⚠️ Blast Is Shutting Down - Export Your Transaction History Now Blast (Ethereum Layer 2 network) announced last week that it is shutting down. If you’ve ever transacted on the Blast network, we recommend exporting your transaction history ASAP. Historical data access may become unavailable in the future, making it harder to obtain the records you need for accurate crypto tax reporting. You can export your Blast transaction history via the blockchain import on Cointracking (na3.hubs.ly/y0Fw_h0) or the Blast Blockchain Explorer (na3.hubs.ly/y0Fw_j0) Users have until October 26, 2026 to withdraw assets through the normal Blast interface. After that, assets will remain withdrawable, but only via Blast bridge contracts on Ethereum mainnet. Official announcements can be found on the @blast X Account. We strongly recommend withdrawing your assets before October 26 and exporting your transaction history now to preserve your accounting records. Blast Network is not affiliated with Metrics Chartered Professional Accounting.

We have joined a group of Canadian and European tech innovators raising concerns about Bill C-22. We are urging the government to amend the bill to protect consumer privacy, encryption, and cybersecurity before it becomes law. Read the full letter here: na3.hubs.ly/y0DL3H0

Forcing a cash buyout of cryptocurrency in family law proceedings can create severe, unallocated tax liabilities. Liquidating tokens to settle property equalization claims may trigger an immediate taxable disposition under the Income Tax Act. In jurisdictions like British Columbia, where the top marginal personal tax rate reaches 53.5%, an unmanaged cash settlement can leave the asset-holding spouse absorbing unrecoverable tax drag while the non-holding spouse receives tax-free funds. To mitigate this financial exposure and protect both parties, family law practitioners can guide their clients through a 3-step property division framework: • Evaluate ACB and Potential Tax Drag: Model the potential latent capital gains tax attached to digital holdings under Section 54 prior to establishing cash equalization amounts. Check 73(1) rollover eligibility and consider any facts that may prompt your client to elect out of the ACB transfer. • Address Derivative Tax Risk: Address potential joint tax liability exposure under Section 160 of the Income Tax Act, which can allow the CRA to assess a receiving spouse if property is transferred while disposition tax debts remain outstanding. • Implement In-Kind Token Transfers: Structure divisions using tax-deferred spousal rollover provisions under the Income Tax Act. Transferring tokens directly ensures both spouses share post-separation market volatility and tax obligations equitably. Link to the full statutory breakdown on our blog: na3.hubs.ly/y0DwZW0

Learn why cryptocurrency and other digital assets belong on the financial statement, how common they are in Canada, and how to identify and describe these holdings so valuation, disclosure, and tax analysis can follow.

CPA/Practitioner perspective here: A static CAD snapshot on a financial statement may fail to address the statutory liabilities inherent in digital asset property. Under Canadian tax principles, cryptocurrencies, stablecoins, and decentralized finance (DeFi) positions are classified as property, meaning every disposition event carries immediate tax consequences that must be accounted for prior to property division. The primary tax trap lies in confusing exchange-reported account balances with actual protocol ownership. A simple account statement reading "5 ETH" may conceal tokens deployed within a smart contract, such as a staking protocol. This distinction carries major consequences. First, tokens committed to smart contracts are subject to un-bonding periods and liquidity restrictions, rendering them illiquid on the valuation date. Second, wrapped tokens (e.g., WBTC) or liquid staking receipts are distinct legal instruments that carry protocol risk and may trade at a structural discount to native assets. Third, automated rewards generated by these protocols constitute income from property, accruing taxable events that often continue post-separation. Legal counsel and financial professionals should look beyond basic account statements. A complete file benefits from a detailed holdings schedule that separates spot assets from smart-contract claims, identifies un-bonding terms, and uses CSRS 4400 agreed-upon procedures to reconcile exchange data with public blockchain records. Without this forensic rigor, litigants risk inheriting unrecoverable tax drag and statutory default liabilities upon final asset distribution. Link to the full article on our blog: na3.hubs.ly/y0Cgzy0

Canada’s Section 188.2 tax policy forces PPLNS miners to absorb up to $150,000 in unrecoverable GST/HST per $1M electricity spend, placing domestic operators at a severe disadvantage against foreign competitors. Full executive breakdown on Section 188.2 Policy Advocacy & Legislative Options on our blog: na3.hubs.ly/y0B-n60

Did your organization participate in the House of Commons Finance Committee pre-budget submissions regarding Section 188.2 ETA? We’d like to hear from you - please let us know in the comments. The CRA Notice 324 distinction between PPLNS and PPS pools is creating severe unrecoverable GST/HST drag for Canadian operators compared to foreign competitors.