You are here:
Home / Archives for dentist
Posted by dmc on February 10, 2013 · Leave a Comment
Future Ontario Dentist Magazine article
I’m very pleased to announce that an article I’ve written entitled “Are Non-Solicitation Clauses Legal? It Depends…” will be published in the April 2013 edition of Ontario Dentist magazine. This article will be a must read for associates, principals, and those dentists looking to buy / sell a practice. It will review the relevant legal principles and discuss a recent case involving the enforceability of a non-solicitation clause against a dentist. Stay tuned!
Posted by dmc on June 23, 2011 · Leave a Comment
What an Ontario dentist wrote about me…
Here’s a new testimonial from a dentist who hired me (Michael Carabash) to facilitate a purchase and sale of a dental practice:
“Working with Michael Carabash as my legal counsel was a great experience. He represented me during the sale of one of my dental practices. The sale went through very smoothly, thanks to Michael. He was knowledgeable and always organized. He was flexible in meeting times, and very responsive to phone calls and e-mails. He has a lot of energy, and truly went the extra mile in making sure the deal closed. Even the purchaser’s lawyer made a comment that he was impressed with Michael’s organization and thoroughness. I would encourage anyone seeking legal counsel when purchasing or selling a dental practice to give Michael a call. He’s a trusted adviser, a great resource and a nice guy to work with.”
Posted by dmc on May 19, 2011 · Leave a Comment
Dentistry Professional Corporations (Part 1)
Please note that the information provided herein is not legal advice and is provided for informational and educational purposes only. If you need legal advice, contact me (Michael Carabash) or David Mayzel.
Incorporate a Dental Practice
While there are about 8,500 dentists in Ontario, only about 4,500 of them have dentistry professional corporations. Why do dentists incorporate? And what’s the holdup for other dentists?
Incorporating a dental practice is done mainly for tax purposes. You can defer paying taxes by having the corporation only pay 15.5% on the first $500,000 of active business income and then leaving the after tax dollars inside the corporation. You can income split by using your immediate family (e.g. spouse, children). You can also sell the shares of your dentistry professional corporation and pay little or no taxes by using and multiplying your lifetime capital gains exemption (currently $750k).
But what else should you know about when it comes to incorporating? Well, lets look at the not-so-often discussed points.
Liability
When someone creates a corporation, they are essentially creating another person. That person can own their own assets, take on their own debt, be sued and sue others, etc. Importantly, they are owned by people who hold shares in the corporation (i.e. certificates evidencing ownership). Now, when it comes to the liability of the shareholders for the debts and obligations of the corporation, the liability of shareholders is said to be “limited”. In other words, their personal assets are not exposed to the debts and obligations of the corporation. It’s the corporation’s assets that are exposed to being used to pay off creditors and others.
To reiterate, under the Business Corporations Act, the shareholders are generally not liable for any act, default, obligation or liability of the corporation: section 92(1). There are certain exceptions to this general rule. For example, courts have lifted the corporate veil to impose personal liability on shareholders in certain cases, which I have previously blogged about (e.g. fraud, lack of respect for corporate form, alter ego, thin capitalization, etc.). Furthermore, there may be statutory impositions of liability on shareholders under the Business Corporations Act.
So what about dentistry professional corporations? Does the same general rule of limited liability apply? Well, when it comes to professional liability, the answer is “dentist’ liability is UNLIMITED”. Section 3.4(1) of the Business Corporations Act says very clearly that section 92(1) does not limit the professional liability of a shareholder of a professional corporation. The Act even goes on to say that the shareholder’s acts (and the acts of the employees, officers, and directors) are deemed to be the professional corporation’s for the purposes of professional liability (section 3.4(2)). No doubt, these provisions were put in place to protect the public from bad dentists who incorporated their practice to avoid liability for malpractice. Heck, even if the dentistry professional corporation is a member of a partnership, the shareholder of that corporation cannot escape professional liability.
Now, what about liability for things that are unrelated to the professional liability? Well, the Act doesn’t address those matters directly. But if you take section 3.4(1) and 92(1) together, it would appear that dentist shareholders have limited liability for things unrelated to professional liability. This could include entering into a commercial lease and defaulting on the lease, taking out and then defaulting on a bank loan, hiring or terminating staff inappropriately, and leasing equipment and then defaulting on that lease. Basically, anything that the dentist would do in the context of running a business and not necessarily providing professional dentistry services COULD essentially give the dentist limited liability as a shareholder of the corporation. In any event, dentists should take caution when entering into these types of legal agreements (e.g. leases, loans, employment agreements, etc.) and should also have insurance in place if things go awry.
Small Business Tax Rate
Not every dentist should be incorporating his or her practice. Only if they make a certain amount of income each year, have family members to split their income with, or are thinking about selling their practice should they then think about doing it. Not only are there many procedural hurdles to cross along the way to getting incorporated, but it also costs money: legal and accounting fees. It also takes time to set up the corporation, get a bank account, roll over existing assets to the corporation, have the corporation assume the obligations of the practice (e.g. lease, loans, employees, etc.), etc.
One thing worth mentioning is the small business tax rate for small business corporations. With a corporation, the first $500,000 of active business income is taxed at a much lower rate than for individuals: it was (combined federal and provincial) only 15.5% for 2011 . So what does this mean for dentist shareholders? Well, instead of having to claim all their practice’s income in a given fiscal year, they can leave it in the corporation, pay less tax, and then either reinvest it or dividend it out to shareholders – particularly those who are in lower income tax brackets. This all ends up deferring or saving taxes altogether!
Personal Services Business Problem: AVOID THIS ONE!
So how could a dentist lose out on this 15.5% tax rate and end up getting charged the much higher (the regular) tax rate for a corporation? Well, the Income Tax Act has a whole bunch of rules related to denying Personal Services Business corporations the tax advantages of incorporating. The idea is that if an employee associate of a dentist simply incorporates and continues to provide services to the dentist through their corporation, then the corporation will not benefit from the small business tax rate of 15.5%.
So what’s a Personal Services Business corporation? It gets complicated, so just follow me for a second.
Incorporated Employee
First, a Personal Services Business corporation carries on business where an individual (i.e. human being) performs services on behalf of the corporation. In the typical situation, an associate dentist would incorporate their practice and their dentistry professional corporation would in turn be hired by a dentist to provide dental services. For its part, the dentistry professional corporation would engage the associate to provide those services to the dentist on its behalf (the associate is called an INCORPORATED EMPLOYEE). Remember: there are 3 persons involved at this point: (1) a dentist (who hires the dentistry professional corporation), (2) a dentistry professional corporation that is hired to provide services and which in turn engages the associate to perform those services and (3) an associate (i.e. the INCORPORATED EMPLOYEE) who provides services to the dentist on behalf of or for the dentistry professional corporation (because a corporation cannot do anything without human actors!).
Specified Shareholder
Now, we’re just getting started with the tax rules, so pay attention. A Personal Services Business Corporation is a business who has one of these INCORPORATED EMPLOYEES performing services to a dentist through the corporation. But the INCORPORATED EMPLOYEE must also be a SPECIFIED SHAREHOLDER of the Corporation. What does that mean? Well, a SPECIFIED SHAREHOLDER is someone who owns at last 10% (directly or indirectly) at any time in the given year, of the issued shares of any class of the capital of the corporation.
Employee of the Dentist
Now, just when you thought we were done with these tax rules which deny Personal Services Business Corporations from qualifying for the small business income tax rate for corporations (15.5%), there’s one more requirement that applies: the Incorporated Employee would reasonably be regarded as an officer or employee of the person or partnership to whom or to which the services were provided (i.e. the dentist who needs the associate) but for the existence of the corporation. What does this mean? Basically, if the Incorporated Employee – had he or she not incorporated a dentistry professional corporation – reasonably been regarded as an employee, then their dentistry professional corporation will not qualify for the small business tax rate of 15.5%.
UNLESS…
Now, even though we have to look at a number of things to determine whether the dentistry professional corporation of the associate would qualify for the small business tax rate of 15.5%, there is an exemption: if the dentistry professional corporation employs throughout the year more than 5 full time employees, then it will not be considered a Professional Services Business Corporation! Sounds good, but that means you have to fork over a lot of money to full time employees to qualify! Ouch! I guess the government figured that, if you’re employing at least 5 full time employees (plus yourself, so it’s actually 6), then you’re more legitimate as an independent business and not just an employee in disguise.
RATIONALE
So what is the rationale for limiting the small business tax rate by saying that Personal Services Business Corporations aren’t entitled to it? Well, it has to do with fairness: Personal Services Business Corporations are merely a way of disguising an employment relationship but allowing the dentistry professional corporation to take advantage of favourable income tax rates. That’s why they are not allowed to benefit if the above rules are true. What does this mean for dentist associates? BE CAREFUL when you’re asked to incorporate as an associate independent contractor. You might not get to take advantage of the favourable tax rates and rules that go hand in hand with typically having a corporation!
SUMMARY:
If you are an associate dentist who has been asked to incorporate their practice as an independent contractor to provide services to one dentist, then you may be considered a personal service business (and not entitled to favourable income tax rates and rules) if:
- You perform the services to the dentist on behalf of your corporation;
- You owns 10% or more of any class of shares of your corporation;
- Without the use of your corporation, you would be considered an employee of the dentist; AND
- Your corporation has fewer than 6 full-time employees.
There are other, more complicated and intricate tax rules, but you can get the gist of it by reading the above. In the next blog, I’ll discuss what factors the Canada Revenue Agency considers relevant when trying to determine whether an associate would reasonably be regarded as an employee of a dentist instead of as an independent contractor.
Filed under Blog, Incorporating, Taxes · Tagged with associate, dental law, dental lawyer, dentist, dentistry profesional corporation, dentistry professional, income tax, incorporation, professional services business corporation
Posted by dmc on May 6, 2011 · Leave a Comment
Dentist Appraisals: Legal Issues
Please note that the information provided herein is not legal advice and is provided for informational and educational purposes only. If you need legal advice, contact me (Michael Carabash) or David Mayzel.
What is an appraisal?
A dental appraisal involves a person giving a monetary value to a dental practice. That person is typically a professional valuator (e.g. ROI Corp, or Professional Practice Sales) or an accountant. They examine the assets of the dental practice (irrespective of whether the owner of the dental practice is a sole practitioner, a partnership, or a dentistry professional corporation). They will specifically look at things like:
- goodwill (e.g. trademarks, proprietary systems, dental records, patient lists, etc.);
- leasehold improvements;
- equipment and furniture; and
- inventory and supplies.
When are appraisals needed?
Buying and Selling a Dental Practice
Appraisals are needed in order for parties to buy and sell a practice. The buyer wants to know what exactly they’re getting themselves into. The seller typically engages a professional valuator to review the practice and come up with the price. Purchasers, however, should be cautious about relying upon what the appraisal says: it was paid for by the Seller and for the Seller’s benefit (i.e. to get the best possible price). In fact, if the appraisers are also brokers, then they will have an incentive t put down the highest possible price. Purchasers should conduct their own diligence about the appraisal and get a chance to review the practice, its assets, and particularly its goodwill (i.e. dental records and patient charts).
Transferring assets to a Dentistry Professional Corporation
If you are a dentist and you want to transfer dental assets (e.g. lease, inventory, equipment, tools, supplies, leasehold improvements, etc.) which you owned personally into a dentistry professional corporation, you may want to get an appraisal done. You can’t just assign any old number for the asset purchase agreement when doing these kinds of deals. The Income Tax Act allows you to elect to transfer assets from your personal to your corporation on a tax-free basis (although there may be HST payable), but only if the price paid for the assets is FAIR MARKET VALUE. If the Canada Revenue Agency ever reviews the transaction, they may say that the value of the assets being transferred into the corporation and the shares taken back were below or above what the fair market value should have been. Hence, an appraisal (coupled with a price adjustment clause in the Agreement of Purchaser and Sale) may make sense here.
Adding Partners / Shareholders
An appraisal will be needed when a new dentist partner or shareholder is being admitted into the dental practice. How much should they contribute? How many units or shares should they take back? This all depends on what the dental practice is worth. Hence, the appraisal.
Family Law
Appraisals could also be required when a dentist is going through a divorce. Absent a marriage contract, prenuptial agreement, or separation agreement to the contrary, the dentist will be required to calculate their net family property (i.e. generally the increase in wealth of a married spouse during the course of the marriage) in order to ultimately get to an equalization payment. I’ve blogged extensively about net family property and equalization payments here.
Once again, it is worth mentioning that the appraisal will be made by a professional for their client’s benefit. If the husband, for example, wants to reduce the value of their net family property (so they end up paying a lower equalization payment), then there will be an incentive for the appraisal to be on the lower-end of scale.
The case of David v. David, [2004] O.J. No. 5022 is illustrative of how different appraisers can arrive at different figures. In that case, a wife sought an equalization of net family property. The wife was a homemaker and the husband was a dentist. When it came time to value the dental practice on the date of separation, both the wife and the husband had their own expert appraisers (the husband used Graham Tuck of Professional Practice Sales and the wife used Timothy Brown from ROI Corp.).
For his part, Mr. Tuck (the husband’s expert) examined the husband’s dental practice in detail. His 23 page report (excluding appendices) included the following information:
- description of the practice
- treatment policy of the practice
- patient flow
- appointment and recall system
- demographics
- market data
- personnel and professional services
- office hours
- facilities design and use
- fees, payments, collections and prepayment plans
- systems and records
- income, expenses and earnings
- basis of valuation and valuation analysis
- summary of current market values.
The appendix to the report included a list of dental equipment, practice financial statements, copy of lease agreement, photographs, information on area and demographics. Mr. Tuck had personally attended the practice, interviewed the husband dentist and his staff, reviewed patient charts, and conducted a patient chart count. He also compared the value of the husband’s practice with 8 similar practices sold that had an ethnic composition in the same geographic vicinity. He ultimately found that the dental practice was worth $212,000 – which included $65,000 of goodwill.
For his part, Mr. Brown (the wife’s expert) provided a 2 page limited scope forensic letter of opinion only and relied solely on the appraisal prepared by Mr. Tuck. Mr. Brown concluded that the goodwill could have been about $139,500 for the dental practice – much higher than Mr. Tuck’s opinion.
Now, just keep in mind that the wife (a homemaker) had been accusing her dentist husband of diverting income. Clearly, the wife wanted the value of the dental practice to be relatively high, while the husband wanted it to be relatively low.
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice ultimately fixed a midpoint value between the two opinions at $102,500 for the goodwill and a total value of the dental practice at $249,000 at the date of separation. In coming to that conclusion, the court took into consideration: the age and location of the dental practice, the patient base, the management style and office protocols of the dental practice, data from another similar practice which the dentist had previously sold, a commonsense and market comparison capitalization rate (i.e. the yield of income to capital).
Filed under Appraisals, Blog · Tagged with appraisal, dental law, dental lawyers, dentist, family law, legal aspects of appraisals, partnership, shareholder, tax law, transferring assets
Posted by dmc on February 17, 2011 · Leave a Comment
Dentist hiring staff…Independent Contractors vs. Employees?
Please note that the information provided herein is not legal advice and is provided for informational and educational purposes only. If you need legal advice, contact me (Michael Carabash) or David Mayzel.
This is the second of a series of blogs I’m writing for dentists about hiring staff (e.g. associates, dental hygienists, etc.). In my first blog, I briefly examined the case of Bradford v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue – M.N.R.), [1988] T.C.J. No. 818, where the court found that a dental hygienist was an independent contractor and, as such, entitled to deduct certain business expenses. Now, I’m going in chronological order, so the next case I’m going to discuss case out a few years later; and the court held in this case that the dentist and some orthodontists were actually EMPLOYEES and NOT INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS. So lets get to it, shall we?
Carovar Ltd. v. Canada
In Carovar Ltd. v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue – M.N.R.), [1989] T.C.J. No. 405, the tax court of Canada was dealing with the issue of whether a corporation owed money for insurance premiums on the basis that it had hired employees instead of independent contractors (which the corporation claimed). The corporation was owned by an orthodontist and his wife to provide management and administrative services ancillary to his practice. The corporation leased office space, owned the instruments, billed patients on behalf of the orthodontist for treatments administered in his office, paid all other accounts payable, and in return charged the orthodontist an amount equal to its operating cost plus a 10-15% mark up. The corporation received money from the orthodontist, who in turn received payments from patients as billed, retained a fixed monthly draw for his own purposes, and transferred the balance to the corporation’s accounts.
Now, importantly, the company hired associates (a graduate dentist and recent graduates in orthodontics). The question before the court was whether those associates were employees or independent contractors? If they were employees at law, then the company would owe Employment Insurance premiums for those employees over the course of 3 years: 1984-1986.
The Court found, after considering all the factors, that they were employees and that Employment Insurance premiums were owed. Here’s Millar D.J.T.C. came to that conclusion.
The Agreement:
First, when it came to the contract between the company and the employees, it was oral. It was agreed that they were to be paid the standard dental profession commission of 40% of fees earned. There were no fixed or minimum salaries. No notice was required for either side to disengage each other. Associates received no benefit, nor was remuneration subject to deductions. This was totally different from the receptions, dental assistants, and dental hygienists – who were staff employees. Now, at first glace, this makes it appear as though the corporation was employing independent contractors and not employees. But the court had to consider all of the relevant factors; in other words, the terms of the ORAL AGREEMENT were NOT DETERMINATIVE.
Control
On the issue of control, there was no supervision, the orthodontist who owned part of the corporation was regularly absent when new patients presented themselves, he gave no instructions on how the associates were to proceed, etc. The associates set their own fees covering services to patients and instructed the receptionist as to the amounts to be billed. So once again, it seems as though the associates are independent contractors on the basis that the orthodontist did not control the manner in which they provided services (as an employer would).
Opportunity for Profit
The court held that there wasn’t a real opportunity to make profit since the associates were simply paid on a piece work or hourly basis for the services which they performed. They didn’t operate their own practice whilst engaged for the orthodontist and therefore the profit factor (again in the entrepreneurial sense) was missing with respect to such work. Hence, they now appeared to be employees.
Risk of Loss
Here, the court held that it was the orthodontist who bore the risk of loss, not the associates, while treating patients. Hence, they were more like employees.
Ownership of Tools of Production
On the issue of who leased the premises and who owned the equipment, it was the orthodontist, not the associates. Hence, they resembled employees again.
Integration
Here, the court held that the work performed by the associates was repetitive and routine tasks; they were in no way performing work that was integral to their own practices but merely providing services to the orthodontist’s patients.
The court ultimately held, on a balance of probabilities (meaning 50% + 1% chance) that it was more likely that the associates were employees instead of independent contractors.
Conclusion
Based on Bradford and Carovar Ltd., it is becoming clearer what the courts will look at in determining whether a staff member (associate, dental hygienist, receptionist, dental assistant, etc.) is in reality an employer instead of an independent contractor: control, ownership of tools of production, ability to make profit, chance of loss, economic reality, and integration.
Posted by dmc on February 17, 2011 · Leave a Comment

Associate Agreements: What Dentists Should Know
Please note that the information provided herein is not legal advice and is provided for informational and educational purposes only. If you need legal advice, contact me (Michael Carabash) or David Mayzel..
Associate Agreements
Legally, dentists can practice in one of many ways. First, they can practice as sole proprietors. This means that they personally own and operate the business. They may practice under a trade name that is registered with the Ontario Government and approved of by the Royal College of Dental Surgeons. As a sole proprietor, they may also hire others to do work for them. These third parties may be “associates”, “dental hygienists”, “receptionists”, “bookkeepers”, “technicians”, etc.
A dentist may also join up with other dentists to carry on a dental practice as a partnership. Each dentist contributes capital (money, property) to the dental practice and, in return, gets an interest in the practice as a whole. The assets of the dental practice are partnership assets, and do not belong to any individual dentist (each has an interest in the assets). There are specific rules under the Partnerships Act about how partnerships are generally governed; but certain default rules can be overridden by a partnership agreement. There are also tax issues (a partnership does not pay tax, but is merely a flow-through structure for tax purposes) and liability issues (each partner can bind the partnership and the other partners and is liable for the debts and obligations of the partnership) that arise in the context of a partnership. The partnership itself can hire employees or independent contractors (other than the partner dentists) through an agreement.
Dentists can also carry on business as an employee, director, officer, independent contractor, etc. of a dentistry professional corporation. The latter is a separate legal entity which hires the dentist to work for it and receive payment. I’ve blogged extensively about how to set up a dentistry professional corporation and the tax advantages to doing so (e.g. small business tax rate on the first $500k, using the lifetime capital gains exemption to reduce taxes, etc.).
So, as you can see, typically there is AN AGREEMENT that needs to be entered into between someone or something (e.g. sole proprietorship, partnership, or corporation) and a dentist who is going to provide services in exchange for compensation. Now, you can simply make an oral agreement; but this is ill-advised. There are lots of questions that comes up which may not be adequately dealt with (or remembered) through an oral agreement – such as compensation, restrictive covenants (e.g. non-compete, non-solicitation, etc.), termination, proprietary rights (e.g. patient records), etc.
That’s why it’s best to have a written AGREEMENT in place. I’ll get into the nitty gritty of that agreement next…