Cost-Sharing Agreement Canada

CONSIDERING that Section 55 (1) of the Municipal Government Act (MGA) allows a municipality to enter into an agreement with another municipality with respect to the allocation of subsidies or taxes paid under Section 366; and, as part of a cost-sharing agreement, two or more practitioners operate their individual medical practices from a common facility that can be owned or leased and agree to share specific common operating costs, such as renting, utilities, capital or rental costs for certain medical equipment, equipment and instruments. The fact that practitioners have an agreement on the allocation of expenditure indicates that they are cooperating in some form of a cost-sharing group with respect to these common expenditures. Not all of the measures implemented by the management company will be as an agent, as some of the activities of the management companies will include providing services to practitioners. The agency agreement between the practitioners and the management company does not imply that the management company acts as an intermediary for practitioners on each acquisition. The question is whether an agent buys a delivery as a representative of a client or whether the delivery is acquired by the agent as part of his own business activities. It is established that the management company acts as an agent of the practitioners for each transaction. For example, practitioners may delegate to the management company the power to act as agents for the acquisition of certain goods and services, but it would not act as an agent for practitioners if the management company provides services directly to practitioners in its own role. As the phrase says, “If you don`t plan, you plan to fail.” Therefore, if you intend to work with one or more other practitioners for any function, we strongly recommend that you draft a formal agreement. It`s like a marriage contract for the company, so you can agree in advance on the best way to proceed and cover the different circumstances that can occur. The management company makes statements to practitioners who are members of the cost-sharing agreement, in which it indicates its share of expenses and the amounts to be paid for acquisitions of which the management company is its representative. In addition, the management company collects an administrative fee for the activity as an agent, as well as a fee for other services provided by the management company. If, for example.B. the practitioner cost-sharing agreement provides for the joint commitment and remuneration of workers, the agreement would determine the responsibility of each practitioner to workers.

An example of a service that could be acquired by the management company as a practitioner agent is the acquisition of salary accounting by another party to pay the salaries of the practitioners. However, if the management company itself pays practitioners` salaries on behalf of practitioners, as has already been mentioned, it directly provides practitioners with a payroll service and does not act as an agent of practitioners. The rating agency is of the view that the clause constitutes “access” under the Excise Act s.146, although no direct benefit has been granted, such as preferential rates, access, purchase of services or any other form of service. This decision was contrary to an earlier assessment by the credit rating agency in 2011, when the same clauses were in effect and the statutory auditor did not consider the agreements to be “deliveries”. This finding, although currently based on a single case, but sets a precedent for any municipality or public body that has entered into a cost-sharing agreement.

filed under: Uncategorized