry Society of Canada and as the archivist responsible for heraldry at the Public Archives of Canada (now Library and Archives Canada).
When two representatives of the department came to see me, I showed them both granting documents and certified copies of granted arms and argued that coat of arms were very personal honours and of no more market value than a university diploma. I further emphasized that we were dealing with a copy, not an original creation as Mr. Howard had already pointed out. Subsequently the Ottawa office informed its branch in Montreal that the painting was of the nature of a “manuscript” and could be released free of duty because “… by virtue of subsection 29(1) of the Excise Tax Act and paragraph 3(a) of Part III of Schedule III to that Act, ‘manuscripts’ are accorded exemption from federal sales tax.” It should be noted that nothing old or rare was involved here.
Mr. Howard was informed by Montreal of the decision on 15 January 1985. The whole process had taken from five to six months, but at least a precedent had been established from which some Canadians may have benefitted since. In 1988 a royal proclamation transferred the powers of the sovereign in heraldic matters to the Governor General of Canada, following which the Canadian Heraldic Authority was created with powers to grant arms in Canada. This did not prevent Canadian citizens from obtaining copies of ancestral arms granted in other countries and possibly to face a situation similar to the one just described.
In 1984 Thomas Palmer Howard, Q.C., barrister and solicitor of Montréal, requested a certified painting of his coat of arms from the College of Arms in London. What he wanted was a depiction that could be framed and displayed in a suitable place such as one’s office, library or den. Sometimes in September, F. D’Alton Gooderham, Secretary of the Heraldry Society of Canada, received a call from Revenue Canada, Customs and Excise, wanting to know the significance of these paintings as well as the materials used in their creation. On October 19, Mr. Gooderham received another call this time from Mr. Howard informing him that the Department of Customs and Excise was poised to impose a 25% duty on the painting unless further clarification could be provided. Mr. Howard wrote the department making a number of observations, namely that the painting was a copy of existing arms and in essence a document. Mr. Gooderham then called on me (Auguste Vachon) to find a solution to this impasse as a member of the Heraldry Society of Canada and as the archivist responsible for heraldry at the Public Archives of Canada (now Library and Archives Canada).
When two representatives of the department came to see me, I showed them both granting documents and certified copies of granted arms and argued that coat of arms were very personal honours and of no more market value than a university diploma. I further emphasized that we were dealing with a copy, not an original creation as Mr. Howard had already pointed out. Subsequently the Ottawa office informed its branch in Montreal that the painting was of the nature of a “manuscript” and could be released free of duty because “… by virtue of subsection 29(1) of the Excise Tax Act and paragraph 3(a) of Part III of Schedule III to that Act, ‘manuscripts’ are accorded exemption from federal sales tax.” It should be noted that nothing old or rare was involved here.
Mr. Howard was informed by Montreal of the decision on 15 January 1985. The whole process had taken from five to six months, but at least a precedent had been established from which some Canadians may have benefitted since. In 1988 a royal proclamation transferred the powers of the sovereign in heraldic matters to the Governor General of Canada, following which the Canadian Heraldic Authority was created with powers to grant arms in Canada. This did not prevent Canadian citizens from obtaining copies of ancestral arms granted in other countries and possibly to face a situation similar to the one just described.
La valeur douanière de l’art héraldique
En 1984, Thomas Palmer Howard, C. R., avocat de Montréal, commandait une peinture de ses armoiries au Collège d’armes à Londres. Cette peinture était propre à être encadrée et placée dans une pièce comme un bureau ou une bibliothèque. Ne sachant pas très bien de quoi il s’agissait, le ministère de Revenu Canada, Douanes et Accise, entreprit une première enquête auprès de la Société héraldique du Canada, après quoi il informa Maître Howard que des douanes de 25% allaient s’appliquer à moins de recevoir des renseignements additionnels qui justifieraient une exemption. Maître Howard protesta auprès du ministère qu’il s’agissait d’une copie d’un emblème conçu antérieurement et que la peinture en cause s’apparentait à un document. La Société héraldique demanda alors mon aide (Auguste Vachon) pour dénouer cette impasse étant l’un de ses membres et le responsable des collections héraldiques aux Archives publiques du Canada, maintenant Bibliothèque et Archives Canada.
Lorsque deux représentants de Revenu Canada me visitèrent, je leur montrai des lettres d’armoiries et des peintures semblables à celle qui était en litige. J’insistai sur le fait qu’il s’agissait d’une forme de distinction à caractère personnel qui n’avait pas plus de valeur marchande qu’un diplôme universitaire. Je leur fis aussi remarquer qu’il s’agissait d’une copie et non d’une peinture originale comme Maître Howard l’avait signalé auparavant. Le ministère déclara alors que la peinture était de la même nature qu’un manuscrit et donc exempte de la taxe de vente fédérale en vertu d’une des dispositions de la Loi sur la taxe d'accise. Bien entendu, il ne s’agissait pas ici de pièces rares ou anciennes.
Le processus, qui avait duré de cinq à six mois, établissait un précédent dont d’autres Canadiens ont pu se prévaloir depuis. En 1988, une proclamation royale transférait la prérogative royale en matière d’armoiries au gouverneur général du Canada et établissait l’Autorité héraldique du Canada avec mandat de concéder des armoiries au pays. Mais ceci n’empêchait pas les citoyens canadiens d’obtenir des copies d’armoiries ancestrales concédées dans d’autres pays et potentiellement de faire face à une situation semblable à celle décrite ici.