I think the provisions that are in place are there for anti-avoidance reasons. Obviously, there are many ways in many sections of the act in which anti-avoidance reasons exist. The section 55 one is an interesting one. Bill C-208 tries to tie it to the status of the shares themselves, which creates a protection from that level, which is positive.
You are exactly right. It creates an awkwardness when you're unrelated for these purposes but related for those purposes, so it just becomes very confusing in an already confusing situation.