How are Professional Poker Winnings Taxed in Canada? Taxable Business Income and Non-Taxable Hobbies: Fournier-Giguère v. Canada et. al., 2025 FCA 112

Introduction: Taxability of Poker Winnings – The Difference Between Non-Taxable Hobbies and Taxable Business Income from Non-Traditional Ventures

This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision in Fournier-Giguère et al. v. Canada, 2025 FCA 112. This pivotal ruling addresses the contentious issue of whether earnings derived from professional-poker activities are subject to income tax in Canada. The Court decisively upheld the Tax Court of Canada’s finding that income generated by professional poker players constitutes income from a business under Canada’s Income Tax Act, specifically within the scope of paragraphs 40(2)(f) and 3(a).

The Federal Court of Appeal‘s decision centred around several key factual determinations, including the taxpayers’ explicit intent to earn a living from poker, the significant time and effort they devoted to the activity, and the demonstrable application of skill and expertise. These factors collectively established the commercial nature of their poker playing.

The ruling offers crucial clarification on the distinction between, on the one hand, a non-taxable hobby or windfall and, on the other, taxable business income from non-traditional activities, particularly those that blend elements of chance and skill. For any Canadian tax-litigation lawyer, this judgment provides a vital precedent for advising Canadian taxpayers engaged in similar professional pursuits that generate income from unconventional sources.

The article first analyzes the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision in Fournier-Giguère et al. v. Canada, 2025 FCA 112. It then concludes by providing pro tax tips from our esteemed Canadian tax-litigation lawyers on the implications of the Fournier-Giguère decision and on securing effective legal tax representation during the tax-litigation process.

The Context of Fournier-Giguère et al. v. Canada

Fournier-Giguère et al. involved three similar poker cases that originated in the Tax Court of Canada: (1) Fournier-Giguère v. The King, 2022 TCC 132; (2) Bérubé v. The King,^, 2023 TCC 12; and (3) D’Auteuil v. The King, 2023 TCC 3. In each case, the Tax Court of Canada held that the taxpayer’s poker winnings constituted taxable business income. And in each case, the taxpayer’s Canadian tax-litigation lawyer appealed the Tax Court’s decision to Canada’s Federal Court of Appeal. Because each case involved substantially similar facts, the appellate court heard the three appeals together.

The importance of this case lies in its contribution to the fundamental distinction between (i) a non-taxable windfall or personal hobby and (ii) taxable business income, a dispute that frequently arises in Canadian tax law. The Federal Court of Appeal’s judgment provides contemporary guidance on how established “indicia of business” are to be applied to evolving forms of income generation in the digital age and beyond.

A Canadian tax-litigation lawyer routinely navigates these definitional complexities because the classification of income directly impacts a taxpayer’s tax obligations and potential tax liabilities. For that reason, Canadian taxpayers should proactively seek to involve a Canadian tax-litigation lawyer as early as possible, starting from the initial tax audit stage and continuing through any subsequent tax objections or Tax Court appeals.

The Factual Background

The dispute in Fournier-Giguère v. Canada centred on the tax treatment of earnings accumulated by the three taxpayers, Mr. Fournier-Giguère, Mr. Bérubé, and Mr. D’Auteuil. The factual matrix underpinning the case proved crucial to the appellate court’s determination.

In particular, the court found that the taxpayers’ poker activities were not casual or recreational; rather, they were pursued with a clear commercial intent and a high degree of commitment. After reviewing the evidence, the Federal Court of Appeal found that the taxpayers had engaged in poker to earn a living, effectively operating as professional poker players. For Mr. Fournier-Giguère and Mr. Bérubé, poker constituted the sole source of income, while for Mr. D’Auteuil, poker represented his “main source of income.” Mr. Fournier-Giguère’s poker winnings allowed him to purchase two homes, buy a car, and pay for several trips.

Although he also coached poker part-time, that part-time income could not support his lifestyle, nor did it suffice to pay for the assets that he had acquired. Similarly, Mr. D’Auteuil lived off his poker winnings, generating over $5.2 million over 5 years. During two of those years, he also earned some part-time employment income, receiving $16,000 in one year and $8,000 in another.

But his poker winnings, not his employment income, covered the $525,000 purchase price for his home and allowed him to buy a $37,000 vehicle in cash. Mr. Bérubé also supported himself entirely on his poker winnings, earning in three years about $1.5 million, which allowed him to buy a $530,000 home outright and to fill his bank account with enough cash to sustain his daily needs.

This reliance on poker earnings for their livelihood underscored the financial imperative behind their venture. Furthermore, the taxpayers “devoted almost all of their time to [poker], apart from sleeping, eating, and partying.” Canada’s Federal Court of Appeal concluded that this extensive time commitment demonstrated a systematic and organized approach to their poker playing, akin to operating a full-time professional endeavour.

These factual findings ultimately proved determinative in establishing the commercial nature of the taxpayers’ activities, moving them beyond the realm of a mere hobby or game of chance.

The Federal Court of Appeal’s Decision & Disposition

After conducting a thorough review of the Tax Court of Canada’s findings and reasoning, the Federal Court of Appeal upheld the Tax Court’s decision. The appellate court ultimately found no reversible error in the Tax Court’s factual findings or in the Tax Court’s conclusion that the taxpayers’ poker winnings were income from a business.

The Federal Court of Appeal endorsed the Tax Court’s scrutiny of factors such as the taxpayers’ almost-exclusive reliance on poker as a means to sustain their lifestyles, their profit motive, their devotion of time and capital, their level of organization and application of skill. These are classic hallmarks that Canadian courts have applied for decades to distinguish between a hobby and a business.

The Fournier-Giguère decision powerfully demonstrates that these established tests remain robust and adaptable to unconventional income-generating activities. It confirms that the inherent nature of an activity is often less important than the methodical and commercial manner in which it is conducted. If an activity is pursued systematically, with a clear profit motive, and with significant time and effort, it will be classified as a business for tax purposes.

Pro Tax Tips: Disputing Tax Reassessments of Poker Winnings & The Need for Effective Representation by an Expert Canadian Tax-Litigation Lawyer

The Fournier-Giguère decision carries direct implications for individuals who earn a living from activities traditionally perceived as games or hobbies, such as professional e-sports players, online streamers, or even highly successful fantasy-sports participants, where skill and consistent effort are key to generating income. These individuals must now carefully assess their activities against the indicia of business established in this case.

Like these other cases involving the source-of-income analysis, poker cases invoke a nuanced, fact-specific tax-law analysis. Moreover, as the Canada Revenue Agency’s income-tax auditors did in Fournier-Giguère, the Canada Revenue Agency’s income-tax auditors can assume that your hobby constitutes a business and reassess your winnings as taxable income. Because of the complex tax-law analysis that these cases require, the average Canadian taxpayer will fare poorly against these CRA tactics without representation by competent Canadian tax lawyers.

So, if the Canada Revenue Agency has reassessed your poker winnings, gambling winnings, or receipts from other monetized hobbies as taxable income or if you believe that CRA may attempt to reassess your poker-playing, gambling, or monetized hobby as a taxable business, contact one of our expert Canadian tax-litigation lawyers today. Our top Canadian tax lawyers have represented clients with significant poker earnings and thoroughly understand this area of law, so we can ensure that you deliver a forceful and cogent notice of objection to the Canada Revenue Agency’s Appeals Division or notice of appeal to the Tax Court of Canada.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

I regularly gamble at casinos. Are my winnings taxable in Canada?

Generally, no. But there are exceptions. In Canada, the tax-law concept of “income” excludes windfalls, such as the winnings of an amateur gambler. Amateur or casual gambling doesn’t produce a “source of income” for Canadian tax purposes. Even for compulsive gamblers who continually try their luck at a game of chance—the lottery, for instance—the activity remains a personal endeavour, not a source of income.

This isn’t always true, however. For example, gambling winnings may qualify as taxable business when a person uses his or her own expertise to earn a livelihood from a gambling game in which skill is a significant component—e.g., the poker players at the heart of the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision in Fournier-Giguère et al. v. Canada, 2025 FCA 112. But this is a complicated area of Canadian tax law. For advice on whether your gambling or poker winnings are taxable in Canada, consult one of our highly skilled Canadian tax lawyers today.

I recently underwent an income-tax audit by the Canada Revenue Agency. The CRA income-tax auditor says that I played poker as a business and plans to reassess my poker winnings as taxable income. What should I do?

Contact our knowledgeable Canadian tax lawyers for representation. The Federal Court of Appeal’s recent poker decision in Fournier-Giguère demonstrates the importance of retaining an expert Canadian tax lawyer for representation in a poker-related CRA tax audit. Poker cases invoke a nuanced, fact-specific tax-law analysis. Just as they did in Fournier-Giguère, the Canada Revenue Agency’s tax auditors can assume that your poker hobby constitutes a business and reassess your poker winnings as taxable income.

Because of the complex tax-law analysis that these cases require, the average Canadian taxpayer will fare poorly against these CRA tactics without representation by competent Canadian tax lawyers. So, if the Canada Revenue Agency has reassessed your poker or gambling winnings as taxable income or if you believe that CRA may attempt to reassess your poker or gambling winnings as taxable income, contact one of our top Canadian tax lawyers today. We utterly understand this area of law, and we can ensure that you deliver a forceful and cogent objection to the Canada Revenue Agency’s Appeals Division or appeal to the Tax Court of Canada.

DISCLAIMER: This article just provides broad information. It is only up to date as of the posting date. It has not been updated and may be out of date. It does not give legal advice and should not be relied on. Every tax scenario is unique to its circumstances and will differ from the instances described in the article. If you have specific legal questions, you should seek the advice of a Canadian tax lawyer.