The past 18 months have been characterized by a steady stream of mostly bad news, relating to the pandemic and its harmful consequences. The human cost of the pandemic, in terms of illness and death, is paramount. But the reality is also that much economic and financial harm resulted, at an individual, community, and national level, as businesses closed and individuals lost jobs or saw their hours — and consequently their income — reduced.

The past 18 months have been characterized by a steady stream of mostly bad news, relating to the pandemic and its harmful consequences. The human cost of the pandemic, in terms of illness and death, is paramount. But the reality is also that much economic and financial harm resulted, at an individual, community, and national level, as businesses closed and individuals lost jobs or saw their hours — and consequently their income — reduced.

However, an exception to that steady stream of economic and financial bad news came recently in the form of a Statistics Canada report on state of Canadians’ indebtedness.

The rise in personal debt over the past 15 years, as individuals and families took advantage of record low interest rates, has been a source of concern to both financial advisers and the government. One measure of the indebtedness of an individual or family is the debt-to-income ratio, which measures the amount of debt (secured and unsecured) as a percentage of household income. In 2005, the debt-to-income ratio of the average household was 93%. By the end of 2019 that ratio had climbed to more than 180%.

As well, in the two decades prior to the pandemic, credit card debt of Canadians had risen, on average, by 20.7% each year. By the beginning of 2020, the outstanding balance of credit card debt owed by Canadians had reached $90.6 billion.

As outlined in the Statistics Canada report, that picture changed dramatically from the beginning of 2020 to the start of 2021. Over that period, the outstanding balance carried on credit cards fell from $90.6 billion to $74 billion, an 18.3% decline in less than one year. 

The StatsCan report, which can be found on its website at https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/210823/dq210823c-eng.htm, attributes that change to two circumstances. As stated in the report “Canadian households began to see their disposable income rise during the pandemic, due in part to the limited opportunities to spend money during the lockdowns as well as the monetary support provided by governments …. to offset lost wages.” And, perhaps the best news of all is that the largest reductions in debt loads were seen in Canadians who had the lowest credit ratings.

Getting a post-secondary education, especially where that education includes graduate school or professional training, is an expensive undertaking. According to Statistics Canada, the average undergraduate tuition cost for the 2020-21 academic year was $6,580. Costs for graduate programs, particularly professional training, can go much higher, reaching as much as $50,000 per year. And those costs don’t factor in necessary expenditures on textbooks and other ancillary costs, to say nothing of general living expenses, like rent, transportation, and food.

Getting a post-secondary education, especially where that education includes graduate school or professional training, is an expensive undertaking. According to Statistics Canada, the average undergraduate tuition cost for the 2020-21 academic year was $6,580. Costs for graduate programs, particularly professional training, can go much higher, reaching as much as $50,000 per year. And those costs don’t factor in necessary expenditures on textbooks and other ancillary costs, to say nothing of general living expenses, like rent, transportation, and food.

What that means, in most cases, is that Canadians who want to pursue post-secondary education must go into debt to do so.  Financing through a bank loan or line of credit is possible, but most students who need financial assistance receive that assistance through a federal government program — the Canada Student Loan (CSL) program — as well as loan or grant programs provided by the particular province or territory in which the student resides.

Using a government-sponsored loan program to finance education has a number of advantages. Under the CSL program, any loans provided do not accrue interest while the recipient student is still in school and no repayment of the loan is required during that time. However, interest starts accruing once the student has graduated and, six months after graduation, those who received loans under the CSL program are required to make arrangements for repayment. Consequently, CSL loan recipients who graduated in the spring of 2021 must now consider what arrangements they wish to make for repayment of loan amounts received.

The onus is on the loan recipient to contact the CSL center to make required arrangements for repayment, and failing to do so will not delay repayment. In such cases, the federal government, as the loan issuer, has the right to automatically withdraw loan repayments from the same bank account where the loans were originally deposited.

While interest usually starts accruing as soon as the student has graduated, that’s not the case right now. As part of its pandemic relief measures, the federal government has suspended the accumulation of interest on Canada Student Loans, effective as of April 2021 and lasting until March 31, 2023. So, while graduates are still required to begin repayment of their loans no more than six months after graduation, those repayments will, at least until April 2023, not include an interest component. Once interest is levied on a loan, loan recipients can choose between a fixed interest rate on their loan (meaning that the interest rate stays the same until the loan is fully repaid) or a variable/floating rate of interest, which will change with changes in the prime rate.

The choice of whether to select a fixed or floating interest rate is, obviously, an individual one, which must take into account the size of the loan, the time period over which the borrower expects to make full repayment and, of course, one’s views on whether interest rates will be rising or falling over that expected repayment period.

Whatever the interest rate chosen or levied, borrowers who pay that interest can claim, on Line 31900 of the federal tax return, a student loan interest tax credit to help offset those costs. The student loan interest tax credit is a non-refundable credit, meaning that it applies to reduce any federal tax payable, but cannot create or increase a refund. That federal tax reduction is equal to 15% of the interest amount claimed, and interest amounts eligible for the credit are those paid in the current tax year or any of the previous five tax years, without limit. And, finally, the student loan interest tax credit can be claimed only by the former student who received the government student loan.

These criteria require former students who are eligible for the credit to consider the following factors in deciding whether to claim the credit, and in what amount.

• Individuals who do not have tax payable for the year will not benefit from claiming the student loan interest tax credit, as there is no tax which the credit can reduce.
• Individuals who have other available tax credits which must be claimed in the year the related expense is incurred should claim those credits first, as the student loan tax credit can be carried forward and claimed in any of the five years after the interest has been paid.
• Where the individual has remaining tax payable in the current year after all other available tax credits have been claimed, the student loan interest tax credit should be claimed only to the extent necessary to reduce tax payable to zero. Any additional claim should be carried forward to a future year or years where it is needed to reduce tax payable.

There is, as well, a very important caveat. Once a student has graduated (especially from a professional training program like law or medicine), financial institutions will frequently offer to loan that student sufficient funds to allow the former student to consolidate all outstanding debts which were incurred to finance his or her education. Often the interest rate to be provided is a preferential one, and can even be lower than the rate which the student borrower would pay under the CSL program.

That preferential interest rate, however, has a “cost” of which most graduates are unaware. The student loan interest tax credit is available only for interest paid on government-sponsored student loans. Borrowers cannot claim interest paid on any other kind of loan, even where that loan was used for financing post-secondary education. As well, no credit can be claimed for interest paid on an otherwise qualifying student loan that has been combined with any other kind of loan. If the borrower has obtained a loan from a bank or other financial institution, or has consolidated such a loan with government student loans which would otherwise qualify for the credit, none of the interest paid on that loan or consolidated loan will qualify for the student loan interest tax credit.

Consequently, borrowers who are considering a loan offer from a financial institution must include in their calculations not only the difference in interest rates, but whether any lower interest rate offered by the financial institution will compensate for the loss of any claim for the student loan interest tax credit.

When things work out after graduation in the way everyone hopes they will, the former student will have secured employment at an income sufficient to make repayment of student borrowings possible. Where that’s not the case, and the borrower cannot make repayment as required because of financial hardship, it is possible to reduce the required monthly repayment through the Repayment Assistance Program. Details of that program, and much more information on the Canada Student Loan Program generally, can be found on the federal government website at https://www.canada.ca/en/services/benefits/education/student-aid/grants-loans/repay/assistance/rap.html.

There are a number of income sources available to Canadians in retirement. Those who participated in the work force during their adult life will have contributed to the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and will be able to receive CPP retirement benefits as early as age 60. Earning employment or self-employment income will also have entitled those individuals to contribute to a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP). A shrinking minority of Canadians will be able to look forward to receiving benefits from an employer-sponsored pension plan.

There are a number of income sources available to Canadians in retirement. Those who participated in the work force during their adult life will have contributed to the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and will be able to receive CPP retirement benefits as early as age 60. Earning employment or self-employment income will also have entitled those individuals to contribute to a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP). A shrinking minority of Canadians will be able to look forward to receiving benefits from an employer-sponsored pension plan.

Each of those income sources requires that an individual have made contributions during his or her working life in order to enjoy benefits in retirement; the fourth major source of retirement income for Canadians — the Old Age Security (OAS) program — does not. Entitlement to OAS is based solely on the number of years of Canadian residence, and individuals who are resident in Canada for 40 years after the age of 18 can receive full OAS benefits. As of the third quarter of 2021, those full OAS benefits are equal to $626.49 per month.

The OAS program is distinct from other sources of retirement income in another, less welcome way, in that it is the only such income source for which the federal government can require repayment by the recipient. That repayment requirement comes about through the OAS “Recovery Tax”, which is universally known as the OAS “clawback”.

While the rules governing the administration of the clawback can be confusing, the concept is a (relatively) simple one. Anyone who receives OAS benefits during the year and has income for that year of more than (for 2021) $79,845 must repay a portion of the benefits received benefits. That repayment, or clawback is administered by reducing the amount of OAS benefits which the individual receives during the next benefit year.

For example, an individual who receives full OAS during 2021 and has net income for the year of $85,000 will be subject to the clawback. He or she must repay OAS amounts received at a rate of 15 cents (or 15%) of every dollar of income over the clawback income threshold, as in the following simplified example:

Total OAS benefit for the year — $7,500

Total income for the year — $85,000

OAS income clawback threshold — $79,845

Income over clawback threshold — $5,155 × 15% = $773.25

Repayment amount required — $773.25

The federal government becomes aware of an individual’s income for 2021 only once the tax return for that year is filed, usually by April 30 of 2022. At that time, it will become apparent that $773.25 in OAS benefits received must be repaid. Consequently, in the following benefit year (which will run from July 2022 to June 2023), OAS benefits received will be reduced by $64.44 per month ($773.25 ÷ 12 months).

The OAS clawback affects only individuals who have an annual income of at least $79,845, and it’s arguable that at such income levels, the clawback requirement does not impose any real financial hardship. Nonetheless, the OAS clawback is a perpetual irritant to those affected, perhaps because of the sense that they are being penalized for being disciplined savers, or good managers of their finances during their working years, in order to ensure a financially comfortable retirement.

While any sense of grievance can’t alter the reality of the OAS clawback, there are strategies which can be put in place to either minimize or, in some cases, entirely eliminate one’s exposure to that clawback. Some of those planning considerations are better addressed earlier in life, prior to retirement, However, it’s not too late, once one is already receiving OAS, to make arrangements to avoid or minimize the clawback.

In all cases, no matter what strategy is employed, the goal is to “smooth” one’s income from year to year, so that net income for each year comes in under the OAS clawback threshold and, not incidentally, minimizes exposure to the higher federal and provincial income tax rates which apply once income exceeds around $100,000.

The starting point, for taxpayers who are approaching retirement, is to determine how much income will be received from all sources during retirement, based on CPP and OAS entitlement, any savings accrued through an RRSP and any amounts which may be received from a private pension plan. Anyone who has an RRSP must begin receiving income from that RRSP in the year after that person turns 71. However, it’s possible to begin receiving income from an RRSP at any time. Similarly, an individual who is eligible for CPP retirement benefits can begin receiving those benefits anytime between age 60 and age 70, with the amount of monthly benefit receivable increasing with each month receipt is deferred. The same calculation applies to OAS benefits, which can be received as early as age 65 or deferred up until age 70.

Once the amount of annual income is determined, strategies to smooth out that income can be put in place. Those strategies can include receiving income from an RRSP prior to age 71, so as to reduce the total amount within the RRSP and so thereby reduce the likelihood of having a large “bump” in income when required withdrawals kick in at that time.

Taxpayers are sometimes understandably reluctant to take steps which they view as depleting their RRSP savings, but receiving income from an RRSP doesn’t mean spending that income. While tax has to be paid on any withdrawals (no matter what the taxpayer’s age), the after-tax amounts can be contributed to the taxpayer’s tax-free savings account, where they can compound free of tax. And, when the taxpayer has need of those funds, in retirement, they can be withdrawn free of tax and, they won’t count as income for purposes of the OAS clawback.

Taxpayers who are married can also “even out” their income by using pension income splitting, so that neither of them has sufficient income to be affected by the clawback. Using pension income splitting, the spouse who has income over the OAS clawback threshold re-allocates the “excess” income to his or her spouse on the annual return, and that income is then considered to be income of the recipient spouse, for purposes of both income tax and the OAS clawback. To be eligible for pension income splitting, the income to be reallocated must be private pension income, which is generally income from an RRSP or registered retirement income fund (RRIF), or from an employer-sponsored pension plan.

There are two reasons why pension income splitting is a particularly attractive strategy for avoiding or minimizing the OAS clawback. First, there is no need to actually change the source or amount of income received by each spouse, as the reallocation of income is “notional”, existing only the return for the year. Second, no decision has to be made on pension income splitting until it’s time to file the return for the previous year, meaning that spouses can easily calculate exactly how much income has to be reallocated in order to avoid the clawback, and to reduce tax liability generally. More information on the kinds of income eligible for pension income splitting, and the mechanics of the process, can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/pension-income-splitting.html.

To win elections, politicians need votes. And to run the election campaigns needed to garner those votes, they need an organization, volunteers, and money — a lot of money. To wage the current federal election, the major political parties will need to raise and spend millions of dollars. Their task of raising that money is undoubtedly made somewhat easier by the fact that Canadian taxpayers who donate money to political parties or candidates can obtain some tax benefit from doing so.

To win elections, politicians need votes. And to run the election campaigns needed to garner those votes, they need an organization, volunteers, and money — a lot of money. To wage the current federal election, the major political parties will need to raise and spend millions of dollars. Their task of raising that money is undoubtedly made somewhat easier by the fact that Canadian taxpayers who donate money to political parties or candidates can obtain some tax benefit from doing so.

Individuals who donate to the political party or candidate of their choice may or may not be happy with the outcome of the election, but no matter which registered party or candidate they donated to, it will be possible for them to claim a federal tax credit for those donations when they file their returns for 2021 next spring.

The credit provided under the Income Tax Act is available with respect to funds contributed to either a registered political party or to candidates running in a federal election. Contributions can be made at any time, not just during an election campaign, as long as the donation is received by an official candidate or a registered federal political party or association.

While the parties which currently hold seats in the House of Commons are, of course, the most well-known, there are in fact 20 political parties registered and in good standing with Elections Canada for purposes of the 2021 federal election. They are as follows, in alphabetical order:

• Animal Protection Party of Canada
• Bloc Québécois
• Canada's Fourth Front
• Canadian Nationalist Party
• Christian Heritage Party of Canada
• Communist Party of Canada
• Conservative Party of Canada
• Free Party Canada
• Green Party of Canada
• Liberal Party of Canada
• Libertarian Party of Canada
• Marijuana Party
• Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada
• Maverick Party
• National Citizens Alliance of Canada
• New Democratic Party
• Parti pour l'Indépendance du Québec
• Parti Rhinocéros Party
• People's Party of Canada
• Veterans Coalition Party of Canada

Donations to any one of these registered parties, within prescribed limits, would qualify for the federal political contribution tax credit.

Official candidates can, of course, be running either as candidates for one of the registered parties or as independents. Elections Canada provides a list of confirmed candidates who are running in this year’s federal election and that information can be found on the Elections Canada website at https://www.elections.ca/scripts/vis/FindED?L=e&PAGEID=20.

The federal political tax credit is calculated as a percentage of donations given. However, the credit percentage decreases as contributions amounts increase, and no credit at all is given for donations in excess of $1,275. The credit percentages allowed at different contribution levels are as follows:

The maximum credit claimable in any taxation year by a single taxpayer is $650. Once the arithmetic is worked out, it becomes clear that the maximum credit obtainable is reached once contribution levels reach $1,275.

Contribution amount             Allowable tax credit

$400 × 75% =                                   $300

$350 × 50% =                                   $175

$525 × 33.3% =                                $175          

$1,275                                              $650

Where donations exceed $1,275 in any one taxation year, no tax credit can be claimed on the “excess” donation. As well, there is no provision which allows the taxpayer to carry over any “excess” contributions to a subsequent taxation year, meaning that no credit will ever be obtainable with respect to those “excess” contributions.

Many Canadians who are committed to a particular political party or candidate volunteer their time during a nomination or election campaign — canvassing for the candidate, putting up election signs, or telephoning voters to encourage them to vote for the candidate. However, in such cases, the work must be its own reward, as no income tax receipts can be issued for most such non-monetary contributions and consequently no credit can be claimed for the value of any non-monetary contribution (including volunteer hours) donated.

Where a qualifying contribution is made, an official receipt must be issued in order for the tax credit to be claimed. A receipt must be issued, in paper or electronic format, for every contribution over $20.

The actual credit for qualifying donations made is claimed on the tax return for the year in which the contribution was made. The amount of the credit is calculated (according to the formula outlined above) on the Federal Worksheet, and the amount of the actual credit entered on line 41000 of Schedule 1 of the federal tax return. By the time the 2021 return is filed, of course, the election will long since have been concluded, the newly elected government will be in place in Ottawa, and the taxpayer will be in a position to assess whether it was, in fact, money well spent.

Although it’s doubtful that anyone does so with any great degree of enthusiasm, each spring millions of Canadians sit down to complete their annual tax return for the previous calendar year (or, more often, they pay someone else to do it for them).

Although it’s doubtful that anyone does so with any great degree of enthusiasm, each spring millions of Canadians sit down to complete their annual tax return for the previous calendar year (or, more often, they pay someone else to do it for them).

The Canadian tax system is a “self-assessing system” which relies heavily on that voluntary co-operation of taxpayers. Canadians are expected (in fact, in most cases, required), to complete and file a tax return each spring, reporting income from all sources, calculating the amount of tax owed and remitting that amount to the federal government by a specified deadline. Whether they do it themselves or pay someone else to do it, the rate of compliance among Canadian taxpayers is very high — between February and July 2021, just over 29 million individual income tax returns were filed with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). Inevitably, however, there are those who do not meet their filing or payment obligations.

There are a lot of reasons why some Canadians don’t file their returns or pay their taxes on a timely basis, and almost all of them are based on a lack of understanding of how our tax system works, or on incorrect information about that system. In addition, each year there are some Canadians who file returns in which income amounts are underreported and/or deductions or credits to which that taxpayer is not entitled are claimed.

While the overall percentage of taxpayers who don’t file or pay on time, or who file returns which are not accurate isn’t high, there are a lot of such returns when measured by absolute numbers. And, although each such instance of non-compliance represents lost revenue to the Canadian government, the resources needed to track down each and every instance of non-compliance simply aren’t available, especially since in many cases the amount recovered may be less than the costs which must be incurred to recover that amount.

With all of that in mind, several years ago the CRA instituted a program — the Voluntary Disclosure Program (VDP) — intended to encourage non-compliant taxpayers to come forward and put their tax affairs in order. The incentive to do so arises from the fact that, in most cases, while taxpayers who participate in the VDP program have to pay outstanding tax amounts owed, plus interest, they avoid the penalties which would normally be imposed and, in addition, avoid the risk of criminal prosecution.

To qualify for relief under the VDP, an application made with respect to non-compliance with income tax filing and payment obligations must:

• be voluntary (meaning that it is done before the taxpayer becomes aware of any compliance or enforcement action by the CRA);
• be complete;
• involve the application or potential application of a penalty;
• include information that is at least one year past due; and
• include payment of the estimated tax owing.

The VDP program includes two separate “tracks” for income tax disclosures — the Limited Program and the General Program — and the kind and extent of relief available depends on the track to which a particular application is assigned.

While the CRA will ultimately make the determination of whether an application should proceed under the Limited or the General Program on a case-by-case basis, there are guidelines in place. The CRA’s intention is to restrict the Limited Program to instances in which applications disclose non-compliance which appears to include intentional (as distinct from inadvertent) conduct on the part of the taxpayer. In making its determination of the appropriate track for a disclosure, the factors which the CRA will consider include the following:

• the dollar amounts involved;
• the number of years of non-compliance;
• the sophistication of the taxpayer;
• how quickly the taxpayer acted to correct their non-compliance after becoming aware of it;
• whether there has been deliberate or wilful default or carelessness amounting to gross negligence on the part of the taxpayer; and
• whether the disclosure was made after the taxpayer became aware of the CRA’s intended specific focus on such area of taxpayer compliance.

Those whose applications are accepted under the Limited Program will not be subject to criminal prosecution and will be exempt from the more stringent penalties which usually apply in cases of gross negligence on the part of the taxpayer. Interest on outstanding tax balances will be payable, however, and other penalties will be levied.

Taxpayers whose conduct does not consign them to the Limited Program will instead be considered under the General Program. Under that program, no penalties will be charged and no criminal prosecutions will take place. As well, the CRA will provide partial interest relief, specifically for the years preceding the three most recent years of non-compliance (i.e., for the years preceding the three most recent years of returns required to be filed). For example, a taxpayer who makes an application to the VDP and who has failed to file returns for the 2014 through 2019 taxation years may be provided with interest relief with respect to taxes owed for the 2014, 2015, and 2016 taxation years. Such relief is generally equal to 50% of interest owed — in other words, the taxpayer will be required to pay only half of the interest charges which would otherwise be levied for those years. No interest relief will, however, be provided on tax amounts owed for the three most recent (2017, 2018, and 2019) taxation years. Since interest charges levied by the CRA are, by law, higher than current commercial rates (for instance, the rate levied for the third quarter of 2021 is 5%) and interest charged is compounded daily, having interest amounts forgiven, even in part, can make a significant difference to the overall tax bill faced by the taxpayer.

In order to benefit from the VDP, taxpayers must first make an application to the program. That application must include payment of the estimated taxes owing, as a condition of participation in the VDP. Where a taxpayer is financially unable to make that tax payment, he or she can request that the CRA consider a payment arrangement.

The decision to apply to the VDP and to “come clean” about all previous tax transgressions is something that most taxpayers will likely consider with considerable trepidation. Those who are unsure about whether they want to move forward with a VDP application have the option of using the CRA’s “pre-disclosure discussion service”. As the name implies, that service allows taxpayers to participate in preliminary discussions with a CRA official, on an anonymous basis, to gain some knowledge about the VDP program, the process involved, and the potential relief available.

Taxpayers who decided to move forward with an application to the VDP can complete and file Form RC199, Voluntary Disclosures Program Application, which is available on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms/rc199.html. Once the application is received, the CRA will check to make certain that the applicant is eligible to apply and that all of the required information, documentation, and payment has been sent. The next step is for the CRA to evaluate the application to ensure that the criteria for participation in the VDP are satisfied and, if so, to determine the program (Limited or General) to which the application should be assigned, and the taxation year(s) for which relief is being considered. At each step the taxpayer will be provided with written notice of the CRA’s decisions. The CRA’s advice is that taxpayers should contact them (for individual taxpayers, by calling the Individual Income Tax Enquiries line at 1-800-959-8281) if more than five weeks have passed since the application was submitted and no response has yet been received.

If the decision made is that the application is not eligible for the VDP, the taxpayer will also be advised in writing, with reasons, of the CRA’s decision to deny the application.

Where the decision made by the CRA is one with which the taxpayer does not agree, he or she is entitled to ask for a second review of the application. If that decision is also unfavourable, it is possible for a taxpayer to ask a court to review the decision and to direct the CRA to re-consider the VDP application. However, a taxpayer who wishes to pursue his or her application to the extent of filing such a court application is well advised to obtain legal advice before doing so.

Finally, taxpayers should recognize that the VDP Program can’t be used as a kind of “get out of jail free card” with respect to repeated failures to meet tax filing and payment obligations. The CRA website makes it clear that they expect taxpayers who have benefitted from the VDP to thereafter meet their tax obligations, and a second review will be provided for the same taxpayer only in unusual situations where the circumstances are beyond the taxpayer’s control.

Detailed information on the VDP program can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/programs/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/voluntary-disclosures-program-overview.html.

Canadian drivers are used to seeing gas prices rise each spring as the weather gets warmer and more people take to the road for day trips, weekends at the cottage, and annual holidays. This year, that trend is accelerated for several reasons. The first, of course, is that as pandemic restrictions ease and the economy opens up, there are more and more reasons to be on the road. As well, employees who have worked from home for the past 16 months are starting to return to the daily commute, either part-time or full-time.

Canadian drivers are used to seeing gas prices rise each spring as the weather gets warmer and more people take to the road for day trips, weekends at the cottage, and annual holidays. This year, that trend is accelerated for several reasons. The first, of course, is that as pandemic restrictions ease and the economy opens up, there are more and more reasons to be on the road. As well, employees who have worked from home for the past 16 months are starting to return to the daily commute, either part-time or full-time.

Whatever their reasons for driving this spring and summer, Canadian drivers are experiencing “sticker shock” at the gas pumps to an unprecedented degree. When states of emergency were declared last spring and virtually everyone stayed at home, gas prices in Canada dropped precipitously. In April of 2020, the average cost of gasoline was around 79 cents per litre. That price has rebounded with a vengeance and, as of the end of July 2021, the average gas price in Canada was just under $1.40 per litre — an increase of more than 75% over April of 2020. In some provinces, gas prices have hit a new record high.

While in some cases Canadians can reduce the impact of gas price increases by reducing the amount of driving they do, the practical reality is that, even for those who wish to do less driving and to thereby reduce their carbon footprint, driving less just isn’t a realistic option. While major urban centres are usually well-served by public transit, it’s a different picture outside those centres, where in many cases the public transit option is either non-existent or impractical. As well, as housing prices in major urban areas either continue to increase (or are already out of the reach of the average Canadian), individuals and families must move further from their workplaces in search of affordable housing. Doing so means a longer commute to work, and that commute must often be done by car.

For a number of reasons, then, the cost of driving is often an unavoidable, non-discretionary expense. And, as that cost increases, many wonder whether there are any deductions or credits which can be claimed to help offset that cost.

Unfortunately, for many taxpayers, there’s no relief provided by our tax system to help alleviate the cost of driving to work and back home or the cost of driving that isn’t work-related. In both cases, such expenditures are considered a personal expense for which no deduction or credit can be claimed, no matter how great the cost. That said, there are some (fairly narrow) circumstances in which employees can claim a deduction for the cost of work-related travel.

Those circumstances exist where an employee is required, as part of his or her terms of employment, to use a personal vehicle for work-related travel. For instance, an employee might, as part of his or her job, be required to see clients at their own premises for the purpose of meetings or other work-related activities and be expected to use his or her own vehicle to get to such meetings. If the employer is prepared to certify on a Form T2200 that the employee was ordinarily required to work away from the employer’s place of business or in different places, that he or she is required to pay his or her own motor vehicle expenses (and was not reimbursed for such expenses by the employer) and that the employer did not provide a tax-free allowance to cover such expenses, the employee can deduct actual expenses incurred for such work-related travel. Those deductible expenses include the following:

• fuel (gasoline, propane, oil)
• maintenance and repairs
• insurance
• licence and registration fees
• depreciation, in the form of capital cost allowance
• eligible interest paid on a loan to buy the vehicle; and
• eligible leasing costs.

In almost all instances, a taxpayer will use the same vehicle for both personal and work-related driving. Where that’s the case, only the portion of expenses incurred for work-related driving can be deducted and the employee must keep a record of both the total kilometres driven and the kilometres driven for work-related purposes. And, of course, receipts must be kept to document all expenses incurred and claimed.

While no limits (other than the general limit of reasonableness) are placed on the amount of costs which can be deducted in the first four categories listed above, there are limits and restrictions with respect to allowable deductions for interest, eligible leasing costs and depreciation claims. The rules governing those claims and the tax treatment of employee automobile allowances and available deductions for employment-related automobile use generally are outlined on the Canada Revenue Agency website at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/ddctns/lns206-236/229/slry/mtrvhcl-eng.html.

In larger urban centres, and in the nearby cities and suburbs which are served by inter-city transit, many commuters utilize that transit as a way of avoiding both the stress of a drive to work in rush hour traffic and the associated costs. And, for a time, such commuters were able to claim a tax credit to help mitigate the cost of using such transit. Unfortunately, the federal public transit tax credit was eliminated in 2017 and has never been reinstated.

Given current gas prices, no amount of tax relief is going to make driving, especially for a lengthy daily commute, an inexpensive proposition. But, that said, seeking out and claiming every possible deduction and credit available under our tax rules can at least help to minimize the pain.

By the time August arrives, nearly all Canadians have filed their income tax returns for the previous year, received a Notice of Assessment from the tax authorities with respect to that return, and either spent their refund or, more grudgingly, paid any balance of tax owing.

By the time August arrives, nearly all Canadians have filed their income tax returns for the previous year, received a Notice of Assessment from the tax authorities with respect to that return, and either spent their refund or, more grudgingly, paid any balance of tax owing.

It’s a surprise, therefore, when unexpected mail arrives from the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) around the middle of August, and the information in that mail will likely be both unfamiliar and unwelcome. Specifically, the enclosed Instalment Reminder form will advise the recipient that, in the view of the CRA, he or she should make instalment payments of income tax on September 15 and December 15 of 2021 — and will helpfully identify the amounts which should be paid on each date.

No one particularly likes receiving unexpected mail from the tax authorities and correspondence which suggests that the recipient should be making payments of tax to the CRA during the year (instead of when he or she files the return for the year next April) is likely to be both perplexing and somewhat alarming. It is fair to say that most Canadians aren’t familiar with the payment of income tax by instalments, and are therefore at a loss to know how to proceed the first time they receive an Instalment Reminder.

The reason that the instalment payment system is unfamiliar to most Canadians is that most of us pay income taxes during our working lives through a different system. Every Canadian employee has tax automatically deducted from his or her paycheque (“at source”), before that paycheque is issued, and that tax is remitted by the employer to the CRA, on the employee’s behalf. Such deductions and remittances accrue on the employee’s behalf, and they are credited with those remittances when filing the annual tax return for that year. It’s an efficient system, but it’s also one which is largely invisible to the employee, and certainly one which operates without the need for the employee to take any steps on his or her own. When someone’s working life ends and retirement begins, it’s consequently not particularly surprising that the individual wouldn’t know that it is now his or her responsibility to make specific arrangements for the payment of income tax.

Adding to the potential confusion, most employees who are now moving into retirement have had only a single source of income throughout their working lives. Once in retirement, however, there are likely multiple such sources of income, including Canada Pension Plan benefits and Old Age Security payments, and perhaps monthly amounts received from an employer-sponsored registered pension plan (RPP) or a registered retirement income fund (RRIF). Unless the individual so directs, none of the payors of those kinds of income will deduct income tax from the payments and remit them to the federal government on the individual’s behalf.

Canadian tax rules provide that, where the amount of tax owed when a return is filed by the taxpayer is more than $3,000 ($1,800 for Quebec residents) in the current (2021) year and either of the two previous (2019 and 2020) years, that taxpayer may be subject to the requirement to pay income tax by instalments.

The reason that first instalment reminders are issued in August has to do with the schedule on which Canadians file their tax returns. The amount of tax payable on filing for the immediately preceding year can’t be known until the tax return for that year has been filed and assessed, and the tax return filing deadline for individuals is April 30 (or June 15 for self-employed taxpayers and their spouses). Consequently, by the end of July, the CRA will have the information needed to determine whether a particular taxpayer should receive a first instalment reminder for the current year.

Taxpayers who receive that first Instalment Reminder in August may also be puzzled by the fact that it is a “reminder” and not a “requirement” to pay. The reason for that is that those who receive it are not actually required by law to make instalment payments of tax. There are, in fact, three options open to the taxpayer who receives an Instalment Reminder.

First, the taxpayer can pay the amounts specified on the reminder, by the respective due dates of September 15 and December 15. A taxpayer who does so can be certain that he or she will not have to pay any interest or penalty charges even if he or she does have to pay an additional amount on filing in the spring of 2022. If the instalments paid turn out to be more than the taxpayer’s tax liability for 2021, he or she will of course receive a refund on filing.

Second, the taxpayer can make instalment payments based on the total amount of tax which was owed and paid for the 2020 tax year (including any balance that was owed on filing). Where a taxpayer’s income has not changed between 2020 and 2021 and his or her available deductions and credits remain the same, the likelihood is that total tax liability for 2021 will be the same or slightly less than it was in 2020, owing to the indexation of tax brackets and tax credit amounts.

Third, the taxpayer can estimate the amount of tax which he or she will actually owe for 2021 and can pay instalments based on that estimate. Where a taxpayer’s income has dropped from 2020 to 2021 and there will consequently be a reduction in tax payable, this option may be worth considering. Taxpayers who wish to pursue this approach can obtain the information needed to estimate current year taxes (federal and provincial tax brackets and rates) on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/frequently-asked-questions-individuals/canadian-income-tax-rates-individuals-current-previous-years.html#federal.

All of this may seem like a lot of research and calculation effort, especially when one considers that many Canadians don’t even prepare their own tax returns. And those who don’t want to be bothered with the intricacies of tax calculations can pay the amounts set out in the Instalment Reminder, secure in the knowledge that they will not incur any penalty or interest charges and that, should those amounts ultimately represent an overpayment of taxes, that overpayment will be recovered and refunded when the 2021 return is filed next spring.

Once they have resigned themselves to the realities of the tax instalment system, the next question that most taxpayers have is how such payments can be made. The options open to taxpayers in that regard are helpfully outlined on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/making-payments-individuals/paying-your-income-tax-instalments/you-pay-your-instalments.html.

One or two generations ago, retirement was an event. Typically, an individual would leave the work force completely at age 65, and begin collecting Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security benefits along with, in many cases, a pension from an employer-sponsored registered pension plan.

One or two generations ago, retirement was an event. Typically, an individual would leave the work force completely at age 65, and begin collecting Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security benefits along with, in many cases, a pension from an employer-sponsored registered pension plan.

Much has changed in the intervening decades and one of those changes is that retirement is now more often a process than an event. Many of those who have reached the traditional retirement age of 65 are receiving CPP and OAS benefits while at the same time continuing to participate in the work force. Some stay at an existing full-time job but more commonly, such individuals take up part-time employment, out of financial need or simply from a desire to stay active and engaged in the work force.

At one time, beginning to receive CPP retirement benefits meant that, even for those who chose to remain in the work force, no further CPP contributions were allowed. In 2012 that changed, with the introduction of the CPP Post-Retirement Benefit. The availability of that benefit means that those who are aged 65 to 70 and continue to work while receiving CPP retirement benefits must decide whether or not to continue making CPP contributions. Such individuals who make the choice to continue to contribute to the Canada Pension Plan will see an increase in the amount of CPP retirement benefit they receive each month for the remainder of their lives. That increase is the CPP post-retirement benefit or PRB.

The rules governing the PRB differ, depending on the age of the taxpayer. In a nutshell, an individual who has chosen to begin receiving the CPP retirement benefit but who continues to work will be subject to the following rules:

• Individuals who are 60 to 65 years of age and continue to work are required to continue making CPP contributions.
• Individuals who are 65 to 70 years of age and continue to work can choose not to make CPP contributions. To stop contributing, such an individual must fill out form https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms/cpt30.html. A copy of that form must be given to the individual’s employer and the original sent to the Canada Revenue Agency. An individual who has more than one employer must make the same choice (to continue to contribute or to cease contributions) for all employers and must provide a copy of the CPT30 form to each employer.

A decision to stop contributing can be changed, and contributions resumed, but only one such change can be made per calendar year. To make that change, the individual must complete section D of CRA form https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms/cpt30.html, give one copy of the form to his or her employer(s), and send the original to CRA

• Individuals who are over the age of 70 and are still working cannot contribute to the CPP.

Overall, the effect of the rules is that CPP retirement benefit recipients who are still working and who are under aged 65, as well as those who are between 65 and 70 and choose not to opt out, will continue to make contributions to the CPP system and will continue therefore to earn new credits under that system. As a result, the amount of CPP retirement benefits which they are entitled to will increase with each successive year’s contributions.

Where an individual makes CPP contributions while working and receiving CPP retirement benefits, the amount of any CPP post-retirement benefit earned will automatically be calculated by the federal government (no application is required), and the individual will be advised of any increase in their monthly CPP retirement benefit each year. The PRB will be paid to that individual automatically the year after the contributions are made, effective January 1^st of that second year. Since the federal government doesn’t have all of the information needed to make such calculations until T4s and T4 summaries are filed by the employer by the end of February, the first PRB payment is usually made in a lump sum amount, in the month of April. That lump sum amount represents the PRB payable from January to April. Thereafter, the PRB is paid monthly and combined with the individual’s usual CPP retirement benefit in a single payment.

While the rules governing the PRB can seem complex (and certainly the actuarial calculations are), the individual doesn’t have to concern him or herself with those technical details. For CPP retirement benefit recipients who are under age 65 or over 70, there is no decision to be made. For the former, CPP contributions will be automatically deducted from their paycheques and for the latter, no such contributions are allowed.

Individuals in the middle group – aged 65 to 70 will need to make a decision about whether it makes sense, in their individual circumstances, to continue making contributions to the CPP. Some assistance in making that decision is provided on the federal government website at https://www.canada.ca/en/services/benefits/publicpensions/cpp/cpp-post-retirement/benefit-amount.html, which shows the calculations which would apply for individuals of different ages and income levels.

More information on the PRB generally is also available on that website at https://www.canada.ca/en/services/benefits/publicpensions/cpp/cpp-post-retirement.html.

Two quarterly newsletters have been added—one dealing with personal issues, and one dealing with corporate issues.

Two quarterly newsletters have been added—one dealing with personal issues, and one dealing with corporate issues.

They can be accessed below.

Corporate:

Issue #56 Corporate

Personal:

Issue #56 Personal

There’s a lot that is still unknown about the upcoming 2021-22 academic year for post-secondary students. It may be that such students will be back on campus, living in residence and once again attending classes in lecture halls. Less optimistically, they may (again!) be learning online and living off campus, or still at home with their parents. Most likely, they will be experiencing some combination of the two.

There’s a lot that is still unknown about the upcoming 2021-22 academic year for post-secondary students. It may be that such students will be back on campus, living in residence and once again attending classes in lecture halls. Less optimistically, they may (again!) be learning online and living off campus, or still at home with their parents. Most likely, they will be experiencing some combination of the two.

Whatever the physical reality will be for post-secondary students come September, there is a financial reality which has not and will not change. Regardless of how their learning is structured, there will be tuition costs to be paid. Fortunately there are also tax credits and benefits which can be claimed to offset such costs.

The tax credits and deductions which can be claimed by post-secondary students (or their spouses, parents or grandparents) in relation to the 2021-22 academic year are summarized below.

Tuition fees

The good news is that a tax credit continues to be available for the single largest cost associated with post-secondary education — the cost of tuition. Any student who incurs more than $100 in tuition costs at an eligible post-secondary institution (which would include most Canadian universities and colleges) can still claim a non-refundable federal tax credit of 15% of such tuition costs. Many of the provinces and territories (excepting Alberta, Ontario and Saskatchewan) also provide students with an equivalent provincial or territorial credit, with the rate of such credit differing by jurisdiction.

The charges imposed on post-secondary students under the heading of “tuition” include a myriad of costs which may differ, depending on the particular program or institution, and not all of those costs will qualify as “tuition” for purposes of the tuition tax credit. The following specific amounts do, however, constitute eligible tuition fees for purposes of that credit:

• admission fees
• charges for use of library or laboratory facilities
• exemption fees
• examination fees (including re-reading charges) that are integral to a program of study

• application fees (but only if the student subsequently enrolls in the institution)
• confirmation fees
• charges for a certificate, diploma or degree
• membership or seminar fees that are specifically related to an academic program and its administration
• mandatory computer service fees and
• academic fees.

The following charges do not, however, constitute tuition fees for purposes of the credit:

• extracurricular student social activities
• medical expenses
• transportation and parking
• board and lodging
• goods of enduring value that are to be retained by students (such as a microscope, uniform, gown, or computer)
• initiation fees or entrance fees to professional organizations including examination fees or other fees (such as evaluation fees) that are not integral to a program of study at an eligible educational institution
• administrative penalties incurred when a student withdraws from a program or an institution
• the cost of books (other than books, compact disks or similar material included in the cost of a correspondence course when the student is enrolled in such a course given by an eligible educational institution in Canada) and
• courses taken for purposes of academic upgrading to allow entry into a university or college program. These courses would usually not qualify for the tuition tax credit as they are not considered to be at the post-secondary school level.

Certain ancillary fees and charges, such as health services fees and athletic fees, may also be eligible tuition fees. However, such fees and charges are limited to $250 unless the fees are required to be paid by all full-time students or by all part-time students.

At both the federal and provincial levels, the credit acts to reduce tax otherwise payable. Where, as is often the case, a student doesn’t have tax payable for the year because his or her income isn’t high enough, credits earned can be carried forward and claimed by the student in any future tax year or transferred (within limits) in the current year to be claimed by a spouse, parent or grandparent.

Personal and living expenses

As has always been the case, living costs incurred by a post-secondary student (whether on campus or off) are characterized as personal and living expenses, for which no tax deduction or credit is allowed.

Student debt

Most post-secondary students in Canada must incur some amount of debt in order to complete their education, and repayment of that debt is typically not required until after graduation. Once repayment starts, a tax credit can be claimed for the amount of interest being paid on such debt, in some circumstances.

Students who are still in school and arranging for loans to finance their education should be mindful of the rules which govern that student loan interest tax credit, since decisions made while still in school with respect to how post-secondary education will be financed can have tax repercussions down the road, after graduation. That’s because while all interest paid on a qualifying student loan is eligible for the credit, only some types of student borrowing will qualify. Specifically, only interest paid on government-sponsored (federal or provincial) student loans will be eligible for the credit. Interest paid on loans of any kind from any financial institution will not.

It’s not uncommon (especially for students in professional programs, like law or medicine) to be offered lines of credit by a financial institution, often at advantageous or preferential interest rates. As well, financial institutions sometimes offer, once a student has graduated and begun to repay a government-sponsored student loan, to consolidate that student loan with other kinds of debt, also at advantageous interest rates. However, it should be kept in mind that interest paid on that line of credit (or any other kind of borrowing from a financial institution to finance education costs) will never be eligible for the student loan interest tax credit.

As explained in the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) publication on the subject: “ [I]f you renegotiated your student loan with a bank or another financial institution, or included it in an arrangement to consolidate your loans, you cannot claim this interest amount”. In other words, where a government student loan is combined with other debt and consolidated into a borrowing of any kind from a financial institution, the interest on that government student loan is no longer eligible for the student loan interest tax credit.

Students who are contemplating borrowing from a financial institution rather than getting a government student loan (or considering a consolidation loan which incorporates that student loan amount) must remember, in evaluating the benefit of any preferential interest rate offered by a financial institution, to take into account the loss of the student loan interest tax credit on that borrowing in future years.

Other credits and deductions

There are, as well, a number of credits and deductions which, while not specifically education-related, are frequently claimed by post-secondary students (for instance, deductions for moving costs). The CRA publishes a very useful guide which summarizes most of the rules around income and deductions which may apply to post-secondary students. The current version of that guide, entitled Students and Income Tax, is available on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/publications/p105.html.

As Canada begins to (slowly) transition back to a pre-pandemic way of life, one of the many opportunities which did not exist last summer is once again a possibility — that of sending the kids to summer camp. In most cases, Canadian children of school age have not had the opportunity to interact with their peers on a regular basis for nearly a year and a half. At the same time, parents across Canada have been coping with a situation in which they must work from home while simultaneously helping the kids with online learning. For both kids and parents, the possibility of going to summer camp must be particularly welcome this year.

As Canada begins to (slowly) transition back to a pre-pandemic way of life, one of the many opportunities which did not exist last summer is once again a possibility — that of sending the kids to summer camp. In most cases, Canadian children of school age have not had the opportunity to interact with their peers on a regular basis for nearly a year and a half. At the same time, parents across Canada have been coping with a situation in which they must work from home while simultaneously helping the kids with online learning. For both kids and parents, the possibility of going to summer camp must be particularly welcome this year.

When it comes to those summer camps, there are an almost limitless number of options for parents, but what each of those choices has in common is a price tag — sometimes a steep one. Some options, like day camps provided by the local recreation authority or municipality can be relatively inexpensive, while the cost of others, like elite level sports or arts camps, can run to the thousands of dollars.

The good news for families which incur such expenditures is that in many cases a deduction for part or all of the costs incurred can be claimed on the tax return for the year. And, since eligible expenditures can be deducted from income on a dollar-for-dollar basis, that means that income used to pay eligible child care expenses is income which is effectively not subject to income tax. That benefit is provided by our tax system through the general deduction provided for child care costs. The general rule for that deduction, which is not specific to summer child care or summer camp costs but is available year round, is that parents who must incur child care costs in order to work (whether in employment or self-employment) or, in some cases to attend school, to deduct those costs from income, within specified limits. In 2021, however, an exception is provided to that requirement. For this year, the requirement that the parent be working at employment or self-employment in order to claim a deduction for child care expenses does not apply where that parent was the recipient, during 2021, of taxable federal or provincial pandemic benefits (like the Canada Emergency Response Benefit, which was received by over 8 million Canadians), Employment Insurance Benefits or Quebec Parental Insurance Benefits.

The calculation process set out on Form T778, which is used to determine the amount of any allowable deduction from income for child care expenses incurred can seem quite complex. However, at the end of the day, the amount of child care expenses which can be deducted is simply the least of those three numbers, and only one of those numbers requires a calculation. The steps involved in doing so are as follows.

First, the amount of any deduction for child care expenses is limited to two-thirds of the taxpayer’s income for the year. The income figure used to calculate the two-thirds figure is, generally, the amount shown on Line 150 of the annual tax return. Where the family incurring child care expenses is a two-income family, it is the spouse with the lower net income who must make the claim and consequently his or her net income is used to determine the two-thirds of income figure.

The second figure to be determined is the amount actually paid for eligible child care costs during the year. While virtually any licensed child care arrangement will qualify, more informal arrangements may not. Specifically, no deduction is available for amounts paid to most family members to provide child care. So, it’s not possible for a working spouse to pay the stay-at-home parent to provide child care, nor is it possible to pay an older sibling who is under the age of 18 to provide such services, and to claim a deduction for those expenses incurred. As well, where a claim is made for a deduction for child care expenses on the annual return, the claimant must obtain (and be prepared to provide to the tax authorities) the social insurance number of the individual providing the care as well as a receipt showing the amounts paid, whether to an individual or an organization.

The third figure to be determined is the one which requires some calculation. Basically, the rules governing the deduction of child care expense impose a maximum deduction per child per year (referred to as the “basic limit”), with that basic limit dependent on the age of the particular child. As well, where expenses are incurred for overnight camps or boarding schools, the amount deductible for such costs is similarly capped.

For 2021, the following overall limits apply:

• $5,000 in costs per year for a child who was born in 2004 to 2013;
• $8,000 in costs per year for a child who was born after 2013;
• $11,000 in costs per year for a child who was born in 2020 or earlier, but for whom the disability amount can be claimed.

Similar restrictions are placed on the amount of costs which can be deducted for overnight camp or boarding school fees, and those are as follows:

• $125 per week for a child who was born in 2004 to 2013;
• $200 per week for a child who was born after 2013 or later; and
• $275 per week for a child who was born in 2020 or earlier, but for whom the disability amount can be claimed.

Taking all of these figures into account, the computation of a deduction for summer day camp expenses for a typical Canadian family would look like this.

A two-income family has two children and both parents are employed. One spouse earns $65,000 per year, while the other earns $55,000. In 2021, one child is age 9 and the other is age 5. Neither child is disabled. During July and August, both of the children attend a local full-day summer camp, for which the cost is $300 per week per child.

• The first step is to determine the two-thirds of income figure. Since it is the lower-income spouse who must make the deduction claim, that figure is two-thirds of $55,000, or $36,300. Consequently, any deduction for child care expenses for the year cannot exceed $36,300.

• The second calculation is the total amount of child care expenses paid for each child:

$300 per week for eight weeks of summer camp, or $2,400.

Total child care expenses for the year for each child is therefore $2,400.

• The last step is to determine the basic limit for child care expenses for each child, as follows:
• the limit for the 5-year-old (who was born after 2013) is $8,000, and so the entire $2,400 in summer day camp costs incurred can be deducted.
• the basic limit for the 9-year-old (who was born between 2004 and 2013) is $5,000, and so once again the entire $2,400 incurred for summer day camp costs can be deducted.

As well, since the camp is a day camp, the dollar amount cost limitations which apply with respect to overnight camps does not apply to limit the amount of expenses claimed by the family.

The total deduction available for child care expenses incurred for the 2021 tax year will therefore be $4,800. That deduction is claimed on Line 21400 of the tax return filed by the lower-income spouse for the year, reducing his or her taxable income from $55,000 to $50,200, and resulting in a federal tax savings of just under $1,000. A similar tax deduction is claimed as well for provincial tax purposes, and the amount of provincial tax saved will depend on the tax rates imposed by the province in which the family lives.

While the availability of a “subsidy” through the tax system should never be the sole determinant of what activity or camp is the best choice, there’s no denying that being able to claim a deduction for the costs involved can tip the balance toward one or choice or another, or bring a formerly unavailable option within a family’s financial reach.

Parents wishing to find out more about the child care expense deduction, and perhaps to calculate the maximum deduction which will be available to them for the 2021 tax year should consult Form T778 E (17). That form, which includes detailed information on the rules governing the deduction, can be found on the Canada Revenue Agency website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms/t778.html.

Between February 8 and June 21 of this year, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) received and processed just under 29 million individual income tax returns filed for the 2020 tax year. The sheer volume of returns and the processing turnaround timelines mean that the CRA does not (and cannot possibly) do a manual review of the information provided in a return prior to issuing the Notice of Assessment. Rather, all returns are scanned by the Agency’s computer system and a Notice of Assessment is then issued.

Between February 8 and June 21 of this year, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) received and processed just under 29 million individual income tax returns filed for the 2020 tax year. The sheer volume of returns and the processing turnaround timelines mean that the CRA does not (and cannot possibly) do a manual review of the information provided in a return prior to issuing the Notice of Assessment. Rather, all returns are scanned by the Agency’s computer system and a Notice of Assessment is then issued.

In addition, the CRA has, for many years, been encouraging taxpayers to fulfill their filing obligations online, through one of the Agency’s electronic filing services. This year, just over 26 million (or 91.5%) of those returns were filed by electronic means. While e-filing means that the turnaround for processing of returns is much quicker, there is, by definition, no paper involved. The Canadian tax system has always been what is termed a “self-assessing” system, in which taxpayers report income earned and claim deductions and credits to which they believe they are entitled. Prior to the advent of e-filing there were means by which the CRA could easily verify claims made by taxpayers. Where returns were paper-filed, taxpayers were usually required to include receipts or other documentation to prove their claims, whatever those claims were for. For the over 90% of returns which were filed this year by electronic means, no such paper trail exists. Consequently, the potential exists for misrepresentation of such claims (or simple reporting errors) on a large scale.

The CRA’s response to that risk is to conduct a variety of review programs, some of them before a Notice of Assessment is issued for the taxpayer’s return, and others after that Notice of Assessment has been issued and sent to the taxpayer. Regardless of the timing, in all cases the purpose of the review is to obtain from the taxpayer the information or documentation needed to support claims for deductions or credits made by the taxpayer on the return. The CRA also administers a Matching Program, in which information reported on the taxpayer’s return (both income and deductions) is compared to information provided to the CRA by third-party sources (like T4s filed by employers or T5s filed by banks or other financial institutions).

Being selected for review under either program means, for the individual taxpayer, the possibility of receiving unexpected correspondence, or a telephone call, from the CRA. Receiving such correspondence or call from the tax authorities is almost guaranteed to unsettle the recipient taxpayer, who may immediately conclude that he or she has done something very wrong and is facing a big tax bill — maybe even a tax audit. However, in the vast majority of cases, the contact is just a routine part of the Agency’s processing review mandate.

A taxpayer whose return is selected as part of a processing review program will be asked to provide verification or proof of deductions or credits claimed on the return -usually by way of receipts or similar documentation. The Matching Program, on the other hand, involves comparison by the CRA of information received from different sources (i.e., matching up the amount of employment income reported by a taxpayer with the amount showing on the T4 slip issued by that taxpayer’s employer). Where the figures match up, there is no need for the further action by the CRA. Where they don’t, the taxpayer will likely be contacted with a request for an explanation of the discrepancy.

Of course, most taxpayers are not concerned so much with the kind or program or programs under which they are contacted as they are with why their return was singled out for review or follow-up. Many taxpayers assume that it’s because there is something wrong on their return, or that the letter is the start of an audit, but that’s not necessarily the case. Returns are selected by the CRA for post-assessment review for a number of reasons. Canada’s tax laws are complex and, over the years, there are areas in which the CRA has determined that taxpayers are more likely to make errors on their return. Consequently, a return which includes claims in those areas (like dependant tax credit claims, claims for medical expenses, moving expenses or tuition tax credits) may have an increased chance of being reviewed. Where there are deductions or credits claimed by the taxpayer which are significantly different or greater than those claimed in previous returns that may attract the CRA’s attention. And, if the taxpayer’s return has been reviewed in previous years and, especially, if an adjustment was made following that review, subsequent reviews may be more likely. Finally, many returns are picked for the processing review programs simply on the basis of random selection.  

Regardless of the reason for the follow-up, the process is the same. Taxpayers whose returns are selected for review will be contacted by the CRA, usually by letter, identifying the deduction or credit for which the CRA wants documentation or the income or deduction amount about which a discrepancy seems to exist. The taxpayer will be given a reasonable period of time — usually a few weeks from the date of the letter — in which to respond to the CRA’s request. That response should be in writing, attaching, if needed, the receipts or other documentation which the CRA has requested. All correspondence from the CRA under its review programs will include a reference number, which is usually found in the top right-hand corner of the CRA’s letter. That number is the means by which the CRA tracks the particular inquiry and should be included in the response sent to the Agency. It’s important to remember, as well, that it’s the taxpayer’s responsibility to provide proof, where requested, of any claims made on a return. Where a taxpayer does not respond to a CRA request or does not provide such proof, the Agency will proceed on the basis that the requested verification or proof does not exist and will assess or reassess accordingly.

Taxpayers who have registered for the CRA’s online tax program My Account (or whose representative is similarly registered for the Agency’s Represent a Client online service) can usually submit required documentation electronically. More information on how to do so can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/review-your-tax-return-cra/submitting-documents-electronically.html.

Whatever the reason a particular return was selected for post-assessment review by the CRA, one thing is certain. A prompt response to the CRA’s enquiry, providing the Agency with the information or documentation requested will, in the vast majority of cases, bring the matter to a speedy conclusion, to the satisfaction of both the Agency and the taxpayer. The CRA website also includes more detailed information on the return review process, which is available at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/review-your-tax-return-cra.html.

According to Statistics Canada there were, as of July 2020, just under 7 million Canadians over the age of 65. While the age at which an individual retires can vary a lot (from “Freedom 55” to those who are still working in their 70s), it’s reasonable to assume that a significant percentage of those 7 million Canadians is fully or partially retired. It’s also a reasonable assumption that retirement looks a lot different for them than it did for their parents.

According to Statistics Canada there were, as of July 2020, just under 7 million Canadians over the age of 65. While the age at which an individual retires can vary a lot (from “Freedom 55” to those who are still working in their 70s), it’s reasonable to assume that a significant percentage of those 7 million Canadians is fully or partially retired. It’s also a reasonable assumption that retirement looks a lot different for them than it did for their parents.

First, as life expectancy continues to increase, current retirees (many of them baby boomers) can expect to spend a greater proportion of their life in retirement than their parents did. According to StatsCan figures, Canadians who are currently age 65 have an average life expectancy of about 20 years. Second, the financial picture for current retirees is likely to be different. Many of their parents benefitted, in retirement, from an employer-sponsored pension plan which ensured a monthly payment of income for the remainder of their lives. Today such pension plans, and the dependable monthly income they provide are, especially for those who spent their working lives in the private sector, more the exception than the rule. Where, however, baby boomers have the “advantage” over their parents in retirement, it’s in the value of their homes. Increases in residential property values over the past quarter century and, especially, the last decade in nearly every market in Canada have meant that for many Canadians who are retired or approaching retirement, their home — or more specifically, the equity they have built up in those homes — is their single most valuable asset.

While having a home which has greatly appreciated in value may provide a sense of security, what it doesn’t provide is an income. Most retired Canadians are eligible to receive Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security payments and, while those two programs provide the “backbone” of retirement income in Canada, they are almost never enough on their own to provide for a comfortable life in retirement. The maximum combined CPP/OAS income for 2021 (not including federal or provincial/territorial supplements) is about $22,000 — not enough to provide more than a very basic standard of living, if that. Most retirees also have private retirement savings, usually through registered retirement savings plans (RRSPs), but once again, the amount saved by many Canadians through RRSPs falls short of what will be needed to generate a reasonable income over their remaining lifetime, especially where a retirement can last for twenty years or more, and when inflation over that time period is taken into account. Many retired Canadians are, in effect, “house rich and cash flow poor”.

In many cases, those approaching retirement opt to sell their current home — sometimes in order to move to a smaller, easier to maintain dwelling and sometimes simply to free up the capital represented by their accumulated equity. However, while selling and downsizing is the option chose by many retirees, not everyone wants to, or can, leave the family home at retirement. There are many situations in which moving and downsizing isn’t desirable or even possible. Especially for those living in smaller centres, where the types of available housing may be limited, downsizing or choosing to rent could mean having to move to another community. Moving and leaving behind friends and other social supports is difficult at any age, and especially difficult when it coincides with a major life change like retirement. As well, it’s increasingly the case, and especially over the past year, that adult children “boomerang” back to the family home after finishing their education. In many cases, such adult children are unable to find long-term employment or remuneration from available employment isn’t sufficient, or sufficiently secure, for them to take on the financial obligations of their own home, even as a tenant. Finally, in the 2021 real estate market many homeowners have found that, while it is relatively easy to sell a property, finding another one to purchase can be a lot more difficult. For a variety reasons, then, it may be that retirees need to stay, or choose to stay, in the current family home. Where that is their choice, and the only factor creating pressure for them to sell that home is the need to free up equity to create or increase cash flow during retirement, there are other options available.

One of those options which is currently receiving a lot of attention is the reverse mortgage. Reverse mortgages are better known, more widely used and have a much longer history in the U.S. than they do in Canada. However, such financial vehicles are now being advertised and promoted on a regular basis in the Canadian media, and it’s likely that by now most Canadians have at least heard of them.

Simply put, taking out a reverse mortgage allows individuals to obtain a sum of money based on the value of their home and the equity which they have accumulated in that home. It’s also possible, using a reverse mortgage, to structure the receipt of funds in different ways. The homeowner can choose to receive a lump sum amount, or can opt to receive a series of payments which will provide a regular income stream, or some combination of the two. And, with a reverse mortgage, no repayment of the funds advanced is required until the death of the homeowner, or until he or she leaves or sells the home.

When described in those terms, a reverse mortgage can sound like the perfect solution to a cash-strapped retiree. The ability to ease cash flow worries while remaining in one’s own home with no requirement to make any payments at all can sound like the best of all possible worlds. And it’s certainly true that taking out a reverse mortgage can make sense for retirees who are house rich but cash or cash-flow poor. But, as with all financial strategies, it’s necessary to understand both the benefits and the potential costs and risks of getting a reverse mortgage.

The potential downsides of a reverse mortgage start with the basic costs of obtaining one. Setting up a reverse mortgage involves a number of costs for the homeowner, including the need to have one’s property appraised, a set-up fee and interest rates which are higher than those charged for traditional mortgages. There will also be closing costs, and the homeowner will be required to obtain independent legal advice, and to pay the cost of obtaining such advice.

Once the reverse mortgage is taken out, interest will, of course, be levied on all amounts provided, and will accumulate from the time the funds are first advanced. Total interest costs can add up very quickly and reach significant amounts by the time the debt is eventually to be repaid, usually out of the proceeds from the sale of the house. And, of course, every dollar of funds advanced and interest levied eats away at the amount of equity which the homeowner has built up, on a dollar for dollar basis.

In order to obtain a reverse mortgage, the homeowner must be at least 55 years of age, and the amount which can be obtained through any reverse mortgage is limited to 55% of the current value of the home. And, where there is already a mortgage or other form of loan secured by the home (as is increasingly the case for retirees), the reverse mortgage lender will require that any such indebtedness first be paid off with the funds received from the reverse mortgage.

The major benefit of a reverse mortgage for many retirees is that they are not required to make payments while living in the home, putting much less of a strain on cash flow. Offsetting that benefit, however, is the fact that the interest rate charged on a reverse mortgage is usually higher than that which would be levied under a traditional mortgage or other similar financial products. As well, under the terms of many such arrangements, a prepayment penalty is levied where the homeowner moves or sells the house within a few years of obtaining the reverse mortgage — the exact time frame will depend on terms provided by the particular lender.

Many retirees who obtain a reverse mortgage do so with the thought that the debt will not need to be repaid until after their death, when the house will be sold. However, it’s necessary to consider the possibility that the homeowner/retiree will need to move from his or her home at some point in the future to an assisted living facility. Care in such facilities does not come cheap, and in many cases the retiree must shoulder all or a part of the cost of such care on an out-of-pocket basis. If the retiree is counting on his or her home equity to pay for such care, it’s necessary to consider the extent to which the reverse mortgage will reduce that accumulated home equity and consequently the funds available to pay for needed care.

For those who are considering whether a reverse mortgage is the right solution for them in retirement, Canada’s Financial Consumer Agency suggests getting answers from prospective lenders to the following questions:

• What are all the fees?
• Are there any penalties if you sell your home within a certain period of time?
• If you move or die, how much time will you or your estate have to pay off the loan’s balance?
• When you die, what happens if it takes your estate longer than the stated time period to fully repay the loan?
• What happens if the amount of the loan ends up being higher than your home’s value when it is time to pay the loan back?

More information on reverse mortgages in general can be found on the FCAC website at https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/mortgages/reverse-mortgages.html.

In this year’s Budget, the federal government announced the creation of a program — the First-time Home Buyers’ Incentive, or FTHBI, to provide assistance to individuals seeking to enter the housing market. Under that FTHBI, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) (an agency of the federal government) will add a specified amount to the down payment made on a home purchase by a qualifying buyer, with the effect of reducing the amount of the monthly mortgage payment required of the new home owner.

In this year’s Budget, the federal government announced the creation of a program — the First-time Home Buyers’ Incentive, or FTHBI, to provide assistance to individuals seeking to enter the housing market. Under that FTHBI, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) (an agency of the federal government) will add a specified amount to the down payment made on a home purchase by a qualifying buyer, with the effect of reducing the amount of the monthly mortgage payment required of the new home owner.

When the program was announced as part of the Budget, few details were provided, and those details have been released on a piecemeal basis throughout the year. The goal was to launch the FTHBI on September 2, 2019, although the program website indicated that such launch date was contingent on “unforeseen circumstances”.

The FTBHI website now indicates that the program will launch as scheduled on September 2. The federal government has set up an information line for the program, which is now live, and the toll-free number for that information line is 1-877-884-2642. As well, applications for the FTHBI should be available on the program website on September 2. Finally, the website has been updated to include a “live training” component for which interested individuals can register, and that registration site is available at http://www.cvent.com/events/first-time-home-buyer-incentive-live-training/event-summary-f4e28738d84b4077acbadb261c42f3f8.aspx.

The main features of the FTHBI have not changed, and remain as follows:

To qualify for the program, applicants must generally be Canadian residents who have not owned and occupied a home within the previous four years. Where an applicant qualifies for the FTHBI, CMHC will provide additional funds to augment the applicant’s existing down payment. The amount of those additional funds is 5% or 10% of the purchase price, depending on the type of property purchased. Specifically, the incentive by property type is:

• 5% for a first-time buyer’s purchase of an existing resale home; or
• 5% for a first-time buyer’s purchase of a new or re-sale mobile/manufactured home; or
• 5% or 10% of a first-time buyer’s purchase of a newly constructed home.

The total borrowing amount (first mortgage plus incentive amount) is capped at four times the applicant’s annual income. Since the program is available only to those having an annual income of up to $120,000, the maximum total borrowing amount would therefore be $480,000.

Any funds advanced under the program will become a second mortgage on the property. No interest is charged and no regular payments (i.e., mortgage payments) are required on such funds.

Participants in the program are required to repay the incentive amount after 25 years, or when the property is sold, whichever is earlier. Participants can also repay the incentive amount earlier without incurring any pre-payment penalty.

More details of the FTHBI including, as of September 2, the application form, can be found on the FTHBI website at https://www.placetocallhome.ca/fthbi/first-time-homebuyer-incentive.

Raising children is expensive and, in recognition of that fact, the federal government has, for more than half a century, provided financial assistance to parents to help with those costs. That assistance has ranged from monthly Family Allowance payments received by families during the 1960s to its current iteration, the Canada Child Benefit.

Raising children is expensive and, in recognition of that fact, the federal government has, for more than half a century, provided financial assistance to parents to help with those costs. That assistance has ranged from monthly Family Allowance payments received by families during the 1960s to its current iteration, the Canada Child Benefit.

While all of the various programs providing financial assistance to families have had the same underlying purpose, the structure of those programs has evolved over the years. Generally, those changes have involved a move to a more means-tested benefit system and have, as well, recognized the additional costs which must be incurred by parents who are raising a child who has a disability. The current rules for the Canada Child Benefit (CCB) program are as follows.

The CCB is a tax-free monthly amount paid to parents of children under the age of 18.  Each “benefit year” runs from July 1 to June 30, and eligibility for and the amount of benefit for which a particular family may qualify is based on both current family size, and family income for the previous year. CCB amounts are paid around the 20^th of each month.

For instance, the current benefit year started on July 1, 2019 and will run until June 30, 2020. The amount of benefit payable to a particular family during the current benefit year is based, in part, on the income received by the family during the 2018 tax year. It is therefore necessary that the parents in a family have filed tax returns for the 2018 tax year, as the Canada Revenue Agency uses the figures in those returns to determine the amount of benefit for which the family is eligible. More specifically, the CRA uses the figure found on line 236 of the 2018 tax return as the income figure which determines the amount of CCB which a family can receive between July 2019 and June 2020. Where no tax returns for the previous year have been filed, no benefits can or will be paid during the current benefit year.

For a family which has a child or children under the age of 18, the following benefit amounts are payable during the current (July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020).

• $6,639 per year ($553.25 per month) for each eligible child under the age of six, and
• $5,602 per year ($466.83 per month) for each eligible child aged 6 to 17.

The amounts set out above represent the basic benefit payable for each eligible child. Where, however, family net income for the previous year is more than $31,120, the amount of benefits payable are reduced. The benefit reduction for families of different sizes is as follows.

• For families with one eligible child, the reduction is 7% of the amount of family net income between $31,120 and $67,426, plus 3.2% of the amount of family net income over $67,426.
• For families with two eligible children: the reduction is 13.5% of the amount of family net income between $31,120 and $67,426, plus 5.7% of the amount of family net income over $67,426.
• For families with three eligible children: the reduction is 19% of the amount of family net income between $31,120 and $67,426, plus 8% of the amount of family net income over $67,426.
• For families with four or more eligible children: the reduction is 23% of the amount of family net income between $31,120 and $67,426, plus 9.5% of the amount of family net income over $67,426.

Families raising a child or children who have a disability inevitably face additional costs and such families are consequently eligible for additional amounts in the form of the Child Disability Benefit.

The basic requirements for the child disability benefit are the same as for the CCB, in that the child must be under the age of 18 and living with a parent. However, for purposes of the CDB an additional requirement is imposed, in that the child in respect of whom the CDB is claimed must be eligible for the federal disability tax credit. A child is eligible for that disability tax credit when a medical practitioner certifies, on Form T2201, Disability Tax Credit Certificate, that the child has a severe and prolonged impairment in physical or mental functions, and the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) approves that certification.

Eligible families can, during the current (July 2019 to June 2020) benefit year, receive (in addition to the basic CCB) up to $2,832 ($236.00 per month) for each child who is eligible for the disability tax credit.

As is the case with the basic CCB, the amount of CDB which may be received is reduced as family income increases, as follows.

• For families with one child eligible for the CDB, the reduction is 3.2% of the amount of family net income over $67,426.
• For families with two or more children eligible for the CDB, the reduction is 5.7% of the amount of family net income over $67,426.

When a child is born, families must make an application for the CCB, and the process for doing so is outlined on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/child-family-benefits/canada-child-benefit-overview/canada-child-benefit-apply.html. Once the initial application is filed and approved, parents need only to file a tax return each year in order to continue receiving that benefit.

The CRA provides comprehensive information on both the CCB and the CDB on its website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/child-family-benefits/canada-child-benefit-overview.html and also publishes a guide to that program, which can be found on the same website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/publications/t4114.html.

An increasing number of Canada’s baby boomers are moving into retirement with each passing year and, for most of those baby boomers, retirement looks a lot different than it did for their parents. First of all, as life expectancy continues to increase, baby boomers can expect to spend a greater proportion of their life in retirement than their parents did. Second, the financial picture for baby boomers is likely to be different. Many of their parents benefitted, in retirement, from an employer sponsored pension plan, which ensured a monthly payment of income for the remainder of their lives. Now, such pension plans and the dependable monthly income they provide are, especially for boomers who spent their working lives in the private sector, more the exception than the rule. Where, however, baby boomers have the “advantage” over their parents in retirement, it’s in the value of their homes. Increases in residential property values over the past quarter century in nearly every market in Canada have meant that for many Canadians who are retired or approaching retirement, their homes – or more specifically, the equity they have built up in those homes – represents their single most valuable asset.

An increasing number of Canada’s baby boomers are moving into retirement with each passing year and, for most of those baby boomers, retirement looks a lot different than it did for their parents. First of all, as life expectancy continues to increase, baby boomers can expect to spend a greater proportion of their life in retirement than their parents did. Second, the financial picture for baby boomers is likely to be different. Many of their parents benefitted, in retirement, from an employer sponsored pension plan, which ensured a monthly payment of income for the remainder of their lives. Now, such pension plans and the dependable monthly income they provide are, especially for boomers who spent their working lives in the private sector, more the exception than the rule. Where, however, baby boomers have the “advantage” over their parents in retirement, it’s in the value of their homes. Increases in residential property values over the past quarter century in nearly every market in Canada have meant that for many Canadians who are retired or approaching retirement, their homes – or more specifically, the equity they have built up in those homes – represents their single most valuable asset.

While having a home which has greatly appreciated in value may provide a sense of security, what it doesn’t provide is an income. Most retired Canadians are eligible to receive Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security payments and, while those two programs provide the “backbone” of retirement income in Canada, they are almost never enough on their own to provide for a comfortable standard of living in retirement. Most retirees also have private retirement savings, usually through registered retirement savings plans (RRSPs), but once again, the amount saved by many Canadians through RRSPs falls short of what will be needed to generate a reasonable income over their remaining lifetime, especially where a retirement can last for twenty or more years, and when inflation over that time period is taken into account. Many retired Canadians are, in effect, “house rich and cash poor”.

In many cases, those approaching retirement opt to sell their current home – sometimes in order to move to a smaller, easier to maintain dwelling and sometimes simply to free up the capital represented by their accumulated equity.  However, while selling and downsizing is the option chose by many retirees, not everyone wants to leave the family home at retirement. There are many situations in which moving and downsizing isn’t desirable or even possible. Especially for those living in smaller centres, where the types of available housing may be limited, downsizing or choosing to rent could mean having to move to another community. Moving and leaving behind friends and other social supports is difficult at any age, and especially difficult when it coincides with a major life change like retirement. As well, it’s increasingly the case that adult children “boomerang” back to the family home after finishing their education. In many cases, such adult children are unable to find long-term employment or remuneration from available employment isn’t sufficient, or sufficiently secure, for them to take on the financial obligations of having their own home, even as a tenant. For a variety reasons, then, it may be that retirees need to stay, or choose to stay, in the current family home. Where that is their choice, and the only factor creating pressure for them to sell that home is the need to free up equity to create or increase cash flow during retirement, there are other options available.

One of those options which is currently receiving a lot of attention is the reverse mortgage. Reverse mortgages are better known, more widely used and have a much longer history in the U.S. than they do in Canada. However, such financial vehicles are now being advertised and promoted on a regular basis in the Canadian media, and it’s likely that by now most Canadians have at least heard of them.

Simply put, taking out a reverse mortgage allows qualifying homeowners to obtain a sum of money based on the value of their home and the equity which they have accumulated in that home without selling that home. It’s also possible, using a reverse mortgage, to structure the receipt of funds in different ways. The homeowner can choose to receive a lump sum amount or can opt to receive a series of payments which will provide a regular income stream, or some combination of the two. And, with a reverse mortgage, no repayment of the funds advanced is required until the homeowner moves out of or sells the home.

When described in those terms, a reverse mortgage can sound like the perfect solution to a cash-strapped retiree. The ability to ease cash flow worries while remaining in one’s own home with no requirement to make any payments at all can sound like the best of all possible worlds. And it’s certainly true that taking out a reverse mortgage can make sense for retirees who are house rich but cash or cash-flow poor. But, as with all financial tools, it’s necessary to understand both the benefits and the potential costs and risks of getting a reverse mortgage.

The potential downsides of a reverse mortgage start with the basic costs of obtaining one. Setting up a reverse mortgage involves a number of costs for the homeowner, including the need to have one’s property appraised. There will also be closing costs, and the homeowner will be required to obtain independent legal advice, and to pay the cost of obtaining such advice.

Once the reverse mortgage is taken out, interest will, of course, be levied on all amounts provided, and will accumulate from the time the funds are first advanced.  Total interest costs can add up very quickly and reach significant amounts by the time the debt is eventually to be repaid, usually out of the proceeds from the sale of the house.  And, of course, every dollar of funds advanced and interest levied reduces the amount of equity which the homeowner has built up, on a dollar for dollar basis.

In order to obtain a reverse mortgage, the homeowner must be at least 55 years of age. And, where there is already a mortgage or other form of loan secured by the home (as is increasingly the case for retirees), the reverse mortgage lender will require that any such indebtedness first be paid off with the funds received from the reverse mortgage.

The major benefits of a reverse mortgage for many retirees is that amounts received are not subject to tax and do not affect the borrower’s eligibility for means-tested government benefits like Old Age Security or the Guaranteed Income Supplement. And, of course, the homeowner is not required to make payments while living in the home, putting much less of a strain on cash flow. Offsetting that benefit, however, is the fact that the interest rate charged on a reverse mortgage is usually higher than that which would be levied under a traditional mortgage or other similar financial products. As well, under the terms of many such arrangements, a prepayment penalty is levied where the homeowner moves or sells the house within three years of obtaining the reverse mortgage.

Many retirees who obtain a reverse mortgage do so with the thought that the debt will not need to be repaid until after their death, when the house will be sold. However, it’s necessary to consider the possibility that the homeowner/retiree will need to move from his or her home at some point in the future to an assisted living facility. Care in such facilities does not come cheap, and in many cases the retiree must shoulder all or a part of the cost of such care on an out-of-pocket basis. If the retiree is counting on his or her home equity to pay for such care, it’s necessary to consider the extent to which the reverse mortgage will reduce that accumulated home equity and consequently the funds available to pay for needed care.

For those who are considering whether a reverse mortgage is the right solution for them in retirement, Canada’s Financial Consumer Agency suggests getting answers from prospective lenders to the following questions:

• What are all the fees?
• Are there any penalties if you sell your home within a certain period of time?
• If you move or die, how much time will you or your estate have to pay off the loan’s balance?
• When you die, what happens if it takes your estate longer than the stated time period to fully repay the loan?
• What happens if the amount of the loan ends up being higher than your home’s value when it is time to pay the loan back?

More information on reverse mortgages in general can be found on the FCAC website at https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/mortgages/reverse-mortgages.html.

While most Canadians turn their mind to taxes only in the spring when the annual return must be filed (and then only reluctantly), taxes are a year-round business for the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). The CRA is busy processing and issuing Notices of Assessment for individual tax returns during the February to June filing season - this year the Agency had, by the third week of July, received and processed just under 30 million individual income tax returns filed for the 2018 tax year.

While most Canadians turn their mind to taxes only in the spring when the annual return must be filed (and then only reluctantly), taxes are a year-round business for the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). The CRA is busy processing and issuing Notices of Assessment for individual tax returns during the February to June filing season - this year the Agency had, by the third week of July, received and processed just under 30 million individual income tax returns filed for the 2018 tax year.

That volume of returns and the Agency’s self-imposed processing turnaround goals (two to six weeks, depending on the filing method) mean that the CRA cannot possibly do an in-depth review of each return filed prior to issuing the Notice of Assessment.

As well, for many years the CRA has been encouraging taxpayers to fulfill their filing obligations on-line, through one of the Agency’s e-filing services. That effort has clearly succeeded, as just under 26 million (or 89%) of the returns filed this year were filed by electronic means. While e-filing means that the turnaround for processing of returns is much quicker, there is, by definition, no paper involved. The Canadian tax system has always been what is termed a “self-assessing” system, in which taxpayers report income earned and claim deductions and credits to which they believe they are entitled. Prior to the advent of e-filing there were means by which the CRA could easily verify claims made by taxpayers. Where returns were paper-filed, taxpayers were usually required to include receipts or other documentation to prove their claims, whatever those claims were for. For the 89% of returns which were filed this year by electronic means, no such paper trail exists. Consequently, the potential exists for misrepresentation of such claims (or simple reporting errors) on a large scale. The CRA’s response to that risk is to carry out a post-assessment review process, in which the Agency asks taxpayers to back up or verify claims for credits or deductions which were made on the return filed this past spring.

At this time of year there are two components to the review process – the Processing Review Program and the Matching Program. The former is a review of various deductions or credits claimed on returns, while the latter compares information included on the taxpayer’s return with information provided to the CRA by third-party sources, like T4s filed by employers or T5s filed by banks or other financial institutions.

Being selected for review under either program means, for the individual taxpayer, the possibility of receiving unexpected correspondence from the CRA. Receiving such correspondence from the tax authorities is almost guaranteed to unsettle the recipient taxpayer, even where there’s no reason to believe that anything is wrong. However, it’s an experience which will be shared this summer and fall by millions of Canadian taxpayers.

While the two programs are carried out more or less concurrently, they are quite different. The Processing Review Program asks the taxpayer to provide verification or proof of deductions or credits claimed on the return, while the Matching Program deals with discrepancies between the information on the taxpayer’s return and information filed by third parties with respect to the taxpayer’s income or deductions for the year.

Of course, most taxpayers are not concerned so much with the kind or program or programs under which they are contacted as they are with why their return was singled out for review. Many taxpayers assume that it’s because there is something wrong on their return, or that the letter is a precursor to an audit, but that’s not necessarily the case. Returns are selected by the CRA for post-assessment review for a number of reasons. Under the Matching Program, where a taxpayer has filed a return containing information which does not agree with the corresponding information filed by, for instance, his or her employer, it’s likely that the CRA will want to follow up to find out the reason for the discrepancy. As well, Canada’s tax laws are complex and, over the years, there are areas in which the CRA has determined that taxpayers are more likely to make errors on their return. Consequently, a return which includes claims in those areas (like medical expenses, support payments and legal fees) may have an increased chance of being reviewed. Where there are deductions or credits claimed by the taxpayer which are significantly different or greater than those claimed in previous returns that may attract the CRA’s attention. And, if the taxpayer’s return has been reviewed in previous years and, especially, if an adjustment was made following that review, subsequent reviews may be more likely. Finally, many returns are picked for post-assessment review simply on a random basis.  

Regardless of the reason for the follow-up, the process is the same. Taxpayers whose returns are selected for review will receive a letter from the CRA, identifying the deduction or credit for which the CRA wants documentation or the income or deduction amount about which a discrepancy seems to exist. The taxpayer will be given a reasonable period of time – usually a few weeks from the date of the letter – in which to respond to the CRA’s request. That response should be in writing, attaching, if needed, the receipts or other documentation which the CRA has requested. All correspondence from the CRA under its review programs will include a reference number, which is usually found in the top right-hand corner of the CRA’s letter. That number is the means by which the CRA tracks the particular inquiry and should be included in the response sent to the Agency. It’s important to remember, as well, that it’s the taxpayer’s responsibility to provide proof, where requested, of any claims made on a return. Where a taxpayer does not respond to a CRA request and does not provide such proof, the Agency will proceed on the basis that the requested verification or proof does not exist and will reassess accordingly.

Taxpayers who have registered for the CRA’s online tax program My Account (or whose representative is similarly registered for the Agency’s Represent a Client online service) can submit required documentation electronically. More information on how to do so can be found on the CRA website at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rvws/sbmttng-eng.html.

Regardless of the means by which requested documents are submitted, it’s possible that the CRA will send a follow-up letter, or the taxpayer may be contacted by telephone, with a request from the Agency for more information.

Whatever the reason a particular return was selected for post-assessment review by the CRA, one thing is certain. A prompt response to the CRA’s enquiry, providing the Agency with the information or documentation requested will, in the vast majority of cases, bring the matter to a speedy conclusion, to the satisfaction of both the Agency and the taxpayer.

As the summer starts to wind down, both students returning to their colleges and universities and those just starting their post-secondary education must focus on the details of the upcoming school year – finding a place to live, choosing courses, and perhaps most important, arranging payment of tuition and other education-related bills.

As the summer starts to wind down, both students returning to their colleges and universities and those just starting their post-secondary education must focus on the details of the upcoming school year – finding a place to live, choosing courses, and perhaps most important, arranging payment of tuition and other education-related bills.

For many years post-secondary students (and their parents) have benefited from an “assist” through our tax system, which provides deductions and credits for some of the many costs associated with obtaining a post-secondary education. Unfortunately, some of the kinds of assistance which could be obtained through our tax system to help offset those costs has been eliminated in the past few years, but the following credits and deductions remain available to be claimed by post-secondary students and, in some cases, their spouses, parents, and grandparents.

Tuition fees

The good news is that a tax credit continues to be available for the single largest cost associated with post-secondary education — the cost of tuition. Any student who incurs more than $100 in tuition costs at an eligible post-secondary institution (which would include most Canadian universities and colleges) can still claim a non-refundable federal tax credit of 15% of such tuition costs. The provinces and territories also provide students with an equivalent provincial or territorial credit, with the rate of such credit differing by jurisdiction.

The charges imposed on post-secondary students under the heading of “tuition” include myriad costs which may differ, depending on the particular program, and not all of those costs will qualify as “tuition” for purposes of the tuition tax credit. The following specific amounts do, however, constitute eligible tuition fees for purposes of that credit:

• admission fees;
• charges for use of library or laboratory facilities;
• exemption fees;
• examination fees (including re-reading charges) that are integral to a program of study;
• application fees (but only if the student subsequently enrolls in the institution);
• confirmation fees;
• charges for a certificate, diploma, or degree;
• membership or seminar fees that are specifically related to an academic program and its administration;
• mandatory computer service fees; and
• academic fees. 

The following charges do not, however, constitute tuition fees for purposes of the credit:

• extracurricular student social activities;
• medical expenses;
• transportation and parking;
• board and lodging;
• goods of enduring value that are to be retained by students (such as a microscope, uniform, gown, or computer);
• initiation fees or entrance fees to professional organizations including examination fees or other fees (such as evaluation fees) that are not integral to a program of study at an eligible educational institution;
• administrative penalties incurred when a student withdraws from a program or an institution;
• the cost of books (other than books, compact discs, or similar material included in the cost of a correspondence course when the student is enrolled in such a course given by an eligible educational institution in Canada); and
• courses taken for purposes of academic upgrading to allow entry into a university or college program. These courses would usually not qualify for the tuition tax credit as they are not considered to be at the post-secondary school level.

Certain ancillary fees and charges, such as health services fees and athletic fees, may also be eligible tuition fees. However, such fees and charges are limited to $250 unless the fees are required to be paid by all full-time or part-time students.

At both the federal and provincial levels, the credit acts to reduce tax otherwise payable. Where, as is often the case, a student doesn’t have tax payable for the year, credits earned can be carried forward and claimed by the student in any future tax year or transferred (within limits) in the current year to be claimed by a spouse, parent, or grandparent.

Personal and living expenses

While the cost of living, whether in a student residence or off campus, can be significant, there is no federal deduction or credit provided for such expenses. Such costs are characterized as personal and living expenses, for which no tax deduction or credit has ever been allowed.

Student debt

Most post-secondary students in Canada must incur some amount of debt in order to complete their education, and repayment of that debt is typically not required until after graduation. Once repayment starts, a tax credit can be claimed for the amount of interest being paid on such debt, in some circumstances.

Students who are still in school and arranging for loans to finance their education should be mindful of the rules which govern that student loan interest tax credit, since decisions made while still in school with respect to how post-secondary education will be financed can have tax repercussions down the road, after graduation. That’s because while all interest paid on a qualifying student loan is eligible for the credit, only some types of student borrowing will qualify. Specifically, only interest paid on government-sponsored (federal or provincial) student loans will be eligible for the credit. Interest paid on loans of any kind from any financial institution will not.

It’s not uncommon (especially for students in professional programs, like law or medicine) to be offered lines of credit by a financial institution, often at advantageous or preferential interest rates. As well, financial institutions sometimes offer, once a student has graduated and begun to repay a government-sponsored student loan, to consolidate that student loan with other kinds of debt, also at advantageous interest rates. However, it should be kept in mind that interest paid on that line of credit (or any other kind of borrowing from a financial institution to finance education costs) will never be eligible for the student loan interest tax credit.

As explained in the Canada Revenue Agency publication on the subject: “[I]f you renegotiated your student loan with a bank or another financial institution, or included it in an arrangement to consolidate your loans, you cannot claim this interest amount”. In other words, where a government student loan is combined with other debt and consolidated into a borrowing of any kind from a financial institution, the interest on that government student loan is no longer eligible for the student loan interest tax credit.

Students who are contemplating borrowing from a financial institution rather than getting a government student loan (or considering a consolidation loan which incorporates that student loan amount) must remember, in evaluating the benefit of any preferential interest rate offered by a financial institution, to take into account the loss of the student loan interest tax credit on that borrowing in future years.

Credits withdrawn but available for carryforward

Formerly, post-secondary students were able to claim an education tax credit and the textbook tax credit. Both such credits were, unfortunately, eliminated as of the end of 2016. It’s important to remember, however, that where education and textbook credits were earned but not claimed in years before 2017 they are still available to be claimed by the student as carryover credits in any subsequent tax year.

Other credits and deductions

There are, as well, a number of credits and deductions which, while not specifically education-related, are frequently claimed by post-secondary students (for instance, deductions for moving costs). The Canada Revenue Agency publishes a very useful guide which summarizes most of the rules around income and deductions which may apply to post-secondary students. The current version of that guide, entitled Students and Income Tax, is available on the CRA website at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/tg/p105/README.html.

Sometime during the month of July several thousand Canadians will receive an unexpected, unfamiliar, and probably unwelcome piece of correspondence from the Canada Revenue Agency. That correspondence will be an Instalment Reminder advising the recipient of tax payments to be made in September and December of this year.

Sometime during the month of July several thousand Canadians will receive an unexpected, unfamiliar, and probably unwelcome piece of correspondence from the Canada Revenue Agency. That correspondence will be an Instalment Reminder advising the recipient of tax payments to be made in September and December of this year.

The reason such Reminders are sent during July has to do with how tax is collected in Canada, and when tax returns are filed. Most Canadians, and certainly all Canadians who are employees, have income taxes deducted (or withheld) from each paycheque and remitted to the federal government on their behalf. They then file a tax return for the year the following spring: if they have overpaid taxes they receive a refund and, where taxes were underpaid, they will have a balance owing.

Where, however, a taxpayer receives income from which no tax has been deducted or withheld, the federal government must have another way of collecting the tax owed on such income amounts. And, while it’s possible that such taxpayers could simply pay the full amount of taxes owed for the year when filing the annual tax return, it’s not likely that many individuals would have the financial wherewithal to do so. And, in addition, the federal government is not prepared to wait until then to receive tax amounts owed for the entire year. Instead the instalment payment system is the means by which the Canada Revenue Agency collects such tax amounts, on a quarterly basis, throughout the year.

More technically, an individual is subject to the instalment payment requirement where his or her tax owed on filing for the current year and either of the two previous years is more than $3,000. In other words, the amount of tax collected from that individual throughout the year was at least $3,000 less than the actual tax owed for that year. And, since Canadian tax returns are filed in the spring, the assessment of those returns allows the Canada Revenue Agency to identify individuals who will be subject to the instalment requirement for the current year – and it is those individuals who receive an instalment reminder this month.

Regardless of the type or amount of his or her income for the year, or the amount of any instalment payments, the options available to the recipient of an Instalment Reminder are the same. On its website, the CRA describes the three different payment options open to taxpayers, and outlines the benefits and risks of each option in different circumstances, as follows:

No-calculation option

This option is best for you if your income, deductions, and credits stay about the same from year to year.

We will give the no-calculation option amount on the instalment reminders that we will send you. We determine the amount of your instalment payments based on the information in your latest assessed tax return.

Prior-year option

This option is best for you if your 2019 income, deductions, and credits will be similar to your 2018 amount but significantly different from those in 2017.

You determine the amount of your instalment payments based on the information from your tax return for the 2018 tax year. Use the Calculation chart for instalment payments for 2019 to help you calculate your total instalment amount due.

If you use the prior-year option and make the payments in full by their 2019 due dates, we will not charge instalment interest or a penalty unless the total instalment amount due you have calculated is too low. For more information, see Instalment interest and penalty charges.

Current-year option

This option is best for you if your 2019 income, deductions, and credits will be significantly different from those in 2018 and 2017.

You determine the amount of your instalment payments based on your estimated current-year (2019) net tax owing, any CPP contributions payable, and any voluntary EI premiums. Use the Calculation chart for instalment payments for 2019 to help you calculate your total instalment amount due.

If you use the current-year option and make the payments in full by their 2019 due dates, we will not charge instalment interest or a penalty unless the amounts you estimated when calculating your total instalment amount due were too low. For more information, see Instalment interest and penalty charges.”

Under any of these options, the dates for payment and the percentage amounts payable are summarized as follows:

No-calculation option – Pay the amount shown in box 2 of the Instalment Reminder for September 15 and December 15.

Prior-year option – Determine net taxes owed for 2018. Pay 75% of the total on September 15 and 25% on December 15.

Current-year option – Estimate current-year 2019 net tax owing. Pay 75% of the total on September 15 and 25% on December 15.

The first option – paying the amounts identified on the Instalment Reminder by the September and December deadlines – is the easiest and simplest choice. If the amounts paid represent an overpayment of taxes for 2019, the taxpayer will receive a refund of that overpayment on filing in the spring of 2020. If the amounts identified turn out be an underpayment of tax (in that they are insufficient to cover total tax owed for the year), the taxpayer will have a balance owing on filing. In no case, however, will the taxpayer be charged any interest on insufficient instalment payments.

Taxpayers who don’t wish to pay the amounts specified in the Instalment Reminder (perhaps because they believe that such amounts don’t accurately reflect their tax payable for the year) can use options 2 or 3. The only risk to doing so is that, should the instalments paid be insufficient to cover tax liability for the year, interest will be levied on the underpayments.

More details on the options available to taxpayers who receive an Instalment Reminder, and information on the instalment payment system generally, can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/making-payments-individuals/paying-your-income-tax-instalments.html.

No one particularly likes receiving an Instalment Reminder and everyone dislikes paying taxes. It’s worth remembering, however, that the payment of income tax isn’t a choice – the only real choice is whether to pay now, or pay later. And, for most Canadians, paying taxes on a regular basis throughout the year is much more manageable than being faced with a huge tax bill when filing their return for 2019 next spring.

A generation ago, retirement was an event. Typically, an individual would leave the work force completely at age 65 and begin collecting Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security benefits along with, in many cases, a pension from an employer-sponsored registered pension plan.

A generation ago, retirement was an event. Typically, an individual would leave the work force completely at age 65 and begin collecting Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security benefits along with, in many cases, a pension from an employer-sponsored registered pension plan.

Much has changed in the intervening decades and one of those changes is that retirement is now more often a process than an event. Many of those who have reached the traditional retirement age of 65 are receiving CPP and OAS benefits while at the same time continuing to participate in the work force. Some stay at an existing full-time job but more commonly, such individuals take up part-time employment, out of financial need or simply from a desire to stay active and engaged in the work force.

At one time, beginning to receive CPP retirement benefits meant that, even for those who chose to remain in the work force, no further CPP contributions were allowed. In 2012 that changed, with the introduction of the CPP Post-Retirement Benefit. The availability of that benefit means that those who are aged 65 to 70 and continue to work while receiving CPP retirement benefits must decide whether or not to continue making CPP contributions. Such individuals who make the choice to continue to contribute to the Canada Pension Plan will see an increase in the amount of CPP retirement benefit they received each month. That increase is the CPP post-retirement benefit or PRB.

The rules governing the PRB differ, depending on the age of the taxpayer. In a nutshell, an individual who has chosen to begin receiving the CPP retirement benefit but who continues to work will be subject to the following rules:

• Individuals who are 60 to 65 years of age and continue to work are required to continue making CPP contributions.
• Individuals who are 65 to 70 years of age and continue to work can choose not to make CPP contributions. To stop contributing, such an individual must fill out Form CPT30, Election to stop contributing to the Canada Pension Plan, or revocation of a prior election. A copy of that form must be given to the individual’s employer and the original sent to the Canada Revenue Agency. An individual who has more than one employer must make the same choice (to continue to contribute or to cease contributions) for all employers and must provide a copy of the CPT30 form to each. A decision to stop contributing can be changed, and contributions resumed, but only one change can be made per calendar year. To make that change, the individual must complete section D of CRA Form CPT30, give one copy of the form to his or her employer, and send the original to CRA

• Individuals who are over the age of 70 and are still working cannot contribute to the CPP.

Overall, the effect of the rules is that CPP retirement benefit recipients who are still working and who are under aged 65, as well as those who are between 65 and 70 and choose not to opt out, will continue to make contributions to the CPP system and will continue therefore to earn new credits under that system. As a result, the amount of CPP retirement benefits which they are entitled to will increase with each year’s contributions.

Where an individual makes CPP contributions while working and receiving CPP retirement benefits, the amount of any CPP post-retirement benefit earned will automatically be calculated by the federal government (no application is required), and the individual will be advised of any increase in that monthly CPP retirement benefit each year. The PRB will be paid to that individual automatically the year after the contributions are made, effective January 1^st of that year. Since the federal government doesn’t have all of the information needed to make such calculations until T4s and T4 summaries are filed by the employer by the end of February, the first PRB payment is usually made in a lump sum amount, in the month of April. That lump sum amount represents the PRB payable from January to April. Thereafter, the PRB is paid monthly and combined with the individual’s usual CPP retirement benefit in a single payment.

While the rules governing the PRB can seem complex (and certainly the actuarial calculations are), the individual doesn’t have to concern him or herself with those technical details. For CPP retirement benefit recipients who are under age 65 or over 70, there is no decision to be made. For the former, CPP contributions will be automatically deducted from their paycheques and for the latter, no such contributions are allowed.

Individuals in the middle group – aged 65 to 70 will need to make a decision about whether it makes sense, in their individual circumstances, to continue making contributions to the CPP. Some assistance in making that decision is provided on the federal government website at https://www.canada.ca/en/services/benefits/publicpensions/cpp/cpp-post-retirement/benefit-amount.html, which shows the calculations which would apply for individuals of different ages and income levels.

More information on the PRB generally is also available on that website at https://www.canada.ca/en/services/benefits/publicpensions/cpp/cpp-post-retirement.html.

The most recent estimate issued by the Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA) is that close to half a million homes will be sold in Canada during 2019. Since that number doesn’t include moves from one rental accommodation to another, or the twice-a-year post-secondary student migration from home to school (and back again), it’s safe to say that well over a half a million Canadians and Canadian families will be faced with the need to plan, organize and pay for some kind of move at least once this year.

The most recent estimate issued by the Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA) is that close to half a million homes will be sold in Canada during 2019. Since that number doesn’t include moves from one rental accommodation to another, or the twice-a-year post-secondary student migration from home to school (and back again), it’s safe to say that well over a half a million Canadians and Canadian families will be faced with the need to plan, organize and pay for some kind of move at least once this year.

Individuals and families move for any number of reasons, and those moves can be local or long distance. Whatever the reason for the move, or the distance to the new location, all moves have two things in common – stress and cost. Even where the move is a desired one, moving inevitably means upheaval of one’s life and, where the move is for a long distance, or involves a large family home, the costs can be very significant. There is not much that can diminish the stress of moving, but the associated costs can be offset somewhat by a tax deduction which may be claimed for many of those costs.

While it’s common to refer simply to the “moving expense deduction”, as though it were available in all circumstances, the fact is that there is no general deduction available for moving costs. In order to be tax deductible, such moving costs must be incurred in specific and relatively narrow circumstances. Our tax system allows taxpayers to claim a deduction only where the move is made to get the taxpayer closer to his or her new place of work, whether that work is a transfer, a new job, or self-employment. Specifically, moving expenses can be deducted where the move is made to bring the taxpayer at least 40 kilometres closer to his or her new place of work. That requirement is satisfied where, for instance, a taxpayer moves from Edmonton to Vancouver to take a new job. It’s also met where a taxpayer is transferred by his or her employer to another job in a different location and the taxpayer’s move will bring him or her at least 40 kilometres closer to the new work location. It’s not met where an individual or family move up the property ladder by selling and purchasing a new home in the same town or city, without any change in work location.

It’s not, as well, actually necessary to be a homeowner in order to claim moving expenses. The list of moving related expenses which may be deducted is basically the same for everyone – homeowner or tenant - who meets the 40 kilometre requirement. Students who are moving to take a summer job (even if that move is back to the family home) can also make a claim for moving expenses where that move meets the 40 kilometre requirement.

It's important to remember, however, that even where the 40 kilometre requirement is met, it’s possible to deduct moving costs only from employment or self-employment (business) income - there is no deduction possible from other types of income, like investment income or employment insurance benefits.

The general rule is that a taxpayer can claim reasonable amounts that were paid for moving him or herself, family members and household effects. In all cases, the moving expenses must be deducted from employment or self-employment income earned at the new location. Where the move takes place later in the year, and moving costs are significant, it’s possible that the amount of income earned at the new location in the year of the move will be less than deductible moving expenses incurred. In such instances, those expenses can be carried over and deducted from income earned at the new location in any future year.

Within the general rule, there are a number of specific inclusions, exclusions and limitations. The following is a list of expenses which can be claimed by the taxpayer without specific dollar figure restrictions (but subject, as always, to the overriding requirement of “reasonableness”).

• traveling expenses, including vehicle expenses, meals and accommodation, to move the taxpayer and members of his or her family to their new residence (note that not all members of the household have to travel together or at the same time);
• transportation and storage costs (such as packing, hauling, movers, in-transit storage, and insurance) for household effects, including such items as boats and trailers;
• costs for up to 15 days for meals and temporary accommodation near the old and the new residences for the taxpayer and members of the household;
• lease cancellation charges (but not rent) on the old residence;
• legal or notary fees incurred for the purchase of the new residence, together with any taxes paid for the transfer or registration of title to the new residence (excluding GST or HST);
• the cost of selling the old residence, including advertising, notary or legal fees, real estate commissions, and any mortgage penalties paid when a mortgage is paid off before maturity; and
• the cost of changing an address on legal documents, replacing driving licences and non-commercial vehicle permits (except insurance), and costs related to utility hook-ups and disconnections.

When real estate markets are slow, or a move must be made in a short time frame, it sometimes happens that a move to the new home takes place before the old residence is sold. In most such circumstances, the taxpayer is entitled to deduct up to $5,000 in costs incurred for the maintenance of that residence while it is vacant and efforts are being made to sell it. Specifically, costs including interest, property taxes, insurance premiums and heat and utilities expenses paid to maintain the old residence while efforts were being made to sell it may be deducted. If any family members are still living at the old residence, or it is being rented, no such deduction is available. As well, a claim for such home maintenance expenses on a vacant house can be claimed only where reasonable efforts are being made to sell the property and is not permitted where the taxpayer delayed selling for investment purposes, or until the real estate market improved.

It may seem from the forgoing that virtually all moving-related costs will be deductible – however, there are some costs for which the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) will not permit a deduction to be claimed, as follows:

• expenses for work done to make the old residence more saleable;
• any loss incurred on the sale of the old residence;
• expenses for job-hunting or house-hunting trips to another city (for example, costs to travel to job interviews or meet with real estate agents);
• expenses incurred to clean or repair a rental residence to meet the landlord’s standards;
• costs to replace such personal-use items as drapery and carpets; and
• mail forwarding costs; and
• mortgage default insurance.

To claim a deduction for any eligible costs incurred, supporting receipts must be obtained. While the receipts do not have to be filed with the return on which the related deduction is claimed, they must be kept in case the CRA wants to review them.

Anyone who has ever moved knows that there are an endless number of details to be dealt with. In some cases, the administrative burden of claiming moving-related expenses can be minimized by choosing to claim a standardized amount for certain types of expenses. Specifically, the CRA allows taxpayers to claim a fixed amount, without the need for detailed receipts, for travel and meal expenses related to a move. Using that standardized, or flat rate method, taxpayers may claim up to $17 per meal, to a maximum of $51 per day, for each person in the household. Similarly, the taxpayer can claim a set per-kilometre amount for kilometres driven in connection with the move. The per kilometre amount ranges from 48.5 cents for Alberta to 65.0 cents for the Yukon Territory. In all cases, it is the province or territory in which the travel begins which determines the applicable rate.

These standardized travel and meal expense rates are those which were in effect for the 2018 taxation year – the CRA will be posting the rates for 2019 on its website early in 2020, in time for the tax filing season.

Once eligibility for the moving expense deduction is established, the rules which govern the calculation of the available deduction are not complex, but they are very detailed. The best summary of those rules is found on the form used to claim such expenses – the T1-M. The current version of that form can be found on the CRA’s website at https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/cra-arc/formspubs/pbg/t1-m/t1-m-17e.pdf and more information (including a link to rates for standardized meal and travel cost claims) is available at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/ddctns/lns206-236/219/menu-eng.html.

In this year’s Budget, the federal government introduced a new program – the First-Time Home Buyer Incentive (FTHBI), to help qualifying first-time home buyers get into the housing market. Under that program the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) (an agency of the federal government) will add a specified amount to the down payment made on a home purchase by a qualifying buyer, with the effect of reducing the amount of the monthly mortgage payment required of the new home owner.

In this year’s Budget, the federal government introduced a new program – the First-Time Home Buyer Incentive (FTHBI), to help qualifying first-time home buyers get into the housing market. Under that program the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) (an agency of the federal government) will add a specified amount to the down payment made on a home purchase by a qualifying buyer, with the effect of reducing the amount of the monthly mortgage payment required of the new home owner.

Regrettably, few details of the new program were provided in the Budget papers, and additional details have been released on a somewhat piecemeal basis since then. CMHC recently issued a press release which indicates that the FTHBI will launch (barring unforeseen circumstances) on September 2, 2019 and will be available for home purchases which close on or after November 1, 2019.

Along with that press release, CMHC did announced some additional program details and, based on that information, the structure of the program will be as follows.

Who qualifies?

Any applicant to the program must be a Canadian citizen, permanent resident or non-permanent resident who is legally entitled to work in Canada. As well, prospective borrowers must, in order to qualify, have a maximum annual qualifying income of $120,000.

As the program name implies, program participants must be first-time home buyers (or, in the case of a couple, at least one of them must be a first-time home buyer). However, the definition of first-time home buyer is somewhat more expansive than might be expected. For purposes of the FTHBI, someone will be considered a first-time home buyer if he or she meets any of the following criteria.

• The applicant has never purchased a home before.

• The applicant has gone through a breakdown of a marriage or common-law partnership (even if he or she doesn’t meet the other first-time home buyer requirements).
• In the last 4 years, the applicant did not occupy a home that was owned by the applicant or his or her current spouse or common-law partner.

The four-year clause means that even individuals (or their spouses) who have previously owned a home may qualify for the FTHBI if their period of home ownership ended within the required time frame. The required 4-year period begins on January 1 of the fourth year before the year the new home was purchased, and ends 31 days before the date of that purchase. That computation is more easily understood in the examples provided by CMHC.

• If you purchase a home on March 31, 2019, the 4-year period begins on January 1, 2015 and ends on February 28, 2019.
• If you sold your home you lived in in 2013, you may be able to participate in 2018 or if you sold the home in 2014, you may be able to participate in 2019.

What kinds of properties qualify for the FTHBI?

Generally, most types of housing will qualify for the FTBHBI. More specifically, eligible properties include 1 to 4 unit residential properties which include new construction, re-sale homes and new and re-sale mobile homes.

In order to qualify, a property must be located in Canada and must be suitable for year-round occupancy.

How much will CMHC contribute?

Under the rules which apply to all homebuyers, the minimum required down payment is 5% of the first $500,000 of the home purchase price and 10% of the portion of that purchase price over $500,000.

Where an applicant qualifies for the FTHBI, CMHC will provide additional funds to augment the applicant’s existing down payment. The amount of those additional funds is 5% or 10% of the purchase price, depending on the type of property purchased. Specifically, the incentive by property type is:

• 5% for a first-time buyer’s purchase of an existing resale home; or
• 5% for a first-time buyer’s purchase of a new or re-sale mobile/manufactured home; or
• 5% or 10% of a first-time buyer’s purchase of a newly constructed home.

The total borrowing amount (first mortgage plus incentive amount) is capped at four times the applicant’s annual income. Since the program is available only to those having an annual income of up to $120,000, the maximum total borrowing amount would therefore be $480,000.

Any funds advanced under the program will become a second mortgage on the property. No interest is charged and no regular payments (i.e. mortgage payments) are required on such funds.

What are the repayment requirements?

Participants in the program are required to repay the incentive amount after 25 years, or when the property is sold, whichever is earlier. Participants can also repay the incentive amount earlier without incurring any pre-payment penalty.

What happens when the value of the property changes?

One of the questions which arose immediately when the FTHBI was announced was how increases (or decreases) in the value of the purchased property would be handled. The short answer is that the repayment amount will be equal to the same percentage of the value of the property at the time of repayment as was originally provided to the home buyer. So, if a property owner was provided with 10% of the property value at the time of purchase, he or she must repay 10% of the value of the property at the time of repayment. Effectively, the government of Canada will share in both the upside and the downside of the property value on repayment.

The application of this rule in a situation in which the property value has increased and one in which it has dropped is illustrated in the following examples adapted from those provided by CMHC.

• Anita wants to buy a new home for $400,000. Under the First-Time Home Buyer Incentive, Anita can apply to receive $40,000 in a shared equity mortgage (10% of the cost of a new home) through the program. Years later, Anita has sold her first home for $420,000. At this time, she would now have to repay the original incentive she received as a percentage of her home’s current value. This would result in Anita repaying 10%, or $42,000 at the time of selling her house.
• John wants to buy a newly constructed house for $350,000, and he can receive a 10% incentive, or $35,000. Years later, John has decided to sell his home, but it is now worth $320,000. When he sells his house at the price of $320,000, John will have to repay the original incentive he received as a percentage of his home’s current value. This would result in John repaying 10%, or $32,000 at the time of selling his house.

There are still details of the FTBHI which have not yet been announced – in particular, details of the application process. However, individuals can sign up on the CMHC website to receive e-mails updates as future announcements are made. That sign-up is available at https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/nhs/canada-first-time-home-buyer-incentive, and more information on the program generally can be found at https://www.placetocallhome.ca/fthbi/first-time-homebuyer-incentive.cfm.

Most Canadians have now filed their individual income tax return for the 2018 tax year and received a Notice of Assessment outlining their tax position for that year. Those who receive a refund will celebrate that fact or, less happily, those who receive a tax bill will pay up the tax amount owed. Both groups of taxpayers are then likely to forget about taxes until it’s tax filing time again in the spring of 2020. The fact is, however, that mid-year is very good time to assess one’s tax position for the current year and is particularly a good idea for taxpayers who have received a large refund or a bill for tax owing.

Most Canadians have now filed their individual income tax return for the 2018 tax year and received a Notice of Assessment outlining their tax position for that year. Those who receive a refund will celebrate that fact or, less happily, those who receive a tax bill will pay up the tax amount owed. Both groups of taxpayers are then likely to forget about taxes until it’s tax filing time again in the spring of 2020. The fact is, however, that mid-year is very good time to assess one’s tax position for the current year and is particularly a good idea for taxpayers who have received a large refund or a bill for tax owing.

Although few Canadians have this perspective, the reality is that getting either a big tax refund or having to pay a large tax bill is a sign that one’s tax affairs need attention. A refund, especially a large refund, means that the taxpayer has overpaid his or her taxes for the previous year and has essentially provided the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) with an interest-free loan of funds that could have been put to better use in the taxpayer’s hands. The other outcome — a large bill — means that taxes have been underpaid for the previous year and could mean paying interest charges to the CRA. Either way, it’s in the taxpayer’s best interests to ensure that tax paid throughout the year is sufficient to cover his or her taxes, without overpaying or underpaying. The best-case scenario is to complete one’s tax return and to then receive a Notice of Assessment which indicates that there is neither a refund payable nor any amount owing.

All of this makes the mid-point of the tax year a good time to make sure that everything is on track, and put in place any adjustments needed to help ensure that there are no tax surprises when filing one’s tax return for 2019 next spring. And, as the calendar year goes on, the opportunities to make a significant difference to one’s current year tax situation diminish.

The first step in doing that review is to get a sense of how much tax one will have to pay for 2019. The income of most taxpayers doesn’t change significantly from year to year and, by mid-year, most taxpayers will have a good sense of what their income will be for 2019. Consequently, where income hasn’t changed much, the amount of tax which was paid for 2018 (a number which can be found on Line 435 of the Summary on page 3 of one’s 2018 Notice of Assessment) serves as a good starting point. (In most cases, owing to increases in tax brackets and credits, the amount of tax payable by taxpayers whose income doesn’t change significantly between 2018 and 2019 will decrease slightly.)

There are two ways of paying taxes throughout the year. The majority of Canadians (including all employees) have income taxes deducted from their paycheques and remitted to the federal government on their behalf — known as source deductions. Taxpayers who do not have income tax deducted at source — which would include self-employed individuals and, frequently, retired taxpayers — make tax payments directly to the federal government (four times a year, on the 15^th of March, June, September, and December) through the tax instalment system.

Once a rough idea of one’s tax liability for 2019 is arrived at, it’s necessary to figure out whether income tax payments made to date, either by source deductions or instalment payments, match up with that tax liability figure, recognizing that by this point in the year, approximately one-half of 2019 taxes should already have been paid. If they haven’t, and particularly if there is a shortfall which will mean a balance owing when the tax return for 2019 is filed next spring, the taxpayer will need to take steps to remedy that.

Where the individual involved pays tax by instalments, the solution is simple. He or she can simply increase or decrease the amount of remaining instalment payments made in 2019 so that the total instalment payments made over the course of 2019 accurately reflect the total tax payable for the year. The only caveat in that situation is that the individual should err on the side of caution to ensure that there isn’t a shortfall in instalment payments, which could result in interest charges being levied by the CRA.

The situation is a little more complex for employees, or for anyone who has tax deducted at source. Often when such individuals discover that they are overpaying taxes through source deductions, it’s because other deductions which they claim on their return for the year — for expenditures like  deductible support payments, child care expenses or contributions to a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP) — aren’t taken into account in calculating the amount of tax to deduct at source. The solution for employees who find themselves in that situation is to file a Form T1213, Request to Reduce Tax Deductions at Source, which is available on the CRA website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pbg/tf/t1213/README.html with the Agency. On that form, the taxpayer identifies the additional amounts which will be deducted on the return for the year and, once the CRA verifies that those deductible expenditures are being made, it will authorize the taxpayer’s employer to reduce the amount of tax which is being withheld at source, so as to reflect the reduced tax payable for the year by the employee/taxpayer.

Where it’s the opposite situation and a taxpayer finds that source deductions being made will not be sufficient to cover his or her tax liability for the year (meaning a tax bill to be paid next spring) the solution is to have those source deductions increased. To do that, the employee needs to obtain a TD1A form for their province of residence for 2019, which is available on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/td1-personal-tax-credits-returns/td1-forms-pay-received-on-january-1-later.html. On the reverse side of that Form TD1, there is a section entitled “Additional tax to be deducted”, in which the employee can direct his or her employer to deduct additional amounts at source for income tax, and can specify the dollar amount which is to be deducted from each paycheque, on a go-forward basis.

A final note — while no one likes getting a tax bill, there are taxpayers who simply like getting a tax refund and overpay their taxes through the year to create that result. Some of them view that approach as a kind of “forced” savings plan, while others simply like the idea of getting an annual cheque or direct deposit from the tax authorities. There is nothing inherently wrong with that approach, so long as the taxpayer understands that a tax refund is simply money which was always theirs and is simply being returned to them by the CRA (without interest).  Those who would rather not loan money to the CRA interest-free and who don’t want to face a tax bill each spring can avoid both scenarios by investing a couple of hours of time and a little paperwork to ensure that this year’s tax payments are on track.  

It’s the financial “achievement” no one wants to have, but Canadians keep setting new records when it comes to the size of their household debt. And, as of the last quarter of 2018, they did so again.

The most recent release of “Mortgage and Consumer Credit Trends” issued by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation shows that the debt-to-income ratio of Canadians reached 178.5% as of the fourth quarter of 2018. In other words, Canadian households were carrying, on average, $1.78 in debt for every $1 of household income. Just fifteen years previously, in 2005, Canadians held less than $1 of debt for every dollar of household income — the debt to household income ratio was then 93%.

It’s the financial “achievement” no one wants to have, but Canadians keep setting new records when it comes to the size of their household debt. And, as of the last quarter of 2018, they did so again.

The most recent release of “Mortgage and Consumer Credit Trends” issued by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation shows that the debt-to-income ratio of Canadians reached 178.5% as of the fourth quarter of 2018. In other words, Canadian households were carrying, on average, $1.78 in debt for every $1 of household income. Just fifteen years previously, in 2005, Canadians held less than $1 of debt for every dollar of household income — the debt to household income ratio was then 93%.  

The figures published by CMHC for 2018 are of particular interest, as new rules designed to rein in excessive mortgage lending took effect in April of that year. It’s not surprising, then, that the figures show that mortgage activity during the year slowed. Of greater concern is the fact that non-mortgage borrowing by mortgage holders has accelerated, as average balances for credit cards and lines of credit held by such mortgage-holders grew at a faster pace in 2018 than they had in 2017. That trend was particularly apparent when it came to mortgage holders in Toronto and Vancouver, the two most expensive housing markets in the country.

The other group for whom the debt statistics are notable are those aged 55 and older. The CMHC report notes that the share of mortgage holders aged 55 or older continued to grow during 2018. In addition, mortgage delinquency rates for those aged 65 and older have been increasing — that age group has had, since late 2015, the highest mortgage delinquency rate.

For most Canadians, the size of their overall debt load is, on a day-to-day basis, likekly less significant than the monthly cost of servicing that debt out of current cash flow. Unfortunately, the news in that respect was also not good. As reported by CMHC “average monthly obligations per consumer increased by 4.5% in the fourth quarter of 2018 compared to a year earlier. Over the same period average disposable income rose by 2.5%. Therefore, for the average Canadian, the monthly obligation burden has increased from last year relative to their income”. That’s especially not good news for older Canadians, many of whom are retired or semi-retired, with limited ability to generate the additional income to meet higher debt-servicing costs.

If there is good news in the CMHC report, it’s that despite high levels, loan delinquency rates, including mortgage delinquency rates, remain low. It seems that, despite ever-increasing debt loads, most Canadians are still managing to keep their lines of credit, car loans, and credit cards in good standing.

The full CMCH report can be found on the Agency’s website at https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/housing-observer-online/2019-housing-observer/mortgage-consumer-credit-trends-q4-2018.

It would be entirely reasonable for Canadians seeking to buy their first home to feel that the odds are very much against them, for a number of reasons. Many of them, especially those in their twenties and thirties, must put together an income from short-term contracts and/or multiple part-time jobs, making it almost impossible to have any certainty of income, over either the short or the long term. Mortgage lenders are understandably reluctant to lend to those who don’t know what their income will be for the current year, much less for future years. As well, increases in home prices over the last decade mean that the average home price in Canada is now $470,000, meaning that a minimum 5% downpayment is just under $25,000, and those who can put together such a down payment will be carrying a mortgage of just under $450,000. The interest rate levied on that mortgage has steadily increased over the past 18 months, with changes in the bank rate. Finally, as of April 2018, the federal government imposed a new mortgage “stress test”, which requires prospective borrowers to qualify for a mortgage at rates in excess of current rates. All in all, there is a “perfect storm” of factors in place which keep younger Canadians from attaining that elusive first step on the property ladder.

It would be entirely reasonable for Canadians seeking to buy their first home to feel that the odds are very much against them, for a number of reasons. Many of them, especially those in their twenties and thirties, must put together an income from short-term contracts and/or multiple part-time jobs, making it almost impossible to have any certainty of income, over either the short or the long term. Mortgage lenders are understandably reluctant to lend to those who don’t know what their income will be for the current year, much less for future years. As well, increases in home prices over the last decade mean that the average home price in Canada is now $470,000, meaning that a minimum 5% downpayment is just under $25,000, and those who can put together such a down payment will be carrying a mortgage of just under $450,000. The interest rate levied on that mortgage has steadily increased over the past 18 months, with changes in the bank rate. Finally, as of April 2018, the federal government imposed a new mortgage “stress test”, which requires prospective borrowers to qualify for a mortgage at rates in excess of current rates. All in all, there is a “perfect storm” of factors in place which keep younger Canadians from attaining that elusive first step on the property ladder.

That reality led the federal government, in this year’s Budget, to announce a new program intended to help first-time home buyers, of (relatively) modest means, to purchase their first home. Under that program — the First-Time Home Buyer Incentive — a portion of the mortgage principal amount on the purchase of a first home can be financed through a shared equity mortgage with the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Essentially, CMHC will assume responsibility for a portion of the mortgage and the homeowner will not be required to make payments on that CMHC portion. The CMHC portion will be 5% for purchases of existing properties and 10% on purchases of newly built homes. An example provided by CMHC illustrates the calculation, as follows.

A borrower purchases a new $400,000 home with a 5% down payment and a 10% CMHC shared equity mortgage ($40,000). The borrower’s total mortgage size would be reduced from $380,000 to $340,000, reducing monthly mortgage costs by as much as $228.

There are, of course, limitations and criteria which apply to those seeking to take advantage of the new program. First, it is available only to those who are first-time home buyers and who have total household income of less than $120,000 per year. As well, in order to qualify for the shared equity program, the total mortgage amount (including the shared equity portion) cannot be more than four times the purchaser’s annual household income. Since the upper income limit to qualify for the program is $120,000, a qualifying mortgage therefore cannot be, in total, more than $480,000, and so the maximum home purchase price (assuming a 5% down payment) is, as confirmed by CMHC, $505,000.

The Budget papers did not, unfortunately, provide much detail with respect to exactly how the new incentive will operate. CMHC has since issued a press release outlining some additional details and that press release is available at https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/media-newsroom/making-housing-more-affordable-first-time-home-buyer-incentive. There are however, still a number of questions remaining and a number of details to be worked out. In addition, CMHC has indicated that it will need to consult with lenders before the program can be up and running. The remaining details should, however, be available in the not-too-distant future, as CMHC has indicated that it expects the First Time Home Buyer Incentive program to be operational in September of 2019.

By May 20, 2019, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) had processed just over 27 million individual income tax returns filed for the 2018 tax year. Just under 17 million of those returns resulted in a refund to the taxpayer, while about 5.5 million resulted in the required payment of a tax balance by the taxpayer.

By May 20, 2019, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) had processed just over 27 million individual income tax returns filed for the 2018 tax year. Just under 17 million of those returns resulted in a refund to the taxpayer, while about 5.5 million resulted in the required payment of a tax balance by the taxpayer.

No matter what the outcome of the filing, all returns filed with and processed by the CRA have one thing in common — they result in the issuance of a Notice of Assessment (NOA) by the Agency, outlining the taxpayer’s income, deductions, credits, and tax payable for the 2018 tax year.

In most cases, the information contained in the NOA is the same as that provided by the taxpayer in his or her return, perhaps with a few arithmetical corrections made by the CRA. In a minority of cases, the information presented in the NOA will differ from that provided by the taxpayer in the return.

Where that difference means an unanticipated refund, or a larger refund than expected, it’s a happy day for the taxpayer. In some cases, however, the NOA will inform the taxpayer that additional amounts are owed to the CRA.

When that happens, the taxpayer has to figure out why, and to decide whether or not to dispute the CRA’s conclusions. Many such discrepancies are the result of an error made by the taxpayer in completing the return. A lot of information from a variety of sources is reported on even the most straightforward of returns and it’s easy to overlook, for instance, a T5 slip reporting a small amount of interest income earned. Even where tax software is used to prepare the return, errors can still occur. Such tax software relies, in the first instance, on information input by the user with respect to amounts found on T4, T5, and other information slips. No matter how good the software, it can’t account for income information which the taxpayer hasn’t provided. In other cases, the taxpayer might transpose figures when entering them, such that an income amount of $26,353 on the T4 becomes $23,653 on the tax return. Once again, the tax software has no way of knowing that the information input was incorrect, and calculates tax owing on the basis of the figures provided.

Where there is additional tax owing because of an error or omission made by the taxpayer in completing the return, and the CRA’s figures are correct, disputing the assessment doesn’t really make sense. There is, as well, a persistent tax “myth” that if a taxpayer doesn’t receive an information slip (T4 or T5, as the case might be) for income received during the year, that income doesn’t have to be reported and therefore isn’t taxable. The myth, however, is just that. All taxpayers are responsible for reporting all income received and paying tax on that income, and the fact that an information slip was lost, mislaid or never received doesn’t change anything. The CRA receives a copy of all information slips issued to Canadian taxpayers, and its systems will cross-check to ensure that all income is accurately reported.

There are, however, instances in which the CRA and the taxpayer are in disagreement over substantive issues, and those issues most often involve claims for deductions or credits. For instance, the CRA may have disallowed an individual’s claim for a medical expense, or for a deduction claimed for a business expenditure, which the taxpayer believes to be legitimate. 

Whatever the nature of the dispute, the first step is always to contact the CRA for an explanation of the reasons why the change was made. While the information provided in the NOA is a good summary of the taxpayer’s tax situation for the year, it may not provide the detail to show precisely how and why the taxpayer and the CRA disagree on the actual amount of income tax which the taxpayer must pay for the year. The first step to be taken would be a call to the Individual Income Tax Enquiries line at 1-800-959-8281, where agents who have access to the taxpayer’s return can explain any changes which were made during the assessment process. If that call doesn’t resolve the taxpayer’s questions, or there is still a disagreement, the taxpayer has to decide whether to take the next step of filing a formal objection to the Notice of Assessment.

Doing so formally advises the CRA that the taxpayer is disputing his or her tax liability for the taxation year in question. Not incidentally, the filing of an Objection also brings to a halt most efforts undertaken by the CRA to collect taxes which it considers owing for the taxation year under dispute (although, if the taxpayer is eventually found to owe the amount in dispute, interest will have accumulated in the interim).  Where the taxpayer files an Objection, the CRA’s collection efforts are suspended until 90 days after the date the CRA’s decision on that Objection is sent to the taxpayer. In some cases, however, those collection efforts will not be brought to a halt, in whole or in part. Tax collection efforts by the CRA are not deferred where the amounts in dispute are those which the taxpayer was required to withhold and remit to the CRA, such as employee income tax deductions at source. As well, the CRA is required to postpone collection action on only 50% of the amount in dispute where that dispute involves a charitable donation tax credit or deduction claimed in connection with a tax shelter arrangement.

There is a time limit by which any Objection must be filed, albeit a reasonably generous one. Individual taxpayers must file an Objection by the later of 90 days from the mailing date of the Notice of Assessment (the date found at the top of page 1) or one year from the due date of the return which is being disputed. So, for tax returns for the 2018 tax year, the one-year deadline (which is usually, but not always, the later of those two dates) would be April 30, 2020 (or June 15, 2020 for self-employed taxpayers and their spouses).  As with most things related to taxes, it’s best not to put it off. At the very least, if the taxpayer is ultimately found to owe some or all of the taxes assessed by the CRA, interest will have accrued on those taxes for the entire period since the filing due date and, if the filing of the Objection is delayed, the CRA may well have already commenced its collection efforts. Certainly, if the deadline is imminent, it is necessary to file a Notice of Objection in order to preserve the taxpayer’s appeal rights, even if discussions with the CRA are still ongoing.

Taxpayers who have registered with the CRA’s online services feature My Account can file their Notice of Objection online at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/esrvc-srvce/tx/ndvdls/myccnt/menu-eng.html.The taxpayer provides information with respect to the assessment being disputed and the reasons why the assessment is being disputed and submits those reasons by clicking on the Submit button at the bottom of the "Register my formal dispute — review" page. Taxpayers who are disputing their tax assessment can also upload supporting documents relating to that dispute to the Agency’s website.

While filing a dispute through My Account is certainly faster than mailing hard copy of the Notice of Objection, not all taxpayers want to use that option. In particular, those who are not already registered with My Account may not wish to undertake the registration process simply in order to file a single Notice of Objection. Taxpayers who choose instead to mail hard copy of a Notice of Objection can find the most current version of the CRA’s standardized T400A Objection (which was updated and re-issued in July 2018) on the Agency’s website at https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/cra-arc/formspubs/pbg/t400a/t400a-09-18e.pdf.

Taxpayers aren’t obligated to use the CRA’s official Notice of Objection form; any communication which makes it clear that the taxpayer is objecting to his or her Notice of Assessment will do. Nonetheless, there’s no reason not to use the standardized form, and there are benefits to doing so. Using the T400A form will make it clear to the CRA that a formal objection is being filed, will present the necessary information in a format with which the CRA is familiar, and will also mean that no required information is inadvertently omitted. It is also helpful to include a copy of the Notice of Assessment which is being disputed. Taxpayers should also consider ensuring proof of both delivery and time of delivery by sending the form in a way which provides for tracking and proof of delivery (e.g., registered mail or courier).

Taxpayers whose postal code begins with letters A to P should send their documents to the Eastern Appeals Intake Centre, while objections file by those with postal codes beginning with letters R to Y should be sent to the Western Appeals Intake Centre. The addresses for the two centres are as follows.

Chief of Appeals

Eastern Appeals Intake Centre

North Central Ontario TSO

1050 Notre Dame Avenue,

Sudbury ON P3A 5C1

Chief of Appeals

Western Appeals Intake Centre

Fraser Valley and Northern TSO, 2nd floor,

9755 King George Boulevard,

Surrey BC V3T 5E1

It’s also possible to contact either of the Appeals Intake Centres by phone or fax, and the numbers for both can be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/complaints-disputes/complexity-level-processing-time.html.

The time required for the CRA to consider the objection and make its decision ranges from several weeks to several months, depending on the number and complexity of the issues involved. Eventually, however, the CRA will respond to the objection. In the course of making its decision, the CRA may or may not contact the taxpayer for further discussions of the issues in dispute. Should the taxpayer be contacted, he or she may be asked to provide representations outlining his or her position, in writing or at a meeting. Through such representations and meetings, it may be possible for the taxpayer and the CRA to come to an agreement on the taxpayer’s tax liability. In either case, the CRA will either confirm its original assessment or change it. If the original assessment is changed, the CRA will issue a Notice of Reassessment outlining the changes. If the taxpayer continues to disagree with the CRA’s position, the next step is an appeal to the Tax Court of Canada, which must be filed within 90 days after the CRA issues its assessment or reassessment. While in many instances (generally where amounts in dispute are relatively small) taxpayers can represent themselves before the Tax Court, it is generally a good idea, once things reach this point, to consult a tax lawyer before taking that next step.

The CRA also publishes a useful pamphlet entitled Resolving Your Dispute: Objection and Appeal Rights under the Income Tax Act, and the most recent release of that publication can be found on the CRA website at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/tg/p148/README.html.      

Two quarterly newsletters have been added—one dealing with personal issues, and one dealing with corporate issues.

Two quarterly newsletters have been added—one dealing with personal issues, and one dealing with corporate issues. They can be accessed below.

Corporate:

Issue #48 Corporate

Personal:

Issue #48 Personal

Although virtually no one looks forward to the task, the vast majority of Canadians do file their tax returns, and pay any taxes owed, by the applicable tax payment and filing deadlines each spring. There is, however, a significant minority of Canadians who do not file or pay on a timely basis and, for some, that’s a situation which can go on for years.

Although virtually no one looks forward to the task, the vast majority of Canadians do file their tax returns, and pay any taxes owed, by the applicable tax payment and filing deadlines each spring. There is, however, a significant minority of Canadians who do not file or pay on a timely basis and, for some, that’s a situation which can go on for years.

Part of the problem, of course, is that once a taxpayer is behind on his or her filing or payment of taxes, the problem snowballs. A taxpayer who has already failed to file a tax return may be reluctant to file the subsequent year’s return, for fear of bringing the matter to the attention of the tax authorities. And, of course, where taxes aren’t paid in a particular year, it’s that much more difficult to come up with enough money the next year to pay the bill covering taxes owed for two years.

The reasons why some taxpayers don’t file or pay on time are many. Some don’t file because they believe that there’s no reason to do so if they don’t owe anything and aren’t expecting a refund. While that can be true, it is also the case that it is necessary to file in order to receive a number of income-tested tax credits and benefits, including the HST credit, the Canada child benefit, and a range of provincial tax credits. Those who don’t file can’t have their eligibility for such credits determined and so no credits can be paid to them. Others don’t file because they have a balance owing but don’t have the funds to pay that balance on filing. That, too, is the wrong approach, as anyone who owes taxes but doesn’t file a return by the filing deadline gets hit with an immediate penalty of at least 5% of the outstanding amount owed. In such circumstances, the right approach is to file on time and to contact the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) in order to come to an agreement on a payment arrangement over time. Finally, there is a persistent (and completely false) tax myth that has been circulating for decades, that the federal government does not have the legal right to collect taxes and every year some taxpayers fall victim to someone peddling that myth.

There are also a number of Canadians who file returns in which income amounts are underreported and/or deductions or credits to which that taxpayer is not entitled are claimed. While the overall percentage of taxpayers who don’t file or pay on time, or who file returns which are not accurate isn’t high, there are a lot of such returns when measured by absolute numbers. And, although each such instance of non-compliance represents lost revenue to the Canadian government, the resources needed to track down each and every instance of non-compliance simply aren’t available, especially since in many cases the amount recovered may be less than the costs which must be incurred to recover it.

With all of that in mind, several years ago the CRA instituted a program — the Voluntary Disclosure Program (VDP) — intended to encourage non-compliant taxpayers to come forward and put their tax affairs in order. The incentive to do so arose from the fact that, in most cases, such taxpayers would have to pay outstanding tax amounts owed, plus interest, but would avoid the payment of penalties and the risk of criminal prosecution.

In 2018 changes were made to the VDP which narrowed the eligibility criteria and imposed additional conditions on participants. The requirements for participation in the VDP, and the procedure to be followed to pursue it, are now as follows.

To qualify for relief, an application must:

• be voluntary (meaning that it is done before the taxpayer becomes aware of any compliance or enforcement action by the CRA);
• be complete;
• involve the application or potential application of a penalty; and
• include information that is at least one year past due.

Applications made for disclosure under the VDP are assigned to one of two tracks — the Limited Program or the General Program, and that determination, which is made on a case-by-case basis, will affect the kind of relief provided and the extent of that relief. The intention, however, is to restrict the Limited Program to instances in which applications disclose non-compliance that appears to include intentional conduct on the part of the taxpayer. In making its determination of the appropriate track for a disclosure, the factors which the CRA will consider include the following:

• the dollar amounts involved;
• the number of years of non-compliance;
• the sophistication of the taxpayer;
• whether efforts were made to avoid detection through the use of offshore vehicles or other means; and
• whether disclosure is made following a CRA statement regarding its intended specific focus of compliance or the issuance by the Agency of broad-based correspondence about a particular compliance issue.

Those whose applications are accepted under the Limited Program will not be subject to criminal prosecution and will be exempt from the more stringent penalties which usually apply in cases of gross negligence on the part of the taxpayer. Interest on outstanding tax balances will be payable, however, and other penalties will be levied.

Taxpayers whose conduct does not consign them to the Limited Program will instead be considered under the General Program. Under that Program, no penalties will be charged and no criminal prosecutions will take place. As well, the CRA will provide partial interest relief (usually 50% of the interest assessed), specifically for the years preceding the three most recent years of returns required to be filed. However, full interest charges are assessed for the three most recent years of returns required to be filed.

There is also now a requirement that taxpayers who make an application under the VDP pay the estimated taxes owing as a condition of qualifying for the Program. Where the taxpayer is financially unable to do so, he or she can request that the CRA consider a payment arrangement.

As well, the CRA previously offered what was termed a “no-names disclosure”. That option is no longer provided, but has been replaced by a “pre-disclosure discussion” service. That service will still allow a taxpayer to discuss his or her tax affairs with a representative of the CRA on an anonymous basis, but such discussion is not binding on either party, and does not constitute acceptance into the VDP or preclude the Agency from initiating an audit or referring the case for criminal prosecution.

The CRA provides detailed information on its website with respect to the VDP, covering both the criteria for participation, the kind(s) of relief which may be provided, and the procedure involved in seeking that relief. All of that information can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/programs/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/voluntary-disclosures-program-overview.html and https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/programs/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/voluntary-disclosures-program-income-tax-overview.html.

As every Canadian driver knows, gas prices seem to rise every spring, seemingly in lockstep with the warmer weather. This year, that annual trend has been given an extra push by the implementation of federal and provincial carbon taxes. As of the end of April, gas prices ranged from $1.19 to $1.56 per litre, depending on the province, and most forecasts call for those prices to increase over the summer.

As every Canadian driver knows, gas prices seem to rise every spring, seemingly in lockstep with the warmer weather. This year, that annual trend has been given an extra push by the implementation of federal and provincial carbon taxes. As of the end of April, gas prices ranged from $1.19 to $1.56 per litre, depending on the province, and most forecasts call for those prices to increase over the summer.

While in some cases Canadians can reduce the impact of gas price increases by reducing the amount of driving they do, the practical reality is that, even for those who wish to do less driving and to thereby reduce their carbon footprint, driving less just isn’t a realistic option. While major urban centres are usually well-served by public transit, it is a different picture outside those centres, where in many cases the public transit option is either non-existent or impractical. As well, as housing prices in major urban areas either continue to increase (or are already out of the reach for the average Canadian), individuals and families must move further from their workplaces in search of affordable housing. Doing so means a longer commute to work, and that commute must often be done by car.

For a number of reasons, then, the cost of driving is often an unavoidable, non-discretionary expense. And, as that cost increases, many wonder whether there are any deductions or credits which can be claimed to help offset that cost.

Unfortunately, for most taxpayers, there’s no relief provided by our tax system to help alleviate the cost of driving as the cost of driving to work and back home, as well as the cost of driving that isn’t work related, is considered a personal expense for which no deduction or credit can be claimed, no matter how great the cost. That said, there are some (fairly narrow) circumstances in which employees can claim a deduction for the cost of work-related travel.

Those circumstances exist where an employee is required, as part of his or her terms of employment, to use a personal vehicle for work-related travel. For instance, an employee might, as part of his or her job, be required to see clients at their own premises for the purpose of meetings or other work-related activities and be expected to use his or her own vehicle to get to such meetings. If the employer is prepared to certify on a Form T2200 that the employee was ordinarily required to work away from his employer’s place of business or in different places, that he or she is required to pay his or her own motor vehicle expenses and that no tax-free allowance was provided by the employer for such expenses, the employee can deduct actual expenses incurred for such work-related travel. Those deductible expenses include the following:

• fuel (gasoline, propane, oil);
• maintenance and repairs;
• insurance;
• licence and registration fees;
• interest paid on a loan to purchase the vehicle;
• eligible leasing costs for the vehicle; and
• depreciation, in the form of capital cost allowance.

In almost all instances, a taxpayer will use the same vehicle for both personal and work-related driving. Where that’s the case, only the portion of expenses incurred for work-related driving can be deducted and the employee must keep a record of both the total kilometres driven and the kilometres driven for work-related purposes. And, of course, receipts must be kept in order to document all expenses incurred and claimed.

While no limits (other than the general limit of reasonableness) are placed on the amount of costs which can be deducted in the first four categories listed above, there are limits and restrictions with respect to allowable deductions for interest, eligible leasing costs and depreciation claims. The rules governing those claims and the tax treatment of employee automobile allowances and available deductions for employment-related automobile use generally are outlined on the Canada Revenue Agency website at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/ddctns/lns206-236/229/slry/mtrvhcl-eng.html.

In larger urban centres, and in the nearby cities and suburbs which are served by inter-city transit, many commuters utilize that transit as a way of avoiding both the stress of a drive to work in rush hour traffic and the associated costs. And, for a time, such commuters were able to claim a tax credit to help mitigate the cost of using such transit. Unfortunately, the federal public transit tax credit was eliminated in 2017 and has never been reinstated.

No amount of tax relief is going to make driving, especially for a lengthy daily commute, an inexpensive proposition. But, that said, seeking out and claiming every possible deduction and credit available under our tax rules can at least help to minimize the pain.

The deadline for payment of all individual income taxes owed for the 2018 tax year was April 30, 2019. For all individuals except the self-employed and their spouses, that date was also the filing deadline for tax returns for the 2018 tax year. (The self-employed and their spouses have until June 17, 2019 to file.)

The deadline for payment of all individual income taxes owed for the 2018 tax year was April 30, 2019. For all individuals except the self-employed and their spouses, that date was also the filing deadline for tax returns for the 2018 tax year. (The self-employed and their spouses have until June 17, 2019 to file.)

Most Canadians file and pay on time, but there are exceptions. In some cases, the failure to file or pay by the deadline is a deliberate choice on the part of the taxpayer but such failure can also occur for reasons or circumstances which are outside of the taxpayer’s control. And, in such circumstances, there is relief available from the interest and penalty charges which would usually be levied.

That relief is provided through the Taxpayer Relief Program offered by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). Under that program, the revenue authorities can waive any interest and penalty charges that would ordinarily result from a failure to file or pay on time. The basic criteria for such relief is that the taxpayer’s failure to file or pay on time was caused by or was the result of circumstances that were beyond the control of the taxpayer, and so prevented them from complying with their tax obligations.

The circumstances which will justify relief can be personal in nature and specific to the taxpayer or can be the result of events affecting a large number of individuals. For the past few years those large-scale events have been, for the most part, recurring weather or climate related disasters. Whether it was forest fires in the Western provinces or spring floods in Central Canada and the Maritimes, taxpayers in virtually every province have been affected, and often displaced, by such weather events. As well, such events typically take place during the spring and summer months, which coincides with the deadlines for tax filing and payment.

For anyone facing circumstances which threaten their economic or physical well-being dealing with tax obligations is, understandably, far down the list of priorities. And, in many instances, such individuals don’t in any case have access to their tax records or such records have been destroyed. This year, as in previous years, the federal government has issued a press release reminding individuals affected by this spring’s floods that they can apply for relief under the Taxpayer Relief Program, to ensure that they are not unfairly penalized when they can’t meet their tax obligations on a timely basis. That press release can be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/news/2019/04/government-of-canada-offers-taxpayer-relief-to-canadians-affected-by-flooding.html.

Where the failure to meet tax obligations arises from unavoidable personal circumstances, those circumstances can include anything from personal or family illness or death to financial hardship. It’s important to note that, whatever the reason for the application, only interest and penalty charges can be waived. The Minister has no authority, no matter how dire the circumstances, to waive the payment of actual taxes owed. It’s also the case that, regardless of the reason for the application for relief, the process is the same.

 The CRA issues a prescribed from – RC4288, Request for Taxpayer Relief, which can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms/rc4288.html. While use of the form is not mandatory — a letter to the CRA will suffice — using the prescribed form will ensure that all of the information needed by the Agency to make a decision on the request for relief is provided. For each such request, that information includes:

• the taxpayer’s name, address, and telephone number;
• the taxpayer’s social insurance number (SIN), account number, partnership number, trust account number, business number (BN), or any other identification number assigned to the taxpayer by the CRA;
• the tax year(s) or fiscal period(s) involved;
• the facts and reasons supporting the view that the interest or penalties were mainly caused by factors beyond the taxpayer’s control;
• an explanation of how the circumstances affected the taxpayer’s ability to meet his or her tax obligations;
• the facts and reasons supporting the inability to pay the penalties or interest assessed or charged, or to be assessed or charged;
• any relevant documentation (such as doctor’s certificates, death certificates, or insurance documents); and
• a complete history of events including any measures that have been taken (e.g., payments and payment arrangements), and when they were taken to resolve the non-compliance.

In addition, where the relief request is based on financial hardship, the taxpayer must provide full financial disclosure, including statements of income and expenses. In order to provide full financial disclosure, the CRA recommends that taxpayers use Form RC376, Taxpayer Relief Request — Statement of Income and Expenses and Assets and Liabilities for Individuals. That form is available on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms/rc376.html.

All relief requests are to be sent to a particular Tax Centre or Tax Services Office, depending on the taxpayer’s province of residence. A listing of the addresses of all such Centres and Offices is available on the CRA website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/gncy/cmplntsdspts/sbmtrqst-eng.html, and the same information is included on the RC4288 form. The request cannot be e-mailed, as the CRA does not communicate taxpayer-specific information by e-mail.

Each relief request is assigned to a CRA official, who may, if necessary, contact the taxpayer to obtain clarification of the information provided, or to seek additional information. In any case, a determination will be made of whether the taxpayer’s request for interest or penalty relief is to be approved in full, approved in part, or denied, based on the following considerations:

• the taxpayer’s history of compliance with his or her tax obligations;
• whether or not the taxpayer knowingly allowed an arrears balance to exist upon which arrears interest has accrued;
• whether or not the taxpayer exercised a reasonable amount of care in conducting his or her tax affairs, and whether or not negligence or carelessness has been demonstrated; and
• whether or not the taxpayer acted quickly to remedy any delay or omission.

The decision made will be communicated to the taxpayer, with reasons provided where the request is only partially approved, or is denied. At the same time, the taxpayer will be given information on the options available where the CRA has made a decision with which the taxpayer does not agree.

Finally, when a natural or man-made disaster occurs, individuals living in the immediate area are clearly those most affected, but they are not the only ones. The press release issued recently by the CRA noted that first responders who work to help in such circumstances may also seek relief under the program, where such work has meant that they were unable to meet their tax filing and/or payment obligations.

For the majority of Canadians, the due date for filing of an individual tax return for the 2018 tax year was Tuesday April 30, 2019. (Self-employed Canadians and their spouses have until Monday June 17, 2019 to get their return filed.) In the best of all possible worlds, the taxpayer, or his or her representative, will have prepared a return that is complete and correct, and filed it on time, and the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) will issue a Notice of Assessment indicating that the return is “assessed as filed”, meaning that the CRA agrees with the information filed and tax result obtained by the taxpayer. While that’s the outcome everyone is hoping for, it’s a result which can go “off the rails” in any number of ways.

For the majority of Canadians, the due date for filing of an individual tax return for the 2018 tax year was Tuesday April 30, 2019. (Self-employed Canadians and their spouses have until Monday June 17, 2019 to get their return filed.) In the best of all possible worlds, the taxpayer, or his or her representative, will have prepared a return that is complete and correct, and filed it on time, and the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) will issue a Notice of Assessment indicating that the return is “assessed as filed”, meaning that the CRA agrees with the information filed and tax result obtained by the taxpayer. While that’s the outcome everyone is hoping for, it’s a result which can go “off the rails” in any number of ways.

By the third week of April 2019, over 18 million individual income tax returns for the 2018 tax year had been filed with the CRA. And, inevitably, some of those returns contain errors or omissions that must be corrected — in 2017 the CRA received about 2 million requests for adjustment(s) to an already-filed return.

Over 90% of the returns which have already been filed for the 2018 tax year were filed through online filing methods, meaning that they were prepared using tax return preparation software. The use of such software significantly reduces the chance of making a clerical or arithmetic error, like entering an amount on the wrong line or adding a column of figures incorrectly. However, no matter how good the software, it can work only with the information that is provided to it. Sometimes taxpayers prepare and file a return, only to later receive a tax information slip that should have been included on that return. It’s also easy to make an inputting error when transposing figures from an information slip (a T4 from one’s employer, for instance) into the software, such that $49,505 in income becomes $45,905. Whatever the cause, where the figures input are incorrect or information is missing, those errors or omissions will be reflected in the final (incorrect) result produced by the software.

When the error or omission is discovered in a return which has already been filed, the question which immediately arises is how to make things right. The first impulse of many taxpayers is to file another return, in which the complete and correct information is provided, but that’s not the right answer. There are, however, several ways in which a mistake or omission on an already-filed tax return can be corrected, including online options.

Starting last year, taxpayers who filed online, whether through NETFILE or EFILE, are able to advise the CRA of an error or omission in an already-filed return electronically, using the Agency’s ReFILE service. That service, which can be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/e-services/e-services-businesses/refile-online-t1-adjustments-efile-service-providers.html, allows taxpayers to make corrections to an already-filed return online, using the CRA website.

Essentially, taxpayers whose returns have been filed online (through NETFILE or EFILE) can file a correction to that already-filed return, using the same tax return preparation software that was used to prepare the return. Those taxpayers who used NETFILE to file their return can file an adjustment to a returns filed for the 2016, 2017, or 2018 tax years. Where the return was filed using EFILE, the EFILE service provider can file adjustments for returns filed for the 2015, 2016, 2017, or 2018 tax years.

There are limits to the ReFILE service. The online system will accept a maximum of 9 adjustments to a single return, and ReFILE cannot be used to make changes to personal information, like the taxpayer’s address or direct deposit details. There are also some types of tax matters which cannot be handled through ReFILE, like applying for a disability tax credit or child and family benefits.

It is also possible to make a change or correction to a return using the CRA’s “My Account” service (through the “Change My Return” feature), but that choice is available only to taxpayers who have already registered for the My Account service. As well, the changes/corrections which can be made using ReFILE are the same as those which can be done through My Account, without the need to become registered for My Account, a process which takes a few weeks.

Taxpayers who wish to make changes or corrections which cannot be made through ReFILE or My Account (or those who just don’t wish to use the online option) can paper-file an adjustment to their return. The paper form to be used is Form T1-ADJ E (2018), which can be found on the CRA website at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pbg/tf/t1-adj/README.html. Those who are unable to print the form off the website can order a copy to be sent to them by mail by calling the CRA’s individual income tax enquiries line at 1-800-959-8281. There is no limit to the number of changes or corrections which can be made using the T1-ADJ E (2018) form.

The use of the actual T1-ADJ form isn’t mandatory – it is also possible to file an adjustment request by sending a letter to the CRA – but using the prescribed form has two benefits. First, it makes clear to the CRA that an adjustment is being requested, and second, filling out the form will ensure that the CRA is provided with all the information needed to process the requested adjustment. Whether the request is made using the T1 Adjustment form or by letter, it is necessary to include any relevant documents – the information slip summarizing the income not reported, or the receipt for an expense inadvertently not claimed.

A hard copy of a T1-ADJ (or a letter) is filed by sending the completed document to the appropriate Tax Center, which is the one with which the tax return was originally filed. A listing of Tax Centres and their addresses can be found on the CRA website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/cntct/prv/txcntr-eng.html. A taxpayer who isn’t sure any more which Tax Centre his or her return was filed with can go to www.cra-arc.gc.ca/cntct/tso-bsf-eng.html on the CRA website and select his or her location from the listing found there. The address for the correct Tax Centre will then be provided. Similar information is also provided on page 2 of the T1ADJ form.

Where a taxpayer discovers an error or omission in a return already filed, the impulse is to correct that mistake as soon as possible. However, no matter which method is used to make the correction – ReFILE, My Account, or the filing of a T1-ADJ in hard copy, it is necessary to wait until the Notice of Assessment for the return already filed is received. Corrections to a return submitted prior to the time that return is assessed simply cannot be processed by the Agency.

Once the Notice of Assessment is received, and an adjustment request is made, it will take at least a few weeks, usually longer, before the CRA responds. The Agency’s estimate is that such requests which are submitted online have a turnaround time of about two weeks, while those which come in by mail take about eight weeks. Not unexpectedly, all requests which are submitted during the CRA’s peak return processing period between March and July will take longer.

Sometimes the CRA will contact the taxpayer, even before a return is assessed, to request further information, clarification or documentation of deductions or credits claimed (for example, receipts documenting medical expenses claimed, or child care costs). Whatever the nature of the request, the best course of action is to respond promptly, and to provide the requested documents or information. The CRA can assess only on the basis of the information with which it is provided, and it is the taxpayer’s responsibility to provide support for any deduction or credit claims made. Where a request for information or supporting documentation for a claimed deduction or credit is ignored by the taxpayer, the assessment will proceed on the basis that such support does not exist. Providing the requested information or supporting documentation can usually resolve the question to the CRA’s satisfaction, and its assessment of the taxpayer’s return can then be completed.

Both changes in the job market and increases in real estate prices over at least the past decade have made the goal of home ownership an elusive or even impossible one for many Canadians, especially younger Canadians.

Both changes in the job market and increases in real estate prices over at least the past decade have made the goal of home ownership an elusive or even impossible one for many Canadians, especially younger Canadians.

There is no single solution for the multiple factors which prevent many Canadians from getting that first toehold on the “property ladder”. However, changes announced in this year’s federal Budget seek to make it a bit easier to become a first-time home owner.

Those changes involved the expansion of an existing program — the Home Buyers’ Plan, which allows first-time home buyers to use funds withdrawn from their registered retirement savings plans (RRSPs) to make part or all of a down payment on a home purchase. Any such amounts can be withdrawn tax-free, but must then be re-contributed or repaid to the RRSP in prescribed amounts, and on a prescribed schedule, over the next 15 years.

While access to the HBP is limited to first-time home buyers, the definition of that term is more expansive than it might seem. Under the HBP rules, a first-time home buyer is someone who has not owned and lived in a home either in the current year or any of the four previous years. Where that person is married, his or her spouse must also meet the same criteria.

Where an individual and his or her spouse meet the HBP criteria, each could withdraw up to $25,000 from his or her RRSP and use those funds for a down payment. The Budget measures propose to increase the maximum amount which can be withdrawn from an RRSP under the HBP from $25,000 to $35,000.  Consequently, a couple can now withdraw up to $70,000 under the HBP, as the change is effective for withdrawals made under the HBP after the Budget date of March 19, 2019.

One further change to the HBP program was announced in the Budget, and that change applies where a marriage or common-law partnership breaks down.  When spouses separate, it is often the case that one or both of them must purchase another home. The Budget measures propose to extend access to the HBP for individuals who are in that situation, regardless of whether they meet the definition of first-time home buyer.

Where a former spouse purchases a new residence using the HBP, any previous place of residence must, in most instances, be disposed of within two years after the end of the year in which the HBP withdrawal is made.

The change providing increased access to the HBP on the breakdown of a marriage or common law partnership is effective for HBP withdrawals made after the end of 2019.

More details of the rules governing the HBP can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/rrsps-related-plans/what-home-buyers-plan.html.

Most taxpayers sit down to do their annual tax return, or wait to hear from their tax return preparer, with some degree of trepidation. In most cases taxpayers don’t know, until their return is completed, what the “bottom line” will be, and it’s usually a case of hoping for the best and fearing the worst.

Most taxpayers sit down to do their annual tax return, or wait to hear from their tax return preparer, with some degree of trepidation. In most cases taxpayers don’t know, until their return is completed, what the “bottom line” will be, and it’s usually a case of hoping for the best and fearing the worst.

Most taxpayers are, of course, hoping for a refund — the bigger the better. A lot would be happy to find that at least nothing is owed to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), or that an amount owing is not significant.

The worst-case scenario, for all taxpayers, is to find out that they are faced with a large tax bill and an imminent payment deadline, and that they just don’t have the money to make the required payment by that deadline. For those who don’t have the means to pay a tax bill out of existing resources, that likely means borrowing the needed funds.  And while that will mean paying interest on the borrowing, the interest cost incurred will likely be less than that which would be levied by the CRA on the unpaid tax bill. 

If a tax bill can’t be paid in full out of either current resources or available credit, the CRA is open to making a payment arrangement with the taxpayer. While, like most creditors, the CRA would rather get paid on time and in full, its ultimate goal is to collect the full amount of taxes owed. Consequently, the Agency provides taxpayers who simply can’t pay their bill for the year on time and in full with the option of paying an amount owed over time, through a payment arrangement.

There are two avenues available to taxpayers who want to propose such a payment arrangement. The first is a call to the CRA’s automated TeleArrangement service at 1-866-256-1147. When making such a call, it is necessary for the taxpayer to provide his or her social insurance number, date of birth, and the amount entered on line 150 of the last tax return for which the taxpayer received a Notice of Assessment. (For taxpayers who are up to date on their tax filings, that will be the Notice of Assessment for the return for the 2017 tax year). The TeleArrangement Service is available Monday to Friday, from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m., Eastern time.

Taxpayers who would rather speak directly to a CRA employee can call the Agency’s debt management call centre at 1-888-863-8657 or can complete an online form (available at https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/iesl/showClickToTalkForm.action) requesting a callback from a CRA agent.

The CRA also provides on online tool, in the form of a payment arrangement calculator (available at https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/recc/pac/prot/lngg?request_locale=en_CA), which allows the taxpayer to calculate different payment proposals, depending on his or her circumstances). That calculator includes interest charges since, no matter what payment arrangement is made, the CRA will levy interest charges on any amount of tax owed for the 2018 tax year which is not paid on or before April 30, 2019. Interest charges levied by the CRA tend to add up quickly, for two reasons. First, the interest charged by the CRA on outstanding tax amounts is, by law, higher than current commercial rates. For the second quarter of 2019 (April 1 to June 30), that rate is 6%. Second, interest charges levied by the CRA are compounded daily, meaning that each day’s interest is levied on the previous day’s interest charges. It is for these reasons that a taxpayer is, where at all possible, likely better off arranging private borrowing in order to pay any taxes owing by the April 30 deadline.

Finally, there is one strategy which is, in all circumstances, a bad one. Taxpayers who can’t pay their tax bill by the deadline sometimes conclude that there is no point in filing if payment can’t be made. Those taxpayers are wrong. Where an amount of tax is owed and the return isn’t filed on time, there is an immediate tax penalty imposed of 5% of the outstanding tax amount — and interest charges start accruing on that penalty amount (as well as on the outstanding tax balance) immediately. For each month that the return isn’t filed, a further penalty of 1% of the outstanding tax amount is charged, to a maximum of 12 months. Higher penalty amounts are charged, for a longer period, where the taxpayer has incurred a late-filing penalty within the past three years. In a worst-case scenario, the total penalty charges can be 50% of the tax amount owed — and that doesn’t count the compound interest which is levied on all penalty amounts, as well as on all unpaid taxes. In all cases, no matter what the circumstances, the right answer is to file one’s tax return on time. This year, for most taxpayers, that means filing on or before Tuesday April 30, 2019. For self-employed taxpayers (and their spouses) the filing deadline is Monday June 17, 2019. However for all taxpayers, the payment deadline for all 2018 income tax owed is Tuesday April 30, 2019.

Our tax system is, for the most part, a mystery to individual Canadians. The rules surrounding income tax are complicated and it can seem that for every rule there is an equal number of exceptions or qualifications. There is, however, one rule which applies to every individual taxpayer in Canada, regardless of location, income, or circumstances, and of which most Canadians are aware. That rule is that income tax owed for a year must be paid, in full, on or before April 30 of the following year. This year, that means that individual income taxes owed for 2018 must be remitted to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) on or before Tuesday, April 30, 2019 — no exceptions and, absent extraordinary circumstances, no extensions.

Our tax system is, for the most part, a mystery to individual Canadians. The rules surrounding income tax are complicated and it can seem that for every rule there is an equal number of exceptions or qualifications. There is, however, one rule which applies to every individual taxpayer in Canada, regardless of location, income, or circumstances, and of which most Canadians are aware. That rule is that income tax owed for a year must be paid, in full, on or before April 30 of the following year. This year, that means that individual income taxes owed for 2018 must be remitted to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) on or before Tuesday, April 30, 2019 — no exceptions and, absent extraordinary circumstances, no extensions.

It is very much in the CRA’s interests to make paying taxes as simple and as straightforward as it can be and so the Agency offers individual taxpayers a wide range of choices when it comes making that payment. There are, in fact, no fewer than seven separate options available to individual residents of Canada in paying their taxes for the 2018 tax year. The options open to taxpayers who must make a payment to the taxman are set out below.

Pay using online banking

Millions of Canadians transact most or all of their banking using the online services of their particular financial institution. The list of financial institutions through which a payment can be made to the CRA is a lengthy one (available at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/pay-online-banking.html), and includes all of Canada’s major banks and credit unions.

The specific steps involved in making that payment will differ slightly for each financial institution, depending on how their online payment systems are configured. What’s important to remember is that the nature of the payment (i.e., current year tax return, as distinct from current year tax instalment payments) must be specified, and the taxpayer’s social insurance number must be provided, in order to ensure that the payment is credited to the correct account, for the correct taxation year.

It is not necessary to access any particular CRA form in order to make an online payment of taxes through one’s financial institution website.

Paying at your financial institution

For those who don’t use online banking, or simply prefer to make a payment in person, it’s possible to pay a tax amount owed at the bank. Doing so, however, requires that the taxpayer have a personalized remittance form.

Since that remittance is specific to the taxpayer, it’s not possible to simply print that form from the CRA website. However, taxpayers who wish to obtain such a personalized remittance form can do so by calling the CRA’s Individual Income Tax Enquiries line at 1-800-959 8281 and requesting that one be sent to them by mail.

Using the CRA’s My Payment

The CRA also provides an online payment service called My Payment. There is no fee charged for the service, and it’s not necessary to be registered for any of the CRA’s other online services in order to use My Payment.

What is necessary is that the taxpayer have a debit card with a VISA Debit, Debit MasterCard, or InteracOnline logo from a participating Canadian financial institution, as My Payment is set up to accept payment using only those cards. Anyone intending to use My Payment should first confirm that the amount of any payment to be made is within the daily or weekly transaction limits imposed by the particular financial institution.

More details on this payment method can be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/e-services/payment-save-time-pay-online.html.

Payment by credit card

While it’s possible to pay one’s taxes using a credit card, such payments can only be made through third-party service providers (that is, payments by credit card cannot be made directly to the CRA), and such third-party service providers will impose a fee for the service.

There are only two such service providers listed on the CRA website, and links to each such service are available at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/pay-credit-card.html.

Payment through a service provider

There are a number of third-party service providers which will accept payments and remit them on the taxpayer’s behalf to the CRA. However, the majority of such services are more oriented toward providing services to businesses, and most of those listed on the CRA website do not handle payments of individual income tax amounts owed.

The full listing of third-party service providers, and the types of payments they handle, can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/pay-a-service-provider.html.

Payment by pre-authorized debit

It’s possible to set up a pre-authorized debit (PAD) arrangement with the CRA, authorizing the Agency to debit one’s bank account for an amount of taxes owed, on dates specified by the taxpayer.

Individuals who make instalment payments of tax throughout the year may already have such an arrangement in place and can certainly use that existing arrangement to arrange a PAD of any balance of taxes owed for the 2018 tax year. However, any PAD arrangement must be made at least five business days before the payment due date of April 30. A taxpayer who makes a payment of taxes only once a year is likely better off using another of the available payment methods.

There is also another option for taxpayers who have their return prepared and E-FILED by an authorized electronic filer. Such taxpayers can have that E-FILER set up a PAD agreement on their behalf in order to make a one-time payment for a current-year tax amount owed. Such an arrangement is only for the payment of a current-year tax balance and can’t be used for other payments like instalment payments of tax. Details on how to set up a pre-authorized debit arrangement, whether for a single payment or for recurring payments, are outlined on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/pay-authorized-debit.html.

Payment by cash or debit card

It is still possible to pay one’s taxes in cash, or by using a debit card. Such payments are made, not at CRA offices, but at Canada Post outlets.

However, while a cash payment may be a low-tech option, the requirements for making a cash or debit card payment are not. In order to do so, the taxpayer will need a self-generated QR (quick response) code. Such code can be created by following a link found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/corporate/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/pay-canada-post.html. The QR code created is provided to a clerk at a Canada Post outlet, who uses the information in the code to properly credit the payment made. Service fees are levied for this payment method.

It’s important for all taxpayers to realize that the payment deadline of April 30 requires that the CRA receive payment by that date. The Agency considers that a payment has been made only when it actually receives that payment, or the payment is received by a member of the Canadian Payments Association (which would include most Canadian financial institutions).

The majority of payment options now available to Canadians involve online transactions or the use of third-party service providers. Both such methods can mean some delay in receipt of the payment by the CRA, as a result of the time required for processing of the payment by the financial institution or third party. Consequently, taxpayers who make their tax payments online or using a third-party service provider are well-advised to consider that time lag in deciding when to make their payment – waiting until April 30, especially late in the day, to do so  isn’t a good idea.

Those who make their payment in person at a financial institution (using a personalized remittance form, as outlined above) can make their payment on April 30, as the date stamped on the remittance form is considered to be the date on which such payment is received by the CRA.

By the time most Canadians sit down to organize their various tax slips and receipts and undertake to complete their tax return for 2018, the most significant opportunities to minimize the tax bill for the year are no longer available. Most such tax planning or saving strategies, in order to be effective for 2018, must have been implemented by the end of that calendar year. The major exception to that is, of course, the making of registered retirement savings plan (RRSP) contributions, but even that had to be done on or before March 1, 2019 in order to be deducted on the return for 2018.

By the time most Canadians sit down to organize their various tax slips and receipts and undertake to complete their tax return for 2018, the most significant opportunities to minimize the tax bill for the year are no longer available. Most such tax planning or saving strategies, in order to be effective for 2018, must have been implemented by the end of that calendar year. The major exception to that is, of course, the making of registered retirement savings plan (RRSP) contributions, but even that had to be done on or before March 1, 2019 in order to be deducted on the return for 2018.

However, the fact that the clock has run out on most major tax planning opportunities for 2018 doesn’t mean that there are no tax-saving strategies left. At this point, there are a couple of ways to minimize the tax hit for 2018 — by claiming all available deductions and credits on the return and also by making sure that those deductions and credits are claimed in the way which will give the taxpayer the most “bang for the buck”.

Everyone’s tax situation (and therefore their tax return) is different, of course, but most taxpayers make claims on their annual returns for medical expenses incurred and/or charitable donations made. It may seem counterintuitive, or even illogical, to not claim every available deduction and credit in order to obtain the best possible tax result for the year. However, for both medical and charitable tax credit claims, albeit for different reasons, there are situations in which it makes sense to defer an available claim until a future year, or to transfer the claim to another person.

Claiming charitable donations

Taxpayers are entitled to make a claim on the annual tax return for charitable donations made in the current (2018) year or any of the previous five years. The reason it can sometimes makes sense not to claim a charitable donation in the year it was made arises from the way in which the charitable donations tax credit is structured to encourage higher donations.

That credit, at both the federal and provincial/territorial levels, is a two-tier credit. Federally, the first $200 in donations receives a credit of 15% of the total donation, or $30. However, donations above the $200 level receive a credit equal to 29% of the donation amount over $200.

Take, for example, a taxpayer who makes a regular contribution to a favourite charity of $100 each month, or $1,200 per year. Where he or she claims that donation on the annual return each year, that claim will result in a federal credit of $320 ($200 × 15%, plus $1,000 × 29%). Where, however, the same taxpayer defers the claim to the following year and claims a total of $2,400 in donations on a single return, he or she will receive a federal credit of $668. ($200 × 15%, plus $2,200 × 29%). Where the donations are accumulated and claimed once every five years, the federal credit received will be $1,712 ($200 × 15%, plus $5,800 × 29%). Under each scenario, the total charitable donation made is the same, but the amount of credit received increases with each year that the claim is deferred. Since each of the provinces and territories provide a two-tier credit (at different rates, depending on the jurisdiction), the same result will be seen when calculating the provincial/territorial credit.

Medical expense tax credit

Notwithstanding our publicly funded health care system, there are a great (and increasing) number of medical and para-medical expenses for which coverage is not provided and which must be paid on an out-of-pocket basis. In many instances, it’s possible to claim a medical expense tax credit for those out-of-pocket costs.

The federal credit for such expenses is 15% of allowable expenses. As is usually the case, the provinces and territories also provide a credit for the same expenses, albeit at different rates.

Many taxpayers find the rules on the calculation of a medical tax credit claim confusing, with some justification. First, there is an income threshold imposed. Eligible medical expenses are those expenses which exceed 3% of net income, or (for 2018) $2,302, whichever is less. Put more practically, for 2018 taxpayers who have net income of $76,750 or less can claim medical expenses incurred over $2,302. Those with higher incomes can claim medical expenses which exceed 3% of that higher net income.

The other aspect of the medical expense tax credit which can be confusing is the calculation of the optimal time period. Unlike most credit claims, the medical expense tax credit can be claimed for qualifying expenses which were paid in any 12-month period ending during the tax year. While confusing, this rule is beneficial, in that it allows taxpayers to select the particular 12-month period during which medical expenses (and the resulting credit claim) is highest. The only restrictions are that the selected 12-month period must end during the calendar year for which the return is being filed and, of course, any expenses which were claimed on a previous return cannot be claimed again. 

While only expenses which exceed the $2,302/3% threshold may be claimed, it’s also possible to aggregate expenses incurred within a family and make a single claim for those expenses on the return of one spouse. Specifically, the rules allow families to aggregate medical expenses incurred for each spouse and for all children born in 2001 or later. While medical expenses incurred by a single family member might not be enough to allow him or her to make a claim, aggregating those expenses is very likely (especially for a family that does not have private medical insurance coverage) to mean that total expenses will exceed the applicable threshold.

In determining who will make the medical tax credit claim for a family, there are two points to remember. Since total medical expenses claimable are those which exceed the 3% of net income/$2,302 threshold, whichever is less, the greatest benefit will be obtained if the spouse with the lower income makes the claim for total family medical expenses. However, the medical expense credit is a non-refundable one, meaning that it can reduce tax otherwise payable, but cannot create (or increase) a refund. Therefore, it’s necessary that the spouse making the claim have tax payable for the year of at least as much as the credit to be obtained, in order to make full use of that credit.

Finally, there are a huge number and variety of medical expenses which individuals and families may incur, and the rules governing which can be claimed and in what circumstances, are very specific. In some cases, for instance, a doctor’s prescription will be required, while in others it will not. A listing of medical expenses eligible for the credit, and any ancillary requirements, such as a prescription, can be found on the Canada Revenue Agency website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/tax-return/completing-a-tax-return/deductions-credits-expenses/lines-330-331-eligible-medical-expenses-you-claim-on-your-tax-return.html#mdcl_xpns.

The Old Age Security program is the only aspect of Canada’s retirement income system which does not require a direct contribution from recipients of program benefits. Rather, the OAS program is funded through general tax revenues, and eligibility to receive OAS is based solely on Canadian residency. Anyone who is 65 years of age or older and has lived in Canada for at least 40 years after the age of 18 is eligible to receive the maximum benefit. For the first quarter of 2019 (January to March 2019), that maximum monthly benefit is $601.45. 

The Old Age Security program is the only aspect of Canada’s retirement income system which does not require a direct contribution from recipients of program benefits. Rather, the OAS program is funded through general tax revenues, and eligibility to receive OAS is based solely on Canadian residency. Anyone who is 65 years of age or older and has lived in Canada for at least 40 years after the age of 18 is eligible to receive the maximum benefit. For the first quarter of 2019 (January to March 2019), that maximum monthly benefit is $601.45. 

For many years, OAS was automatically paid to eligible recipients once they reached the age of 65. However, since July 2013 Canadians who are eligible to receive OAS benefits have been able to defer receipt of those benefits for up to five years, when they turn 70 years of age. For each month that an individual Canadian defers receipt of those benefits, the amount of benefit eventually received would increase by 0.6%. The longer the period of deferral, the greater the amount of monthly benefit eventually received. Where receipt of OAS benefits is deferred for a full 5 years, until age 70, the monthly benefit received is increased by 36%.

It can, however, be difficult to determine, on an individual basis, whether and to what extent it would make sense to defer receipt of OAS benefits. Some of the difficulty in deciding whether to defer, and for how long, lies in the fact there are no hard and fast rules, and the decision is very much an individual one. Fortunately, however, there are a number of factors which each individual can consider when making that decision.

The first such factor is how much total income will be required, at the age of 65, to finance current needs. It is also necessary to determine what other sources of income (employment income from full-time or part-time work, Canada Pension Plan retirement benefits, employer-sponsored pension plan benefits, annuity payments, and withdrawals from registered retirement savings plans (RRSPs) and registered retirement income fund (RRIFs)) are available to meet those needs, both currently and in the future, and when receipt of those income amounts can or will commence or cease. Once income needs and the sources and possible timing of each is clear, it is necessary to consider the income tax implications of the structuring and timing of those sources of income. The ultimate goal, as it is at any age, is to ensure sufficient income to finance a comfortable lifestyle while at the same time minimizing both the tax bite and the potential loss of tax credits.

In making those calculations, the following income tax thresholds and benefit cut-off figures are a starting point.

• Income in the first federal tax bracket is taxed at 15%, while income in the second bracket is taxed at 20.5%. For 2019, that second income tax bracket begins when taxable income reaches $47,630.
• The Canadian tax system provides (for 2019) a non-refundable tax credit of $7,494 for taxpayers who are over the age of 65 at the end of the tax year. That amount of that credit is reduced once the taxpayer’s net income for the year exceeds $37,790.
• Individuals can receive a GST/HST refundable tax credit, which is paid quarterly. For 2019, the full credit is payable to individual taxpayers whose family net income is less than $37,789.
• Taxpayers who receive Old Age Security benefits and have income over a specified amount are required to repay a portion of those benefits, through a mechanism known as the “OAS recovery tax”, or clawback. For the July 2019 to June 2020 benefit period, taxpayers whose income for 2018 was more than $75,910 will have a portion of their OAS benefit entitlement “clawed back”.

What other sources of income are currently available?

More and more, Canadians are not automatically leaving the work force at the age of 65. Those who continue to work at paid employment and whose employment income is sufficient to finance their chosen lifestyle may well prefer to defer receipt of OAS. Similarly, a taxpayer who begins receiving benefits from an employer’s pension plan when he or she turns 65, may be able to postpone receipt of OAS benefits.

Is the taxpayer eligible for Canada Pension Plan retirement benefits, and at what age will those benefits commence?

Nearly all Canadians who were employed or self-employed after the age of 18 paid into the Canada Pension Plan and are eligible to receive CPP retirement benefits. While such retirement benefits can be received as early as age 60, receipt can also be deferred and received any time up to the age of 70. As is the case with OAS benefits, CPP retirement benefits increase with each month that receipt of those benefits is deferred. Taxpayers who are eligible for both OAS and CPP will need to consider the impact of accelerating or deferring the receipt of each benefit in structuring retirement income.  

Does the taxpayer have private retirement savings through an RRSP?

Taxpayers who were not members of an employer-sponsored pension plan during their working lives generally save for retirement through a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP). While taxpayers can choose to withdraw amounts from such plans at any age, they are required to collapse their RRSPs by the end of the year in which they turn 71, and to begin receiving income from those savings. There are a number of options available for structuring that income, and, whatever the option chosen (usually, converting the RRSP into a registered retirement income fund or RRIF, or purchasing an annuity) will mean that the taxpayer will begin receiving income amounts from those RRSP funds in the following year. Taxpayers who have significant retirement savings in RRSPs should, in determining when to begin receiving OAS benefits, consider that they will have an additional (taxable) income amount for each year after they turn 71.

The ability to defer receipt of OAS benefits does provide Canadians with more flexibility when it comes to structuring retirement income. The price of that flexibility is increased complexity, particularly where, as is the case for most retirees, multiple sources of income and the timing of each of those income sources must be considered, and none can be considered in isolation from the others.

Individuals who are facing that decision-making process will find some assistance on the Service Canada website. That website provides a Retirement Income Calculator, which, based on information input by the user, will calculate the amount of OAS which would be payable at different ages. The calculator will also determine, based on current RRSP savings, the monthly income amount which those RRSP funds will provide during retirement. To use the calculator, it is necessary to know the amount of Canada Pension Plan benefit which will be received, and the taxpayer can obtain that information by calling Service Canada at 1-800 277-9914.

The Retirement Income Calculator can be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/services/benefits/publicpensions/cpp/retirement-income-calculator.html.

Each year, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) publishes a statistical summary of the tax filing patterns of Canadians during the previous filing season. Those statistics for the 2018 show that the vast majority of Canadian individual income tax returns — nearly 87%, or almost 26 million returns — were filed online, using one or the other of the CRA’s web-based filing methods. The remaining 13% of returns were, for the most part, paper-filed, and a very small percentage (0.1%) were filed using the File My Return service, in which returns are filed by telephone.

Each year, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) publishes a statistical summary of the tax filing patterns of Canadians during the previous filing season. Those statistics for the 2018 show that the vast majority of Canadian individual income tax returns — nearly 87%, or almost 26 million returns — were filed online, using one or the other of the CRA’s web-based filing methods. The remaining 13% of returns were, for the most part, paper-filed, and a very small percentage (0.1%) were filed using the File My Return service, in which returns are filed by telephone.

Clearly, electronic filing is the overwhelming choice of Canadian taxpayers, and those who choose electronic filing this year have two choices — NETFILE and E-FILE. The first of those — NETFILE, which was used last year by just under 30% of tax filers) — involves preparing one’s return using software approved by the CRA and filing that return on the Agency’s website, using the NETFILE service. E-FILE involves having a third party file one’s return online. Almost always, the E-FILE service provider also prepares the return which they are filing. And, it seems that most Canadians want to have little to do with the preparation of their own returns, as last year 57.3% of all the individual income tax returns filed came in by E-FILE. 

The majority of Canadians who would rather have someone else deal with the intricacies of the Canadian tax system on their behalf can find information about E-FILE on the CRA website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/esrvc-srvce/tx/ndvdls/fl-nd/menu-eng.html. That site will also provide a listing (searchable by postal code) of authorized E-FILE service providers across Canada, and that listing can be found at https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/efes/epcs/prot/ntr.action.

Those who are able and willing to prepare their own tax returns and file online can use the CRA’s NETFILE service, and information on that service can be found at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/esrvc-srvce/tx/ndvdls/netfile-impotnet/menu-eng.html. While there are some kinds of returns which cannot be NETFILED (for instance, a return for a non-resident of Canada, or for someone who declared bankruptcy in 2018 or 2019), the vast majority of Canadians who wish to do so will be able to NETFILE their return. As well, while it was once necessary to obtain an access code in order to NETFILE, that’s no longer the case. The CRA’s NETFILE security procedures can be satisfied by providing specific personal identifying information, including one’s social insurance number and date of birth.

A return can be filed using NETFILE only where it is prepared using tax return preparation software which has been approved by the CRA. While such software can be found for sale just about everywhere at this time of year, approved software which can be used free of charge is also available. A listing of free and commercial software approved for use in preparing individual returns for 2018 can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/e-services/e-services-individuals/netfile-overview/certified-software-netfile-program.html.

Copies of the 2018 tax return and guide package can also be ordered online, at https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/cjcf/fpos-scfp/pub/rdr?searchKey=ncp%20, to be sent to the taxpayer by regular mail. Taxpayers can also download and print hard copy of the return and guide from the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/tax-packages-years/general-income-tax-benefit-package.html. Finally, the CRA has made a “limited” number of tax packages available at Service Canada offices and post offices across the country.

Last year the CRA reinstated (for some taxpayers) a tax return filing option that was previously discontinued. For several years, taxpayers with simple returns had the option of filing their returns using a touch-tone telephone. That option, now called  File my Return service (FMR) will be available to eligible Canadians with low or fixed incomes whose situations remain unchanged from year to year, even if they have no income to report, so that they receive the benefits and credits to which they are entitled. The FMR option is, however, available only to taxpayers who are advised by the CRA of their eligibility, and those individuals will have been notified by letter during the month of February.

Finally, taxpayers who are not comfortable preparing their own returns, but for whom the cost of engaging a third party to do so is a financial hardship, have another option. During tax filing season, there are a number of Community Volunteer Tax Preparation Clinics where taxpayers can have their returns prepared free of charge by volunteers. A listing of such clinics (which is regularly updated during tax filing season) can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/campaigns/free-tax-help.html.

While there are a number of filing options available to Canadian taxpayers, there’s no element of choice when it comes to the filing and payment deadlines for 2018 tax returns. All individual Canadians must pay the balance of any taxes owed for 2018 on or before Tuesday April 30, 2018, with no exceptions and, absent very unusual circumstances, no extensions.

For the majority of Canadians, the tax return for 2018 must also be filed on or before Tuesday April 30, 2019. Self-employed taxpayers and their spouses have until Monday June 17, 2018 to file their returns for 2018 (but they too must pay any 2018 taxes owing on or before April 30, 2019).

For many years now, there has been a persistent tax scam operating in Canada in which Canadians are contacted, usually by phone, by someone who falsely identifies himself or herself as being a representative of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). The taxpayer is told that money — sometimes a substantial amount of money — is owed to the government. The identifier for this particular scam is that the caller insists that the money owed must be paid immediately (usually by wire transfer or pre-paid credit card) and, if payment is not made right away, significant negative consequences will follow, including immediate arrest or seizure of assets, confiscation of the taxpayer’s Canadian passport, or deportation.

For many years now, there has been a persistent tax scam operating in Canada in which Canadians are contacted, usually by phone, by someone who falsely identifies himself or herself as being a representative of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). The taxpayer is told that money — sometimes a substantial amount of money — is owed to the government. The identifier for this particular scam is that the caller insists that the money owed must be paid immediately (usually by wire transfer or pre-paid credit card) and, if payment is not made right away, significant negative consequences will follow, including immediate arrest or seizure of assets, confiscation of the taxpayer’s Canadian passport, or deportation.

Of course, none of those consequences are remotely possible, even in circumstances where a legitimate tax debt is owed. However, the individuals or groups perpetrating this scam have, over the years, become both increasingly sophisticated — to the point of having a call display which shows the call as coming from the CRA — and increasingly successful, and many Canadians have suffered significant financial losses as a result.

To combat this, the CRA and other authorities have provided many warnings to taxpayers on how to avoid getting cheated, such that by now almost everyone has heard of this particular tax scam. However, there has also been an unintended result, as outlined by the CRA on its website:

“Scammers posing as Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) employees continue to contact Canadians, misleading them into paying false debt. These persistent scammers have created fear among people who now automatically assume that any communication from someone representing the CRA is not genuine.”

As we move into tax filing season, it is more likely that the CRA will be in touch with taxpayers for legitimate reasons. This poses two potential problems. First, there is likely to be an increase in the activity of tax scammers, who are relying on the fact that taxpayers are more likely to expect contact from the CRA during tax filing season. Second, the tax administration process can’t function efficiently if taxpayers don’t respond to legitimate communications from the CRA out of fear that such communications are just in furtherance of another tax scam.

To address this problem, the CRA has provided comprehensive information on the methods by which it does and does not contact taxpayers, and what it will and will not ask for in communications with taxpayers. That information, which is posted on the CRA website, is as follows.

Phone

The CRA may

• verify your identity by asking for personal information such as your full name, date of birth, address, account number, or social insurance number
• ask for details about your account, in the case of a business enquiry
• call you to begin an audit process

The CRA will never

• ask for information about your passport, health card, or driver's license
• demand immediate payment by Interac e-transfer, bitcoin, prepaid credit cards, or gift cards from retailers such as iTunes, Amazon, or others
• use aggressive language or threaten you with arrest or sending the police
• leave voicemails that are threatening or give personal or financial information

Email

The CRA may

• notify you by email when a new message or a document, such as a notice of assessment or reassessment, is available for you to view in secure CRA portals such as My Account, My Business Account, or Represent a Client
• email you a link to a CRA webpage, form, or publication that you ask for during a telephone call or a meeting with an agent (this is the only case where the CRA will send an email containing links)

The CRA will never

• give or ask for personal or financial information by email and ask you to click on a link
• email you a link asking you to fill in an online form with personal or financial details
• send you an email with a link to your refund
• demand immediate payment by Interac e-transfer, bitcoin, prepaid credit cards, or gift cards from retailers such as iTunes, Amazon, or others
• threaten you with arrest or a prison sentence

Mail

The CRA may

• ask for financial information such as the name of your bank and its location
• send you a notice of assessment or reassessment
• ask you to pay an amount you owe through any of the CRA's payment options
• take legal action to recover the money you owe, if you refuse to pay your debt
• write to you to begin an audit process

The CRA will never

• set up a meeting with you in a public place to take a payment
• demand immediate payment by Interac e-transfer, bitcoin, prepaid credit cards, or gift cards from retailers such as iTunes, Amazon, or others
• threaten you with arrest or a prison sentence

Text messages/instant messaging

The CRA never uses text messages or instant messaging such as Facebook Messenger or WhatsApp to communicate with taxpayers under any circumstance. If a taxpayer receives text or instant messages claiming to be from the CRA, they are scams!

Fraud isn’t new, and it isn’t going away any time soon. However, the speed and anonymity of electronic communication and the extent to which most people are now comfortable transacting their tax and financial affairs online or over the phone makes it easier in many ways for fraud artists to succeed. The best defence against becoming a victim of such scams is a healthy degree of caution, even skepticism, and a refusal to provide any personal or financial information, whether by phone, e-mail, text, or online, without first verifying the legitimacy of the request. The CRA suggests that anyone who is contacted by phone by someone claiming to be a CRA employee take the following steps:

• Ask for or make a note of the caller's name, phone number, and office location and tell them that you want to first verify their identity.

• Check that the employee calling you about your taxes works for the CRA or that the CRA did contact you by calling 1-800-959-8281 for individuals or 1-800-959-5525 for businesses. If the call you received was about a government program such as Student Loans or Employment Insurance, call 1-866-864-5823.

While Canadian taxpayers must prepare and file the same form – the T1 Income Tax and Benefit Return – every spring, that return form is never the same from one year to the next. The one constant in tax is change, and every year taxpayers sit down to face a different tax return form than they dealt with the previous year.

While Canadian taxpayers must prepare and file the same form – the T1 Income Tax and Benefit Return – every spring, that return form is never the same from one year to the next. The one constant in tax is change, and every year taxpayers sit down to face a different tax return form than they dealt with the previous year.

First, there are “automatic” changes to the tax rules which are reflected on the return every year. The basic personal credits which can be claimed by most taxpayers increase every year, as do the income brackets which determine the tax rate which applies at each level of income, as both are changed to reflect the rate of inflation.

Changes in tax credit amounts or tax bracket figures are largely invisible to the average taxpayer, as they don’t require any change to the layout or organization of the tax return form, or the process of completing it. The more significant changes are those which provide new credits or deductions to qualifying taxpayers or, conversely, eliminate such credits or deductions which taxpayers might have claimed in previous years. What follows is a listing of such changes which taxpayers will find when completing their return for the 2018 tax year.

Climate Action Incentive

Perhaps the best news in the 2018 tax return, for taxpayers who are residents of Saskatchewan, Ontario, Manitoba, or New Brunswick, is the new Climate Action Incentive (CAI) – a refundable tax credit intended to help mitigate the impact of carbon taxes. The Incentive is extremely broad-based; it is, with few exceptions, claimable by any resident of one of those provinces who is 18 years of age or older, has a spouse or common law partner, or is a parent who lives with his or her child.

The CAI rates vary by province, with the basic incentive ranging from $128 in New Brunswick to $305 in Saskatchewan. An individual who has a spouse or common law partner, or a dependant, can claim an amount in respect of each, and a separate amount is claimable by a single parent in respect of each qualified dependant. As with the basic amount, the amounts claimable for spouses or common law partners and for qualified dependants will vary by province.

The amount of the CAI is increased for individuals who live in rural areas, where the impact of a carbon tax is likely to be greater. Such individuals can increase their basic CAI claim (as outlined above) by 10% to arrive at the total amount claimable. The definition of what constitutes “rural area” for purposes of the CAI has been defined by the tax authorities and a listing of locations in each province which do not qualify as a rural area can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/tax-return/completing-a-tax-return/deductions-credits-expenses/line-449-climate-action-incentive/qualify-for-the-supplement.html.

Finally, the CAI is a refundable credit, meaning that it is paid to the taxpayer even where no tax is payable for the year and, finally, there are no income restrictions when it comes to eligibility – all qualifying taxpayers receive the amounts outlined above, regardless of their income for the year.

Medical expense tax credit

The list of medical and para-medical expenses for which the medical expense tax credit can be claimed is long and detailed and subject to continual revision. This year, that list has been expanded to include a variety of expenses relating to service animals specially trained to perform specific tasks for a patient with a severe mental impairment.

Unfortunately, the two changes listed above are the only ones which are likely to put money in the taxpayer’s pocket this year. The other major changes which are effective for 2018 cancel existing credits or deductions which were formerly available.

First-time donor super-credit expires

In 2013, the federal government introduced a so-called “first time donor super credit”, which allowed individuals who had not claimed a charitable donation tax credit for a specified period to claim an enhanced credit for donations made in 2013 and the subsequent four years. The first-time super donor tax credit expired at the end of 2017 and consequently no such claim can be made on the 2018 return.

Employee home relocation loan deduction eliminated

Under general tax rules, employees who receive a loan from their employer are considered to have received a taxable benefit. Prior to 2018, preferential tax treatment in the form of a deduction was provided for employees who were required to relocate for work purposes and who received a loan from their employer to assist with related expenses. However, the employee home relocation loan deduction was eliminated as of January 1, 2018.

Changes to the Return, Schedules, and Guide

It’s not news to anyone that our tax system is complex, and that complexity is reflected in the annual tax return form, and in the guide which is intended to provide assistance to taxpayers in completing that return. The income tax return is composed of a four-page return form (the T1) and a number of schedules. Each of those schedules is used to calculate a particular amount – usually a tax credit or tax deduction amount, which is then transferred to a particular line on the return form. Anyone who has ever prepared a tax return is familiar with the sometimes frustrating process of moving back and forth from the return to the schedules to the guide (and back again!), searching for the information needed to figure out just how to complete a particular line or lines of the return.

This year, the Canada Revenue Agency has made some changes in the return, the schedules, and the guide, which are intended to streamline and simplify that process. Specifically, instructions and information which are needed to complete a particular schedule have been moved from the guide and included on that schedule. As well, there are a number of schedules for which it is necessary to first complete some calculations on a worksheet. This year, such calculations, instead of being included in the guide, are incorporated with the worksheet for the particular schedule. Overall, the changes seek to gather in one place all of the information, instructions, and calculations needed to complete a particular schedule, hopefully reducing or eliminating the frustrating need to search through the entire guide for the needed information.

Two quarterly newsletters have been added—one dealing with personal issues, and one dealing with corporate issues.

Two quarterly newsletters have been added—one dealing with personal issues, and one dealing with corporate issues. They can be accessed below.

Corporate:

Issue #47 Corporate

Personal:

Issue #47 Personal

The fact that debt levels of Canadian households have been increasing over the past decade and a half can’t really be called news anymore. In particular, the ratio of debt-to-household-income, which stood at 93% in 2005, has risen steadily since then and, as of the third quarter of 2018, reached (another) new record of 177.5%. In other words, the average Canadian household owed $1.78 for every dollar of disposable (after-tax) income. (The Statistics Canada publication reporting those findings can be found on the StatsCan website at https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/181214/dq181214a-eng.htm.)

The fact that debt levels of Canadian households have been increasing over the past decade and a half can’t really be called news anymore. In particular, the ratio of debt-to-household-income, which stood at 93% in 2005, has risen steadily since then and, as of the third quarter of 2018, reached (another) new record of 177.5%. In other words, the average Canadian household owed $1.78 for every dollar of disposable (after-tax) income. (The Statistics Canada publication reporting those findings can be found on the StatsCan website at https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/181214/dq181214a-eng.htm.)

Repeated announcements of yet another increase in the average debt-to-household income ratio have become almost routine over the past 15 years — the latest statistics are reported in the media and concern is expressed by financial planners and, sometimes, government and banking officials, but there has not been any sustained change in consumer behavior. Starting a year and a half ago, however, something did change. Debt didn’t just get bigger, it got more expensive — five successive times. In June of 2016 the Bank Rate set by the Bank of Canada, on which financial institutions base their lending rates, was 0.75%, and had not changed in the previous two years. Starting in July 2016, that rate was increased in five separate announcements over the next 18 months and, as of January 2019, it stands at 2%.

Like most economic events, the explosive growth in the average debt of Canadian households over the past fifteen years can’t be attributed to a single cause. What’s undeniable however, is that two of the major causes of that growth in debt were first, interest rates which were the lowest on record since before the Great Depression and second, a remarkable run-up in Canadian residential real estate values. Money was cheap and, when debt was secured against home equity, it was frequently incurred in the belief that the increased amount of such debt would soon be covered, or outstripped, by an increase in the value of the underlying real estate. And, since interest rates were so low, the cost of carrying that increased debt was very manageable.

To some extent, both those circumstances have changed. Canadian real estate values are still high by historic standards and, while those values have softened in some areas of the country, there has been nothing like the “crash” in such real estate prices which happened in the late 1980s. However, the era of ultra-cheap money seems to be over, and interest rates are clearly on the increase. While it’s impossible to say how high interest rates will go, and how quickly, it’s prudent to assume at least that rates won’t be going down any time soon.

As the Bank of Canada has announced successive increases in the bank rate, financial institutions have inevitably responded by increasing the interest rates charged on all forms of borrowing. In other words, even if the amount of debt carried by Canadian families hasn’t changed in the last 18 months, the cost of carrying that debt has certainly gone up. The effect of such change is measurable: as noted by the credit reporting agency Equifax, the proportion of Canadians who pay off their credit cards in full each month has declined (as measured on a year-over-year basis) each month since August 2017.

There is no instant fix for anyone who has taken on debt and is now finding that repaying (or even servicing) that debt has become more difficult, or even impossible. There are, however, steps which can be taken to get that debt under control and even, eventually, to be become debt-free. And, there is help available through debt and credit counselling provided by any number of non-profit agencies. Those agencies work with individuals, and with their creditor(s), to create both a realistic budget and a manageable debt repayment schedule. More information on the credit counselling process, and a listing of such non-profit agencies can be found at http://creditcounsellingcanada.ca/.

Sometime during the month of February, millions of Canadians will receive mail from the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). That mail, a “Tax Instalment Reminder”, will set out the amount of instalment payments of income tax to be paid by the recipient taxpayer by March 15 and June 17 of this year.

Sometime during the month of February, millions of Canadians will receive mail from the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). That mail, a “Tax Instalment Reminder”, will set out the amount of instalment payments of income tax to be paid by the recipient taxpayer by March 15 and June 17 of this year.

Receiving an “Instalment Reminder” from the CRA won’t be a surprise for many recipients who have paid tax by instalments during previous tax years. For others, however, the need to make tax payments by instalment is a new and unfamiliar concept. That’s because for most Canadians — certainly most Canadians who earn their income through employment — the payment of income tax throughout the year is an automatic and largely invisible process, requiring no particular action on the part of the employee/taxpayer. Federal and provincial income taxes, along with Canada Pension Plan (CPP) contributions and Employment Insurance (EI) premiums, are deducted from each employee’s income and the amount deposited to an employee’s bank account is the net amount remaining after such taxes, contributions and premiums are deducted and remitted on the employee’s behalf to the CRA. While no one likes having to pay taxes, having those taxes paid “off the top” in such an automatic way is, relatively speaking, painless. Such is not, however, the case for the sizeable minority of Canadians who pay their income taxes by way of tax instalments

The CRA’s decision to send an Instalment Reminder to certain taxpayers isn’t an arbitrary one. Rather, an Instalment Reminder is generated when sufficient income tax has not been deducted from payments made to that taxpayer throughout the year. Put more technically, an instalment reminder will be issued by the CRA where the amount of tax which was or will be owed when filing the annual tax return is more than $3,000 in the current (2019) tax year and either of the two previous (2017 or 2018) tax years. Essentially, the requirement to pay by instalments will be triggered where the amount of tax withheld from the taxpayer’s income throughout the year is at least $3,000 less than their total tax owed for 2019 and either 2017 or 2018. For residents of Quebec, that threshold amount is $1,800.

Such obligation arises on a regular basis for those who are self-employed, or course, and generally for those whose income is largely derived from investments. The group of recipients of a tax instalment reminder often also includes retired Canadians, especially the newly retired, for two reasons. First, while most employees have income from only a single source – their paycheque – retirees often have multiple sources of income, including Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and Old Age Security (OAS) payments, private retirement savings and, sometimes, employer-provided pensions. And, while income tax is deducted automatically from one’s paycheque, that’s not the case for most sources of retirement income. Relatively few new retirees realize that it’s necessary to make arrangements to have tax deducted “at source” from either their government source income (like CPP or OAS payments) or private retirement income like pensions or registered retirement income fund withdrawals, and to make sure that the total amount of those deductions is sufficient to pay the total tax bill for the year. It is that group of individuals, who may be surprised and puzzled by the arrival of an unfamiliar “Instalment Reminder” from the CRA. However, no matter what kind of income a taxpayer has received, or why sufficient tax has not been deducted at source, the options open to a taxpayer who receives such an Instalment Reminder are the same.

First, the taxpayer can pay the amounts specified on the Reminder, by the March and June payment due dates. Choosing this option will mean that the taxpayer will not face any interest or penalty charges, even if the amount paid by instalments throughout the year turns out to be less than the taxes actually payable for 2019. If the total of instalment payments made during 2019 turn out to more than the taxpayer’s total tax liability for the year, he or she will of course receive a refund when the annual tax return is filed in the spring of 2020.

Second, the taxpayer can make instalment payments based on the amount of tax which was owed for the 2018 tax year. Where a taxpayer’s income has not changed significantly between 2018 and 2019 and his or her available deductions and credits remain the same, the likelihood is that total tax liability for 2019 will be slightly less than it was in 2018, as the result of the indexation of both income tax brackets and tax credit amounts.

Third, the taxpayer can estimate the amount of tax which he or she will owe for 2019 and can pay instalments based on that estimate. Where a taxpayer’s income will decrease significantly from 2018 to 2019, such that his or her tax bill will also be substantially reduced, this option can make the most sense.

A taxpayer who elects to follow the second or third options outlined above will not face any interest or penalty charges if there is no tax payable when the return for the 2019 tax year is filed in the spring of 2020. However, should instalments paid have been late or insufficient, the CRA will impose interest charges, at rates which are higher than current commercial rates. (The rate charged for the first quarter of 2019 — until March 31, 2019 — is 6%.) As well, where interest charges are levied, such interest is compounded daily, meaning that on each successive day, interest is levied on the previous day’s interest. It’s also possible for the CRA to levy penalties for overdue or insufficient instalments, but that is done only where the amount of instalment interest charged for the year is more than $1,000.

Most Canadian taxpayers are understandably disinclined to pay their taxes any sooner than absolutely necessary. However, ignoring an Instalment Reminder is never in the taxpayer’s best interests. Those who don’t wish to involve themselves in the intricacies of tax calculations can simply pay the amounts specified in the Reminder. The more technical-minded (or those who want to ensure that they are paying no more than absolutely required, and are willing to take the risk of having to pay interest on any shortfall) can avail themselves of the second or third options outlined above.

For most taxpayers, the annual deadline for making an RRSP contribution comes at a very inconvenient time. At the end of February, many Canadians are still trying to pay off the bills from holiday spending, the first income tax instalment payment is due two weeks later on March 15 and the need to pay any tax balance for the year just ended comes just 6 weeks after that, on April 30. And, while the best advice on how to avoid such a cash flow crunch is to make RRSP contributions on a regular basis throughout the year, that’s more of a goal than a reality for the majority of Canadians.

For most taxpayers, the annual deadline for making an RRSP contribution comes at a very inconvenient time. At the end of February, many Canadians are still trying to pay off the bills from holiday spending, the first income tax instalment payment is due two weeks later on March 15 and the need to pay any tax balance for the year just ended comes just 6 weeks after that, on April 30. And, while the best advice on how to avoid such a cash flow crunch is to make RRSP contributions on a regular basis throughout the year, that’s more of a goal than a reality for the majority of Canadians.

Whether convenient or not, the deadline for making RRSP contributions which can be claimed on the return for 2018 is Friday March 1, 2019. The maximum allowable current year contribution which can be made by any individual taxpayer for 2018 is 18% of that taxpayer’s earned income for the 2017 year, to a statutory maximum of $26,230.

Those are the basic rules governing RRSP contributions for the 2018 tax year. For most Canadians, however, those rules are just the starting point of the calculation, as millions of Canadian taxpayers have what is termed “additional contribution room” carried forward from previous taxation years. That additional contribution room arises because the taxpayer either did not make an RRSP contribution in each previous year, or made one which was less than his or her maximum allowable contribution for the year. For many taxpayers that additional contribution room can amount to tens of thousands of dollars, and the taxpayer is entitled to use as much or as little of that additional contribution room as he or she wishes for the current tax year.

It’s apparent from the forgoing that determining one’s maximum allowable contribution for 2018 will take a bit of research. The first step in determining one’s total (current year and carryforward) contribution room for 2018 is to consult the last Notice of Assessment which was received from the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). Every taxpayer who filed a return for the 2017 taxation year will have received a Notice of Assessment from the CRA, and the amount of that taxpayer’s allowable RRSP contribution room for 2018 will be summarized on page 2 of that notice. Taxpayers who have discarded (or can’t find) their Notice of Assessment can obtain the same information by calling the CRA’s Telephone Information Phone Service (TIPS)  line at 1-800-267-6999. An automated service at that line will provide the required information, once the taxpayer has provided his or her social insurance number, month, and year of birth and the amount of income from his or her 2017 tax return. Those who don’t wish to use an automated service can call the CRA’s Individual Income Tax Enquiries Line at 1-800-959 8281, and speak to a client services agent, who will also request such identifying information before providing any taxpayer-specific data. Finally, for those who have registered for the CRA’s My Account service, the needed information will be available online.

One question that doesn’t often get asked by taxpayers is whether it actually makes sense to make an RRSP contribution. The wisdom of making annual contributions to one’s RRSP has become an almost unquestioned tenet of tax and retirement planning, but there are situations in which other savings vehicles — particularly the Tax-Free Savings Account, or TFSA — may be the better short-term or long-term option or even, in some cases, the only one available.

When it comes to making a contribution to one’s TFSA, the good news is the timelines and deadlines are much more flexible than those which govern RRSP contributions. A contribution to one’s TFSA can be made at any time of the year, and contributions not made during the current year can be carried forward and made in any subsequent year.

On the other hand, determining one’s total TFSA contribution room is significantly more complex than figuring out one’s allowable RRSP contribution amount, for two reasons. First, the maximum TFSA amount has changed several times (increasing and decreasing) since the program was introduced in 2009. Second, and more important, individuals who withdraw funds from a TFSA can re-contribute those funds, but not until the year following the one in which the withdrawal is made. Especially where a taxpayer has several TFSA accounts, and/or a history of making contributions, withdrawals and re-contributions, it can be difficult to determine just where that taxpayer stands with respect to his or her maximum allowable TFSA contribution for 2019.

In this case, there’s no help to be had from a Notice of Assessment, as the CRA no longer provides TFSA contribution information on that form. Information on one’s current year TFSA contribution limit can, however, be obtained from the CRA website, from the TIPS line at 1-800-267-6999 or its Individual Income Tax Enquiries line at 1-800-959-8281, as outlined above. It should be noted, however, that information on one’s 2019 TFSA contribution limit won’t be available through the TIPS line until mid-February 2019.

Determining which savings vehicle is the better option for a particular taxpayer will depend, for the most part, on the taxpayer’s current and future tax situation, the purpose for which the funds are being saved, and the taxpayer’s particular sources of retirement income.

Taxpayers who are saving toward a shorter-term goal, like next year’s vacation or even a down payment on a home should direct those savings into a TFSA. While choosing to save through an RRSP will provide a tax deduction on that year’s return and, possibly, a tax refund, tax will still have to be paid when the funds are withdrawn from the RRSP in a year or two. And, more significantly from a long-term point of view, repeatedly using an RRSP as a short-term savings vehicle will eventually erode one’s ability to save for retirement, as RRSP contributions which are withdrawn cannot be replaced. While the amounts involved may seem small, the loss of contribution room and the compounding of invested amounts over 25 or 30 years or more can make a significant dent in one’s ability to save for retirement.

Taxpayers who are expecting their income to rise significantly within a few years (e.g., students in post-secondary or professional education or training programs) can save some tax by contributing to a TFSA while they are in school and their income (and therefore their tax rate) is low, allowing the funds to compound on a tax-free basis, and then withdrawing the funds tax-free once they’re working, when their tax rate will be higher. At that time, the withdrawn funds can be used to make an RRSP contribution, which will be deducted from income which would be taxed at that higher tax rate. And, if a need for funds should arise in the meantime, a tax-free TFSA withdrawal can always be made.

Taxpayers who are currently in the work force and who are members of a registered pension plan (RPP) may find that saving through a TFSA is their only practical option. As outlined above, the starting point for calculating one’s current year contribution limit maximum amount which can be contributed to an RRSP and deducted on the tax return for 2018 is calculated as 18% of earned income for 2017. However, the maximum allowable contribution is reduced, for members of RPPs, by the amount of benefits accrued during the year under that pension plan. Where the RPP is a particularly generous one, RRSP contribution room may, as a result, be minimal, and a TFSA contribution the logical savings alternative.

Canadians aged 71 and older will find the RRSP vs. TFSA question irrelevant, as the last date on which taxpayers can make RRSP contributions is December 31^st of the year in which they turn 71. Many of those taxpayers will, however, have converted their RRSP savings to a registered retirement income fund (RRIF) and anyone who has done so is required to withdraw (and be taxed on) a specified percentage of those RRIF funds every year. Particularly where required RRIF withdrawals exceed the RRIF holder’s current cash flow needs, that income can be contributed to a TFSA. Although the RRIF withdrawals made must still be included in income for the year and taxed as such, transferring the funds to a TFSA will allow them to continue compounding free of tax and no additional tax will be payable when and if the funds are withdrawn. And, unlike RRIF or RRSP withdrawals, monies withdrawn in the future from a TFSA will not affect the planholder’s eligibility for Old Age Security benefits or for the federal age credit.

RRSPs and TFSAs are the most significant tax-free or tax-deferred savings vehicles available to Canadian taxpayers, and both have a place in most financial and retirement plans. To help taxpayers to make informed choices about their savings options, the CRA provides a number of dedicated webpages about both RRSPs and TFSAs, and those can be found on the CRA website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/rrsp-reer/menu-eng.html and www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/tfsa-celi/menu-eng.html.

Income tax is a big-ticket item for most retired Canadians. Especially for those who are no longer paying a mortgage, the annual tax bill may be the single biggest expenditure they are required to make each year. Fortunately, the Canadian tax system provides a number of tax deductions and credits available only to those over the age of 65 (like the age credit) or only to those receiving the kinds of income usually received by retirees (like the pension income credit), in order to help minimize that tax burden. And, in most cases, the availability of those credits is flagged, either on the income tax form which must be completed each spring or on the accompanying income tax guide.

Income tax is a big-ticket item for most retired Canadians. Especially for those who are no longer paying a mortgage, the annual tax bill may be the single biggest expenditure they are required to make each year. Fortunately, the Canadian tax system provides a number of tax deductions and credits available only to those over the age of 65 (like the age credit) or only to those receiving the kinds of income usually received by retirees (like the pension income credit), in order to help minimize that tax burden. And, in most cases, the availability of those credits is flagged, either on the income tax form which must be completed each spring or on the accompanying income tax guide.

There is, however, another income tax saving strategy which is not nearly as well-known. Even more unfortunate is the fact that the benefits of that strategy (and the ease with which it can be accomplished) aren’t readily apparent from either the tax return form or the annual income tax guide. That tax saving strategy is pension income splitting, and it’s likely the case that many taxpayers who could benefit aren’t familiar with the strategy, especially if they are not receiving professional tax planning or tax return preparation advice.

That’s a particularly unfortunate reality because pension income splitting has the potential to generate more tax savings among taxpayers over the age of 65 (and certainly those over the age of 71, for whom RRSP contributions are no longer possible) than just about any other tax planning strategy available to retirees. In addition, it’s one of the very few tax planning strategies which require no expenditure of funds on the part of the taxpayer, and which can be implemented after the end of the tax year, at the time the return for that tax year is filed.

When described in those terms, pension income splitting can sound like one of those “too good to be true” tax scams, but that’s not the case. Essentially, what pension income splitting offers is a government-sanctioned opportunity for Canadian residents who are married (and, usually, where recipient spouse is aged 65 or older) to make a notional reallocation of private pension income between them on their annual tax returns, and to benefit from a lower overall family tax bill as a result.

Pension income splitting, like all forms of income splitting, works because Canada has what is called a “progressive” tax system, in which the applicable tax rate goes up as income rises. For 2018, the federal tax rate applied to about the first $47,000 of taxable income is 15%, while the federal rate applied to the next $46,000 of such income is 20.5%. So, an individual who has $90,000 in taxable income would pay federal tax of about $15,900: if that $90,000 was divided equally between such individual and his or her spouse, each would have $45,000 in taxable income and the total federal family tax bill would be $13,500.

The general rule with respect to pension income splitting is that a taxpayer who receives private pension income during the year is entitled to allocate up to half that income (without any dollar limit) to his or her spouse for tax purposes. In this context, private pension income means a pension received from a former employer and, where the income recipient is age 65 or older, payments from an annuity, a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP) or a registered retirement income fund (RRIF). Government source pensions, like the Canada Pension Plan or Old Age Security payments do not qualify for pension income splitting, regardless of the age of the recipient.

The mechanics of pension income splitting are relatively simple. There is no need to transfer funds between spouses or to make any change in the actual payment or receipt of qualifying pension amounts, and no need to notify a pension administrator. Taxpayers who wish to split eligible pension income received by either of them must each file Form T1032, Joint Election to Split Pension Income for 2018, with their annual tax return. That form, which is not included in the annual tax return package, can be found on the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pbg/tf/t1032/README.html, or can be ordered by calling 1-800-959 8281.

On the T1032, the taxpayer receiving the private pension income and the spouse with whom that income is to be split must make a joint election to be filed with their respective tax returns for 2018. Since the splitting of pension income affects the income and therefore the tax liability of both spouses, the election must be made and the form filed by both spouses — an election filed by only one spouse or the other won’t suffice. In addition to filing the T1032, the spouse who is actual recipient of the pension income to be split must deduct from income the pension income amount allocated to his or her spouse. That deduction is taken on Line 210 of his or her 2018 return. And, conversely, the spouse to whom the pension income amount is being allocated is required to add that amount to his or her income on the return, this time on Line 116. Essentially, to benefit from pension income splitting, all that’s needed is for each spouse to file a single form with the CRA and to make a single entry on his or her 2018 tax return.

By the end of February or early March, taxpayers will have received (or downloaded) the information slips which summarize the income received from various sources during 2018. At that time, couples who might benefit from this strategy can review those information slips and calculate the extent to which they can make a dent in their overall tax bill for the year through a little judicious income splitting.

Those wishing to obtain more information on pension income splitting than is available in the 2018 General Income Tax and Benefit Guide should refer to the CRA website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/pensionsplitting/, where more detailed information is available.

The Employment Insurance premium rate for 2019 is decreased to 1.62%.

The Employment Insurance premium rate for 2019 is decreased to 1.62%.

Yearly maximum insurable earnings are set at $53,100, making the maximum employee premium $860.22.

As in previous years, employer premiums are 1.4 times the employee contribution. The maximum employer premium for 2019 is therefore $1204.31.

The Canada Pension Plan contribution rate for 2019 is increased to 5.1% of pensionable earnings for the year.

The Canada Pension Plan contribution rate for 2019 is increased to 5.1% of pensionable earnings for the year.

The maximum pensionable earnings for the year will be $57,400, and the basic exemption is unchanged at $3,500.

The maximum employer and employee contributions to the plan for 2019 will be $2,748.90 each, and the maximum self-employed contribution will be $5,497.80.

Dollar amounts on which individual non-refundable federal tax credits for 2019 are based, and the actual tax credit claimable, will be as follows.

Dollar amounts on which individual non-refundable federal tax credits for 2019 are based, and the actual tax credit claimable, will be as follows.

The indexing factor for federal tax credits and brackets for 2018 is 2.2%. The following federal tax rates and brackets will be in effect for individuals for the 2019 tax year.

The indexing factor for federal tax credits and brackets for 2018 is 2.2%. The following federal tax rates and brackets will be in effect for individuals for the 2019 tax year.

Income level                           Federal tax rate

$12,069 - $47,630                         15%

$47,631 - $95,259                        20.5%

$95,260 - $147,667                        26%

$147,668 - $210,371                      29%

Above $210,371                             33%

Each new tax year brings with it a listing of tax payment and filing deadlines, as well as some changes with respect to tax planning strategies. Some of the more significant dates and changes for individual taxpayers for 2019 are listed below.

Each new tax year brings with it a listing of tax payment and filing deadlines, as well as some changes with respect to tax planning strategies. Some of the more significant dates and changes for individual taxpayers for 2019 are listed below.

RRSP deduction limit increased

The RRSP contribution limit for the 2018 tax year (for which the contribution deadline is Friday March 1, 2019) is $26,230. In order to make the maximum current year contribution for 2018, it will be necessary to have had earned income for the 2017 taxation year of $145,725.

The RRSP contribution limit for the 2019 tax year is $26,500. In order to make the maximum current year contribution for 2019 (for which the contribution deadline will be Monday March 2, 2020), it will be necessary to have earned income for the 2018 taxation year of $147,225.

TFSA contribution limit increased

The TFSA contribution dollar limit for 2019 is increased to $6,000. The actual amount which can be contributed by a particular individual includes both the current year limit and any carryover of uncontributed or re-contribution amounts from previous taxation years.

Taxpayers can find out their 2019 contribution limit by calling the Canada Revenue Agency’s (CRA’s) Individual Income Tax Enquires line at 1-800-959 8281. Those who have registered for the CRA’s online tax service My Account can obtain that information by logging into that service.

Individual tax instalment deadlines for 2019

Millions of individual taxpayers pay income tax by quarterly instalments, which will be due on the 15^th day of each of March, June, September, and December 2019, except where that date falls on a weekend or a statutory holiday.

The actual tax instalment due dates for 2019 are as follows:

Friday March 15, 2019

Monday June 17, 2019

Monday September 16, 2019

Monday December 16, 2019

Old Age Security income clawback threshold

The income level above which Old Age Security (OAS) benefits are clawed back is $77,580 for 2019.

Individual tax filing and payment deadlines in 2019

For all individual taxpayers, including those who are self-employed, the deadline for payment of all income tax owed for the 2018 tax year is Tuesday April 30, 2019.

Taxpayers (other than the self-employed and their spouses) must file an income tax return for 2018 on or before Tuesday April 30, 2019.

Self-employed taxpayers and their spouses must file a 2018 income tax return on or before Monday June 17, 2019.

The following tax changes are in effect January 1, 2019.

The following tax changes are in effect January 1, 2019.

Federal

The small business income tax rate will be reduced from 10% to 9% effective as of January 1, 2019.

British Columbia

The province will introduce an Employer Health (payroll) Tax effective January 1, 2019.

The provincial education tax credit is eliminated as of the 2019 tax year.

Manitoba

Effective January 1, 2019, the business limit for income eligible for the provincial small business deduction will increase from $450,000 to $500,000.

The Rental Housing Construction Tax Credit is eliminated as of 2019.

Prince Edward Island

For corporation tax years ending after December 31, 2018, the small business income tax rate is reduced from 4% to 3.5%.

The basic personal credit amount is increased to $9,160.

Nova Scotia

The province introduces an Innovation Equity Tax Credit for 2019 and later years.

While there weren’t a great number of tax measures included in the 2018 Fall Economic Statement brought down by the Minister of Finance on November 21, 2018, the tax changes that were announced represented good news for Canadian businesses.

While there weren’t a great number of tax measures included in the 2018 Fall Economic Statement brought down by the Minister of Finance on November 21, 2018, the tax changes that were announced represented good news for Canadian businesses.

Perhaps most notably, several of the measures announced include tax changes which will benefit Canadian businesses of all sizes and operating in all sectors of the economy. Generally, those changes involved enhancements to the existing rules which will provide businesses with accelerated write-offs of assets which are acquired after the Budget date.

The Canadian tax system enables taxpayers to deduct (or write off) a specified percentage of the cost of newly-acquired capital property each year, through the capital cost allowance (CCA) system. In the year of acquisition, that deduction is, for most classes of assets, limited to one-half the usual percentage deduction (known as the “half-year rule”). The changes announced in the statement provide businesses with enhanced deductions under the existing capital cost allowance system – in some cases, allowing the entire cost of the property to be deducted in the year it is acquired.

The most broad-based of the changes announced in the statement – the Accelerated Investment Incentive, or AII – will effectively suspend the half-year rule for eligible property, meaning that a full CCA deduction could be taken in the year that eligible property is acquired. In addition, the allowance claimable for that year will be calculated by applying the prescribed CCA rate for that class of property to one-and-a-half times the cost of the property acquired.

For example, the combined effect of those changes is that where a property has a write-off rate of 20% per year, that write off will, under the AII, be equal to 30% of the cost of the property in the year the property is put in use. Significantly, such preferential treatment is not restricted to particular kinds or types of businesses or property. Rather, as stated in the statement, the AII will be available to “businesses of all sizes, across all sectors of the economy, that are making capital investments”. Such property, in order to be fully eligible for the AII, must be acquired and put in use by the taxpayer after November 20, 2018 and before 2024.

The second significant change will allow taxpayers to fully deduct, in the year of acquisition, the cost of machinery and equipment acquired for use in Canada primarily in the manufacturing and processing of goods for sale or lease. Such machinery and equipment, in order to qualify, must be acquired after November 20, 2018, and be available for use before 2024. The enhanced 100% deduction will be phased out for otherwise qualifying property which becomes available for use between 2023 and 2028.

Finally, clean energy equipment acquired by taxpayers in any industry already qualifies for preferential capital cost allowance treatment. That preferential treatment will be enhanced by a measure announced in the Statement which will provide a 100% deduction for such equipment which is acquired after November 20, 2018 and is available for use before 2024. Again, that enhanced deduction will be phased out where the otherwise qualifying property becomes available for use between 2023 and 2028.

While the basics of the three CCA measures announced in the Update are fairly straightforward, the application of those measures, as with any tax change, involves more detailed rules and restrictions. Those rules and restrictions are summarized in an Annex to the 2018 Fall Economic Statement, and that Annex can be found on the Finance Canada website at https://www.budget.gc.ca/fes-eea/2018/docs/statement-enonce/anx03-en.html.

Most Canadians know that the deadline for making contributions to one’s registered retirement savings plan (RRSP) comes after the end of the calendar year, around the end of February. There are, however, some instances an RRSP contribution must be (or should be) made by December 31^st, in order to achieve the desired tax result, as follows.

Most Canadians know that the deadline for making contributions to one’s registered retirement savings plan (RRSP) comes after the end of the calendar year, around the end of February. There are, however, some instances an RRSP contribution must be (or should be) made by December 31^st, in order to achieve the desired tax result, as follows.

When you need to make your RRSP contribution on or before December 31^st

Every Canadian who has an RRSP must collapse that plan by the end of the year in which he or she turns 71 years of age – usually by converting the RRSP into a registered retirement income fund (RRIF) or by purchasing an annuity. An individual who turns 71 during the year is still entitled to make a final RRSP contribution for that year, assuming that he or she has sufficient contribution room. However, in such cases, the 60-day window for contributions after December 31^st is not available. Any RRSP contribution to be made by a person who turns 71 during the year must be made by December 31^st of that year. Once that deadline has passed, no further RRSP contribution is possible.

Make spousal RRSP contributions before December 31

Under Canadian tax rules, a taxpayer can make a contribution to a registered retirement savings plans (RRSP) in his or her spouse’s name and claim the deduction for the contribution on his or her own return. When the funds are withdrawn by the spouse, the amounts are taxed as the spouse’s income, at a (presumably) lower tax rate. However, the benefit of having withdrawals taxed in the hands of the spouse is available only where the withdrawal takes place no sooner than the end of the second calendar year following the year in which the contribution is made. Therefore, where a contribution to a spousal RRSP is made in December of 2018, the contributor can claim a deduction for that contribution on his or her return for 2018. The spouse can then withdraw that amount as early as January 1, 2021 and have it taxed in his or her own hands. If the contribution isn’t made until January or February of 2019, the contributor can still claim a deduction for it on the 2018 tax return, but the amount won’t be eligible to be taxed in the spouse’s hands on withdrawal until January 1, 2022. It’s an especially important consideration for couples who are approaching retirement who may plan on withdrawing funds in the relatively near future. Even where that’s not the situation, making the contribution before the end of the calendar year will ensure maximum flexibility should there be an unforeseen need to withdraw funds.

Accelerate any planned TFSA withdrawals into 2018

Each Canadian aged 18 and over can make an annual contribution to a Tax-Free Savings Account (TFSA) – the maximum contribution for 2018 is $5,500. As well, where an amount previously contributed to a TFSA is withdrawn from the plan, that withdrawn amount can be re-contributed, but not until the year following the year of withdrawal.

Consequently, it makes sense, where a TFSA withdrawal is planned within the next few months, perhaps to pay for a winter vacation or to make an RRSP contribution, to make that withdrawal before the end of the calendar year. A taxpayer who withdraws funds from his or her TFSA before December 31^st, 2018 will have the amount which is withdrawn added to his or her TFSA contribution limit for 2019, which means it can be re-contributed as early as January 1, 2019. If the same taxpayer waits until January of 2019 to make the withdrawal, he or she won’t be eligible to replace the funds withdrawn until 2020.

For individual Canadian taxpayers, the tax year ends at the same time as the calendar year. And what that means for individual Canadians is that any steps taken to reduce their tax payable for 2018 must be completed by December 31, 2018. (For individual taxpayers, the only significant exception to that rule is registered retirement savings plan contributions, which can be made any time up to and including March 1, 2019, and claimed on the return for 2018.)

For individual Canadian taxpayers, the tax year ends at the same time as the calendar year. And what that means for individual Canadians is that any steps taken to reduce their tax payable for 2018 must be completed by December 31, 2018. (For individual taxpayers, the only significant exception to that rule is registered retirement savings plan contributions, which can be made any time up to and including March 1, 2019, and claimed on the return for 2018.)

While the remaining timeframe in which tax planning strategies for 2018 can be implemented is only a few weeks, the good news is that the most readily available of those strategies don’t involve a lot of planning or complicated financial structures – in many cases, it’s just a question of considering the timing of steps which would have been taken in any event. What follows is a listing of the steps which should be considered by most Canadian taxpayers as the year-end approaches.

Charitable donations

The federal government and all of the provincial and territorial governments provide a tax credit for donations made to registered charities during the year. In all cases, in order to claim a credit for a donation in a particular tax year, that donation must be made by the end of that calendar year – there are no exceptions.

There is, however, another reason to ensure donations are made by December 31^st. The credit provided by each of the federal and provincial or territorial governments is a two-level credit, in which the percentage credit claimable increases with the amount of donation made. For federal tax purposes, the first $200 in donations is eligible for a non-refundable tax credit equal to 15% of the donation. The credit for donations made during the year which exceed the $200 threshold is, however, calculated as 29% of the excess. Where the taxpayer making the donation has taxable income (for 2018) over $205,843, charitable donations above the $200 threshold can receive a federal tax credit of 33%.

As a result of the two-level credit structure, the best tax result is obtained when donations made during a single calendar year are maximized. For instance, a qualifying charitable donation of $400 made in December 2018 will receive a federal credit of $88 ($200 × 15% + $200 × 29%). If the same amount is donated, but the donation is split equally between December 2018 and January 2019, the total credit claimable is only $60 ($200 × 15% + $200 × 15%), and the 2019 donation can’t be claimed until the 2019 return is filed in April 2020. And, of course, the larger the donation in any one calendar year, the greater the proportion of that donation which will receive credit at the 29% level rather than the 15% level.

It’s also possible to carry forward, for up to 5 years, donations which were made in a particular tax year. So, if donations made in 2018 don’t reach the $200 level, it’s usually worth holding off on claiming the donation and carrying forward to the next year in which total donations, including carryforwards, are over that threshold. Of course, this also means that donations made but not claimed in any of the 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, or 2017 tax years can be carried forward and added to the total donations made in 2018, and the aggregate then claimed on the 2018 tax return.

When claiming charitable donations, it is possible to combine donations made by oneself and one’s spouse and claim them on a single return. Generally, and especially in provinces and territories which impose a high-income surtax – currently, Ontario and Prince Edward Island – it makes sense for the higher income spouse to make the claim for the total of charitable donations made by both spouses. Doing so will reduce the tax payable by that spouse and thereby minimize (or avoid) liability for the provincial high-income surtax.

Timing of medical expenses

There are an increasing number of medical expenses which are not covered by provincial health care plans, and an increasing number of Canadians who do not have private coverage for such costs through their employer. In those situations, Canadians have to pay for such unavoidable expenditures – including dental care, prescription drugs, ambulance trips, and many other para-medical services, like physiotherapy, on an out-of-pocket basis. Fortunately, where such costs must be paid for partially or entirely by the taxpayer, the medical expense tax credit is available to help offset those costs. Unfortunately, the computation of such expenses and, in particular, the timing of making a claim for the credit, can be confusing. In addition, the determination of what expenses qualify for the credit and which do not isn’t necessarily intuitive, nor is the determination of when it’s necessary to obtain prior authorization from a medical professional in order to ensure that the contemplated expenditure will qualify for the credit.

The basic rule is that qualifying medical expenses (a lengthy list of which can be found on the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/medical/#mdcl_xpns) over 3% of the taxpayer’s net income, or $2,302, whichever is less, can be claimed for purposes of the medical expense tax credit on the taxpayer’s return for 2018.

Put in more practical terms, the rule for 2018 is that any taxpayer whose net income is less than $76,750 will be entitled to claim medical expenses that are greater than 3% of his or her net income for the year. Those having income over $76,750 can claim qualifying expenses which exceed the $2,302 threshold.

The other aspect of the medical expense tax credit which can cause some confusion is that it’s possible to claim medical expenses which were incurred prior to the current tax year, but weren’t claimed on the return for the year that the expenditure was made. The actual rule is that the taxpayer can claim qualifying medical expenses incurred during any 12-month period which ends in the current tax year, meaning that each taxpayer must determine which 12-month period ending in 2018 will produce the greatest amount eligible for the credit. That determination will obviously depend on when medical expenses were incurred so there is, unfortunately, no universal rule of thumb which can be used.

Medical expenses incurred by family members – the taxpayer, his or her spouse, dependent children who were born in 2001 or later, and certain other dependent relatives – can be added together and claimed by one member of the family. In most cases, it is best, in order to maximize the amount claimable, to make that claim on the tax return of the lower income spouse, where that spouse has tax payable for the year.

As December 31^st approaches, it is a good idea to add up the medical expenses which have been incurred during 2018, as well as those paid during 2017 and not claimed on the 2017 return. Once those totals are known, it will be easier to determine whether to make a claim for 2018 or to wait and claim 2018 expenses on the return for 2019. And, if the decision is to make a claim for 2018, knowing what medical expenses were paid and when will enable the taxpayer to determine the optimal 12-month waiting period for the claim.

Finally, it is a good idea to look into the timing of medical expenses which will have to be paid early in 2019. Where those are significant expenses (for instance, a particularly costly medication which must be taken on an ongoing basis), it may make sense, where possible, to accelerate the payment of those expenses to December 2018, where that means they can be included in 2018 totals and claimed on the 2018 return.

Reviewing tax instalments for 2018

Millions of Canadian taxpayers (particularly the self-employed and retired Canadians) pay income taxes by quarterly instalments, with the amount of those instalments representing an estimate of the taxpayer’s total liability for the year.

The final quarterly instalment for this year will be due on Monday December 17, 2018. By that time, almost everyone will have a reasonably good idea of what his or her income and deductions will be for 2018 and so will be in a position to estimate what the final tax bill for the year will be, taking into account any tax planning strategies already put in place, as well as any RRSP contributions which will be made before March 2, 2019. While the tax return forms to be used for the 2018 year haven’t yet been released by the CRA, it’s possible to arrive at an estimate by using the 2017 form. Increases in tax credit amounts and tax brackets from 2017 to 2018 will mean that using the 2016 form will likely result in a slight over-estimate of tax liability for 2018.

Once one’s tax bill for 2017 has been calculated, that figure should be compared to the total of tax instalments already made during 2017 (that figure can be obtained by calling the CRA’s Individual Income Tax Enquiries line at 1-800-959-8281). Depending on the result, it may then be possible to reduce the amount of the tax instalment to be paid on December 15 – and thereby free up some funds for the inevitable holiday spending!

The holiday season is usually costly, but few Canadians are aware that those costs can include increased income tax liability resulting from holiday gifts and celebrations. It doesn’t seem entirely in the spirit of the season to have to consider possible tax consequences when attending holiday celebrations and receiving gifts; however, our tax system extends its reach into most areas of the lives of Canadians, and the holidays are no exception. Fortunately, the possible negative tax consequences are confined to a minority of fact situations and relationships, usually involving employers and employees, and are entirely avoidable with a little advance planning.

The holiday season is usually costly, but few Canadians are aware that those costs can include increased income tax liability resulting from holiday gifts and celebrations. It doesn’t seem entirely in the spirit of the season to have to consider possible tax consequences when attending holiday celebrations and receiving gifts; however, our tax system extends its reach into most areas of the lives of Canadians, and the holidays are no exception. Fortunately, the possible negative tax consequences are confined to a minority of fact situations and relationships, usually involving employers and employees, and are entirely avoidable with a little advance planning.

During the month of December, it’s customary for employers to provide something “extra” for their employees, by way of a holiday gift, a year-end bonus or an employer-sponsored social event. And it’s certainly the case that employers who provide such extras don’t intend to create a tax liability for their employees. Unfortunately, it is the case that a failure to properly structure such gifts or other extras can result in unintended and unwelcome tax consequences to those employees.

It’s even possible to feel some sympathy toward the tax authorities who have to deal with the tax treatment of employer-provided holiday gifts, as they are in something of a no-win situation. On an individual or even a company level, the amounts involved are usually nominal, and the range of situations which must be addressed by the related tax rules are virtually limitless. As a result, the cost of drafting and administering those rules can outweigh the revenue generated by the enforcement of such rules, to say nothing of the potential ill will generated by imposing tax on holiday gifts and celebrations. Notwithstanding, the potential exists for employers to provide what would otherwise be taxable remuneration in the guise of holiday gifts, and it’s the responsibility of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) to ensure that such situations are caught by the tax net.

There is, as a consequence, a detailed set of rules which outline the tax consequences of gifts and awards provided by the employer, and even in relation to annual holiday celebrations sponsored (and paid for) by an employer.

The starting point for the rules is that any gift (cash or non-cash) received by an employee from his or her employer at any time of the year is considered to constitute a taxable benefit, to be included in the employee’s income for that year. However, the CRA makes an administrative concession in this area, allowing an unlimited number of non-cash gifts (within a specified dollar limit) to be received tax-free by an employee over the course of the tax year.

In sum, the CRA’s administrative policy is simply that non-cash gifts to an arm’s length employee, regardless of the number of such gifts, will not be taxable if the total fair market value of all such gifts to that employee is $500 or less annually. Where the total fair market value of such gifts is more than $500, the amount over that $500 limit will be a taxable benefit to the employee, and must be included on the employee’s T4 for the year, and on which income tax must be paid.

It’s important to remember the “non-cash” criterion imposed by the CRA, as the $500 per year administrative concession does not apply to what the CRA terms “cash or near-cash” gifts and all such gifts are considered to be a taxable benefit and included in income for tax purposes, regardless of the amount or frequency of the gifts. For this purpose, the CRA considers anything which could easily be converted to cash as a “near-cash” gift. Even a gift or award which cannot be converted to cash will be considered to be a near-cash gift if it, in the words of the CRA, “functions in the same way as cash”. So, a gift card or gift certificate which can be used by the employee to purchase his or her choice of merchandise or services would be considered a near-cash gift, and taxable as such.

This time of year, the tax treatment of the annual employee holiday party also must be considered. The CRA’s current policy in this area is that no taxable benefit will be assessed in respect of employee attendance at an employer-provided social event, where attendance at the party was open to all employees, and the cost per employee was $100 or less. The $100 cost is meant to cover the party itself, not including any ancillary costs, such as transportation home, taxi fare, or overnight accommodation. Where the total cost of the event itself exceeds the $100 per person threshold, the CRA will assess the employee as having received a taxable benefit equal to the entire per person cost (i.e., not just that portion of the cost that exceeds $100.)

It may seem nearly impossible to plan for employee holiday gifts and other benefits without running afoul of one or more of the detailed rules surrounding the taxation of such gifts and benefits. However, designing a tax-effective plan is possible, if a few basic principles are kept in mind.

• If the employer is planning to hold a holiday party, dinner or other social event, it is imperative that such event be open to all employees. Restricting attendance in any way will mean that the CRA’s concession with respect to the non-taxable status of such events does not apply. The cost of the event must, as well, be kept below $150 per person. While the CRA’s policy doesn’t specify, it seems reasonable to calculate that amount based on the number of employees invited to attend the event, rather than on the actual attendance, which can’t be accurately predicted in advance.
• Any cash or near-cash gifts should be avoided, as they will, no matter how large or small the amount, create a taxable benefit to the employee. Although gift certificates or pre-paid credit cards are a popular choice, they aren’t a tax-effective one, as they will invariably be considered by the CRA to create a taxable benefit to the employee.
• Where non-cash holiday gifts are provided to employees, gifts with a value of up to $500 can be received free of tax. The employer must be mindful of the fact that the $500 limit is a per-year and not a per-occasion limit. Where the employee receives non-cash gifts with a total value of more than $500 in any one taxation year, the portion over $500 is a taxable benefit to the employee.

Two quarterly newsletters have been added—one dealing with personal issues, and one dealing with corporate issues.

Two quarterly newsletters have been added—one dealing with personal issues, and one dealing with corporate issues. They can be accessed below.

Corporate:

Issue #46 Corporate

Personal:

Issue #46 Personal

Getting a post-secondary education – or professional training – isn’t inexpensive. Tuition costs can range from as little as $5,000 per year for undergraduate studies to as much as $40,000 in tuition for a year of professional education. And those costs don’t factor in necessary expenditures on textbooks and other ancillary costs, to say nothing of general living expenses, like rent, transportation and food.

Getting a post-secondary education – or professional training – isn’t inexpensive. Tuition costs can range from as little as $5,000 per year for undergraduate studies to as much as $40,000 in tuition for a year of professional education. And those costs don’t factor in necessary expenditures on textbooks and other ancillary costs, to say nothing of general living expenses, like rent, transportation and food.

What that means, in most cases, is that Canadians who want to pursue post-secondary education must go into debt to do so. Financing through a bank loan or line of credit is possible, but most students who need financial assistance receive that assistance through a federal government program – the Canada Student Loan (CSL) program – as well as loan or grant programs provided by the particular province or territory in which the student resides.

Using a government-sponsored loan program to finance education has a number of advantages. Under the CSL program, any loans provided do not accrue interest while the recipient student is still in school and no repayment of the loan is required during that time. However, interest starts accruing once the student has graduated and, six months after graduation, those who received loans under the CSL program are required to make arrangements for repayment. Consequently, CSL loan recipients who graduated in the spring of 2018 must now consider what arrangements they wish to make for repayment of loan amounts received.

The onus is on the loan recipient to contact the CSL center to make required arrangements for repayment, and failing to do so will not delay repayment. In such cases, the federal government, as the loan issuer, has the right to automatically withdraw loan repayments from the same bank account where the loans were originally deposited.

Loan recipients can choose between a fixed interest rate on their loan (meaning that the interest rate stays the same until the loan is fully repaid) or a variable/floating rate of interest, which will change with changes in the prime rate.

Current rules provide the following rates for Canada Student Loans issued on or after August 1, 1995:

• the fixed interest rate is prime plus 5%;
• the floating interest rate is prime plus 2.5%.

The choice of whether to select a fixed or floating interest rate is, obviously, an individual one, which must take into account the size of the loan, the time period over which the borrower expects to make full repayment and, of course, one’s views on whether interest rates will be rising or falling over that expected repayment period.

Whatever the interest rate chosen or levied, borrowers who pay that interest can claim a federal and provincial/territorial tax credit to help offset those costs. The student loan interest tax credit is a non-refundable credit, meaning that it applies to reduce any federal tax payable, but cannot create or increase a refund. That federal tax reduction is equal to 15% of the interest amount claimed (provincial and territorial amounts will differ by jurisdiction). Interest amounts eligible for the credit are those paid in the current tax year or any of the previous 5 tax years, without limit. And, finally, the student loan interest tax credit can be claimed only by the former student who received the government student loan.

These criteria require former students who are eligible for the credit to consider the following factors in deciding whether to claim the credit, and in what amount.

• Individuals who do not have tax payable for the year will not benefit from claiming the student loan interest tax credit, as there is no tax which the credit can reduce.
• Individuals who have other available tax credits which must be claimed in the year the related expense is incurred should claim those credits first, as the student loan tax credit can be carried forward and claimed in any of the five years after the interest has been paid.
• Where the individual has remaining tax payable in the current year after all other available tax credits have been claimed, the student loan interest tax credit should be claimed only to the extent necessary to reduce tax payable to zero. Any additional claim should be carried forward to a future year or years where it is needed to reduce tax payable.

There is a very important caveat. Once a student has graduated (especially from a professional training program like law or medicine), financial institutions will frequently offer to loan that student sufficient funds to allow the consolidation of all outstanding debts which were incurred to finance his or her education. Often the interest rate to be provided is a preferential one, and can even be lower than the rate which the student borrower would pay under the CSL program.

That preferential interest rate, however, has a “cost” of which most graduates are unaware. The student loan interest tax credit is available only for interest paid on government sponsored student loans. Borrowers cannot claim interest paid on any other kind of loan, even where that loan was used for financing post-secondary education. As well, no credit can be claimed for interest paid on an otherwise qualifying student loan that has been combined with any other kind of loan. If the borrower has obtained a loan from a bank or other financial institution, or has consolidated such a loan with government student loans which would otherwise qualify for the credit, none of the interest paid on that loan or consolidated loan will qualify for the student loan interest tax credit.

Consequently, borrowers who are considering a loan offer from a financial institution must include in their calculations not only the difference in interest rates, but whether any lower interest rate offered by the financial institution will compensate for the loss of any claim for the student loan interest tax credit.

When things work out after graduation in the way everyone hopes they will, the former student will have secured employment at an income sufficient to make repayment of student borrowings possible. Where that’s not the case, and the borrower cannot make repayment as required because of financial hardship, it’s possible to reduce the required monthly repayment through the Repayment Assistance Program. Details of that Program, and much more information on the Canada Student Loan Program generally can be found on the federal government website at https://www.canada.ca/en/services/jobs/education/student-financial-aid/student-loan.html.

When the Canada Pension Plan was launched in the mid-1960s, both the working lives and the retirements of Canadians looked a lot different than they do in 2018. Fifty years ago, most Canadians were able to work at a single full-time job, often held that job for most or all of their working lives and, in many cases, benefitted from an employer sponsored defined benefit pension plan which guaranteed a certain level of income in retirement.

When the Canada Pension Plan was launched in the mid-1960s, both the working lives and the retirements of Canadians looked a lot different than they do in 2018. Fifty years ago, most Canadians were able to work at a single full-time job, often held that job for most or all of their working lives and, in many cases, benefitted from an employer sponsored defined benefit pension plan which guaranteed a certain level of income in retirement.

None of those circumstances accurately describe the current reality for Canadians, either those who are approaching retirement or the younger generation seeking to find their place in the workforce. Defined benefit pension plans, at least in the private sector, simply aren’t part of workplace reality for most Canadian workers. In some cases, corporate bankruptcies have left those who did have such a pension with a reduced pension, or no pension at all. And, while some of those who are nearing retirement may have worked for a single employer for their entire working lives, there are many Canadians for whom corporate downsizing or outsourcing has meant the loss of a long-term position. And, when that happens, replacing that lost income has often meant working on contract or in short-term positions, usually for less compensation.

All of these factors have affected the ability of Canadians to accumulate private savings for retirement through registered pension plans (RPPs) and registered retirement savings plans (RRSPs) and, as a consequence, has increased the degree to which they must rely, in retirement, on government sponsored retirement income programs like the Canada Pension Plan. A few years ago the federal government took a look at the existing structure of the CPP and how well it fit with the current and future needs of retiring Canadians. The result of that review was a decision to make significant changes to the CPP, and the implementation of those changes will begin on January 1, 2019.

Although most Canadians will receive CPP retirement benefits, many are unfamiliar with how the CPP system operates. The CPP is a contributory plan, in which employees and employers each make contributions throughout the working life of the employee, starting at age 18. The amount of contributions made is calculated as 4.95% of income, but there is a maximum annual contribution amount. Effectively, the maximum allowable contribution for a year is currently reached at about $55,000 in income (known as Yearly Maximum Pensionable Earnings, or YMPE). Even where an individual’s income exceeds the YMPE, it’s not possible to make additional CPP contributions for the year. As currently structured, the CPP retirement benefit replaces about 25% of income, based on the current YMPE of $55,000. Finally, the CPP must, by law, be fully funded, meaning that any benefits paid out of the CPP must come from contributions made and income earned from the investment of those contributions.

The changes to be made to the CPP will be implemented over a five-year period, from 2019 to 2025. At the end of that implementation period, the maximum CPP benefit available to retired Canadians will have increased by about 50%. (Currently, the maximum monthly benefit is about $1,135, although the average CPP retirement benefit received is closer to $673.) As a result, by 2025, the CPP retirement benefit will replace about 33% of pre-retirement income, based on the YMPE. In addition, the YMPE will be increased. All of these increases must, of course, be funded, and that funding will come through an increase in the amount of CPP contributions required to be made by employees, employers and the self-employed. Those contribution amount increases will start in January 2019.

Each of the changes outlined above essentially maintain the current structure of the CPP and simply provide for higher contribution amounts resulting in greater CPP benefits. The second change, however, which starts in 2024, effectively provides for a separate, additional required contribution for Canadians who earn more than the YMPE. That separate contribution rate, which is expected to be 4% for both employees and employers, will be calculated as a percentage of income between the YMPE to the upper income limit for the year. That upper income limit will be implemented over a 2-year period and is expected to reach $82,700 in 2025. Individuals who are required to make the additional contribution will be entitled to claim that contribution as a deduction from income for tax purposes.

The first change which working Canadians will notice will be an increase in CPP contribution rates, as of January 1, 2019. That change will be minimal: while CPP contribution rates for 2019 have not yet been announced, the estimate provided when the CPP changes were announced indicated that such changes would mean an increase in contributions of about $6.00 a month in 2019. That increase will accelerate in subsequent years, such that the increase is about $43 per month by 2025.

All working Canadians between the ages of 18 and 65 must contribute to the CPP, and those Canadians, especially younger Canadians, will be most impacted by the upcoming changes. Canadians who remain in the work force past the age of 65 (even if they are already receiving CPP retirement benefits) have the option of continuing to contribute to the CPP up until the age of 70, and receiving increased CPP benefits as a result. After age 70 no one, even if they remain in the work force, can contribute to the CPP.

Canadians also have a choice of when to begin receiving CPP retirement benefits. Such benefits can begin at the age of 60 or can be deferred to as late as age 70. With each year that the receipt of benefits is deferred, the amount of monthly benefit increases.

The decision of when to begin receiving CPP retirement benefits and when to cease making CPP contributions is one which involves the assessment of many individual factors, including living costs in retirement, the availability of other sources of income in retirement, one’s health and employment circumstances and the cost of contributing to the CPP relative to the benefits to be received.

Starting next year, the planned changes to the CPP will be another factor to be included in that calculation.

Most Canadians deal with our tax system only once a year, when preparing the annual tax return. And, while that return – the T1 Individual Income Tax Return – may be only four pages long, the information on those four pages is supported by 13 supplementary federal schedules, dealing with everything from the calculation of the tax-free gain on the sale of a principal residence to the determination of required Canada Pension Plan contributions by self-employed taxpayers.

Most Canadians deal with our tax system only once a year, when preparing the annual tax return. And, while that return – the T1 Individual Income Tax Return – may be only four pages long, the information on those four pages is supported by 13 supplementary federal schedules, dealing with everything from the calculation of the tax-free gain on the sale of a principal residence to the determination of required Canada Pension Plan contributions by self-employed taxpayers.

All of this detail makes it easy for the majority of individuals to overlook valuable deduction and credit claims which may be available to them. And, while the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) will correct minor arithmetical errors made on the return, it does not (and cannot) assess the taxpayer to include claims for deductions or credits which could have been made but were not.

One such often overlooked claim is the one which can be made for payments made during the taxation year for annual union, professional, or similar dues. It’s a particularly useful claim since the expenditure in question is one which the taxpayer is obliged to make in any event and, where the requisite criteria are satisfied, the amount of such payment is fully deductible from income, without limit. Put another way, the income which was earned and used to pay annual union or professional dues is, where the related deduction is claimed, income on which no tax is paid.

The deduction claimable for union and professional dues is particularly easy to overlook because of where it appears on the annual return. Although there are forms used by self-employed taxpayers to claim business-related costs, as well as forms used by employees to claim allowable employment expenses, the deduction for union or professional dues doesn’t appear on either of those forms. Rather, it shows up as a single line (Line 212) on page 3 of the T1 annual return.

The general rule for claiming such a deduction is described in the annual income tax return guide as follows:

Line 212 - Claim the total of the following amounts related to your employment that you paid (or that were paid for you and reported as income) in the year:

• annual dues for membership in a trade union or an association of public servants;
• professional board dues required under provincial or territorial law;
• professional or malpractice liability insurance premiums or professional membership dues required to keep a professional status recognized by law; and
• parity or advisory committee (or similar body) dues required under provincial or territorial law.

There are, of course, requirements which must be satisfied in or for such payments to qualify for a deduction. The most important such restriction is that amounts paid must be those which are necessary in order for the taxpayer to obtain or maintain his or her professional standing. Every profession and trade has licensing and similar requirements which mandate that an individual maintain membership in a professional or similar association in order to practice his or her profession or trade. The costs of maintaining required membership in those organizations is deductible. Most professions and trades also have one or more voluntary associations which individuals may join by choice. However, the cost of maintaining membership in those voluntary associations, even if related to one’s trade or profession, is not deductible. So, for example, if membership in a given association does not affect professional status (e.g., the Canadian Bar Association for lawyers), dues or fees paid to it are not deductible. If, on the other hand, membership is necessary to maintain professional status (e.g., the Law Society of the province in which the individual lives and practices law), required dues to it are deductible.

While all such associations levy fees as a requirement of continuing membership and the right to practice the profession, invoices received for annual membership fees can cover a number of different charges and levies, and not all of those costs will be deductible. CRA’s policy is that annual membership dues do not include initiation fees, licences, special assessments, or charges for anything other than the organization’s ordinary operating costs. An individual cannot, for instance, claim charges for pension plans as membership dues, even if receipts received show them as dues.

Where a claim for a deduction for professional membership or union dues is made, some other considerations arise. Generally, while it’s not necessary that having a particular professional designation be a requirement of the employee’s position in order for that employee to claim a deduction for related professional dues, the CRA does require that there be some connection between the employment and the professional association in question.

Take, for example, a chemical engineer who is employed by a company to sell chemical products or who is the president of a company that processes chemicals. There is sufficient connection between that person’s qualification as a chemical engineer and his or her employment duties that a deduction would be claimable for the cost of professional dues paid. On the other hand, a lawyer who is working full-time as the CEO of a furniture manufacturing and sales business does not satisfy the requirement and, accordingly, would not be entitled to deduct dues paid to maintain his or her professional status as a lawyer.

It’s not uncommon that an employer is willing to cover the cost of an employee’s professional dues as part of that employee’s benefit package. Where that’s the case, and the employer’s payment of those dues does not appear on the employee’s T4 as a taxable benefit, no deduction for those costs can be claimed by the employee. Where, however, there is a taxable benefit which accrues to the employee (and that benefit is documented on a T4A and must be reported as part of his or her employment income), the employee can claim an offsetting deduction for eligible dues or fees paid, on Line 212 of the return.

General information on the deduction of professional membership fees or union dues is available in the 2017 General Income Tax and Benefit Guide. The same information can be found on the CRA website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/ddctns/lns206-236/212/menu-eng.html.

Anyone who has ever tried to reduce their overall personal or household debt knows that doing so, no matter how disciplined one’s approach, can seem like a one step forward, two steps back proposition. It sometimes seems that, just as measurable progress is achieved in one area (an extra payment is made on the mortgage), unexpected costs in another area (a significant car repair bill) push up the level of debt elsewhere (e.g., credit card debt).

Anyone who has ever tried to reduce their overall personal or household debt knows that doing so, no matter how disciplined one’s approach, can seem like a one step forward, two steps back proposition. It sometimes seems that, just as measurable progress is achieved in one area (an extra payment is made on the mortgage), unexpected costs in another area (a significant car repair bill) push up the level of debt elsewhere (e.g., credit card debt).

That experience is being replicated on a macro level, in the figures for household debt relative to disposable income ratios of Canadian households, as reported by Statistics Canada. Earlier this year, media reports on those statistics were able to include such phrases as “household debt ratio sees biggest drop on record” and “Canada’s household debt burden falls to two-year low”. Those phrases did accurately reflect the statistical information released by Statistics Canada in June of this year. More recently, however, the September StatsCan release led to headlines like “Canadian household debt climbs in second quarter” and “Canada’s household debt back to $1.69 for every dollar of disposable income”.

While it seems that the progress made in reducing household debt in the first quarter of 2018 (as reported in June 2018) has been undone by the latest statistics, there is a small amount of positive news — while the ratio of $1.69 of household debt per dollar of disposable income is clearly very high, it has been higher. In the third quarter of 2017, that ratio hit  $1.73.

While the statistics identify the overall quantum of household debt, the composition of that debt and the demographic characteristics of who carries that debt are probably more important, from the point of view of both individuals and the overall economy.

First, the vast majority of debt held by Canadians and Canadian households is mortgage debt – money borrowed to purchase a home. Specifically, of the $2 trillion owed by Canadians, almost 75% is in the form of mortgage debt. Consequently, no matter how much the debt, that debt is secured by an underlying asset – the property – which can, in the worst-case scenario, be sold to satisfy or retire the mortgage debt.

However, absent that worst-case scenario, the day-to-day concern is the ability to keep up with mortgage payments. As pointed out by the Governor of the Bank of Canada in a presentation made earlier this year, “what matters most is the burden of servicing debt relative to income”. Or, in other words, the percentage of household income which is needed to make the required payments of interest and principal. In that respect, the debt service ratio of Canadians has stayed within the 5 to 7% range for about the last quarter century. Canadians have, in effect, been able to carry higher levels of debt relative to income without increasing their debt service costs, because of the lower interest rates which were in place for most of the past decade.

While that is clearly good news, it is very possible that the average debt service ratio will climb in the near future, as the result of several factors. First, most of the debt held by Canadians is in the form of mortgage debt, which is long-term debt. In most cases, a mortgage is the biggest debt Canadian families ever take on, and most mortgages are paid off over at least a 25-year time span. Consequently, the management of mortgage debt in all interest rate environments is a long-term task – absent the sale of the underlying property, paying off mortgage in the short term isn’t a likely scenario. Second, the Bank of Canada has now increased interest rates five times since July 2017 (two of those increases happening in the past four months). The Bank Rate is now more than double what is was in May 2017, and each increase in that rate has been reflected in higher borrowing costs, including higher mortgage interest rates. It’s likely, however, that most mortgage holders have not yet felt the impact of those increased rates. Most mortgages are fixed-term mortgages (meaning that the rate of interest stays the same throughout the mortgage term, regardless of any increase or decrease in interest rates which take place during that time period). And the majority of the fixed-term mortgages taken out have a five-year term. Consequently, homeowners who took out a five-year fixed term mortgage prior to July 2017 have not felt the effects of the five recent interest rate hikes. However, when their current mortgage comes up for renewal, the rate of interest which they will be paying will certainly be higher than their current rate and, consequently, the cost of servicing that debt will take a bigger chunk of their household income. The concern is that that such increases in those debt servicing costs may be not be manageable and, in the worst-case scenario, could lead to an increase in mortgage default rates.  

Finally, it is important to note that all these figures represent an average of all Canadian households, and to remember that that average is made up of both households that have zero debt and those that are seriously over-leveraged. According to Bank of Canada figures, about 8% of indebted households owe 350% or more of their gross income, representing a bit more than 20% of total household debt. In other words, the degree of financial risk facing Canadian households is very much an individual calculation. Figures announcing the average rate of household debt to income ratios or debt servicing ratios, or the announcement of another increase in interest rates by the Bank of Canada shouldn’t be cause for either individual relief or despair. Rather, they should prompt a review of one’s own person debt and financial circumstances to determine whether those circumstances, and particularly the extent to which they will be impacted by future interest rate increases, is cause for concern. If so, it’s time to take steps to mitigate that future risk, before a debt problem becomes a debt crisis.

As the days get shorter and the temperature drops, many Canadians start thinking about spending a few days or weeks (or even longer) of the upcoming winter somewhere warmer. For some, that means going south for the holidays, while for others a January or February escape from winter has more appeal. And some Canadians, generally “snowbird” seniors who have retired, will spend most of the winter in a warmer climate.

As the days get shorter and the temperature drops, many Canadians start thinking about spending a few days or weeks (or even longer) of the upcoming winter somewhere warmer. For some, that means going south for the holidays, while for others a January or February escape from winter has more appeal. And some Canadians, generally “snowbird” seniors who have retired, will spend most of the winter in a warmer climate.

Whatever the timing and wherever the destination, one aspect of the planning of an out-of-country trip is the need to obtain travel medical insurance. No one, of course, wants to think of becoming sick or injured while on holiday, but the reality is that illness and accidents can happen anywhere. And when they do, the last thing anyone wants to have to think about is to how (or whether) they will be able to pay for necessary care or treatment.

Most provincial and territorial plans do make some provision for the payment of out-of-country medical expenses (with the extent of coverage differing by province or territory), but such coverage, where it exists, is usually limited to emergency care in the case of life-threatening illness or accident. The coverage provided by provincial and territorial health care plans can never be relied upon to provide payment of most out-of-country medical expenses and must always be supplemented by additional travel medical insurance coverage arranged (and paid for) by the individual.

The bottom line is that everyone who travels outside of Canada — without exception — needs to obtain travel medical insurance before leaving. And while the terms of that insurance and certainly the cost of obtaining it will vary greatly, depending on the age and health of the person to be insured, and the length of time for which insurance is required, there are some considerations which are common to everyone. At a minimum, everyone needs to consider the following.

• Does the policy cover medical expenses which are incurred as the result of a pre-existing condition? Are there exceptions, and what are they? Where there are coverage exclusions in a travel medical insurance policy, they are most likely to relate to medical conditions from which the applicant already suffers — and those, of course, are also the ones which are most likely to mean incurring out-of-country medical expenses. As well, it’s important to ensure that the extent of the coverage in all circumstances is clearly understood. For instance, in some policies, conditions that are considered minor are still covered, even if they were pre-existing conditions. However, any change in treatment or medication for that condition which occurs within a specified period of time prior to travel can mean that the condition is no longer considered as “minor” and so it will no longer be covered under the terms of the policy.

• For what length of time is coverage available? All travel medical insurance policies are stated to be effective for a specified number of days with the cost, of course, increasing with the length of the coverage period. As an individual grows older, he or she may find that the period of time for which their insurer will provide out-of-country medical insurance coverage becomes shorter and shorter. It is critical to make sure that the insurer will provide coverage for the entire length of the out-of-country stay. If coverage for the whole period can’t be obtained, or obtained at an affordable rate, the period of travel might have to be shortened.

• If the individual requires medical care within the policy coverage period, but the need for that care extends past the end of that period, how long will the coverage continue? For instance, if an individual is insured for a 60-day period, but has an accident or illness on day 58 of that period and care is required past the 60-day expiry date of the policy, for what period of time will the insurer continue to cover consequential medical costs incurred?

• What kind of medical history is required on the policy application form? At one time, applicants were required to provide information about any medical tests, diagnoses, or treatments which had taken place within a realistic, relatively short time frame — typically 90, 120, or 180 days — prior to the application date. More recently, however, some applications for travel medical insurance ask the applicant to provide their entire lifetime medical history — something which would be difficult for most people and is virtually impossible for anyone over the age of 50. And it seems that insurers will examine that medical history requirement to determine whether claims will be paid. There have been instances reported in the media in which coverage was denied on the basis that an individual’s application was incomplete or inaccurate, because some detail of his or her medical history was omitted, even where that detail was unknown to the applicant and unrelated to the medical event for which a claim was made.

• It’s critical to determine whether, in the event that out-of-country costs for medical care must be incurred, the terms of the policy provide that the insurer will pay such costs directly to the provider at the time care is provided, or whether the insured will be required to pay those costs up front and then seek reimbursement from the insurer? Where costs are small (e.g., a visit to a walk-in clinic for a minor matter) having to pay those costs out of pocket and receive reimbursement later isn’t usually a problem. Where, however, the medical event is a serious one — a heart attack or stroke, for example — costs can quickly run to the tens of thousands of dollars for specialized hospital care. Many retirees would find it difficult, if not impossible, to come up with that amount of money out of pocket on short notice.

It may seem that obtaining affordable travel medical insurance for which the underwriting requirements are realistic and which can be relied upon to provide coverage when needed is all but impossible. It is true that the requirements imposed on applicants for such insurance are becoming more and more difficult to fulfill, and it seems as well that insurers are scrutinizing claims much more stringently than they have in the past. In the circumstances, the best advice for those seeking to obtain travel medical insurance would be to start early, shop around, and read and complete the application forms and any other documentation provided by the insurer very thoroughly. It wouldn’t even be out of place, especially where an extended out-of-country stay is planned, to obtain professional advice from an independent insurance broker or a lawyer, to ensure that one’s understanding of the requirements of the application form and the terms of coverage provided by the travel medical insurance policy is correct. Taking such a step might seem extreme, but Canadians who have incurred unexpected out-of-country medical expenses for which coverage has been denied by their insurer have faced medical bills amounting to more than $100,000. For most retirees, such an occurrence would be a financial disaster, at a time of life when they can least afford it. And, put more positively, ensuring that the necessary insurance coverage is in place allows the traveler to focus on what’s most important — enjoying his or her vacation!

The daily commute to and from work is, generally, everybody’s least favourite part of the work day. In recent years that commute has gotten longer and longer as many Canadians, especially those working in large urban centers, have moved further and further away from their workplaces in search of affordable family housing.

The daily commute to and from work is, generally, everybody’s least favourite part of the work day. In recent years that commute has gotten longer and longer as many Canadians, especially those working in large urban centers, have moved further and further away from their workplaces in search of affordable family housing.

The good news for such employees is that changes in technology and the Canadian workplace over the past quarter century have made the option of working from one’s home, at least on an occasional or part-time basis, almost the norm among Canadian employees. For most, the opportunity to take a break from sitting in traffic gridlock or rushing to catch the commuter train is a valued employment perk.

While such advantages would likely, even on their own, be enough to make working from home an attractive option, there is another even more compelling benefit. That benefit is in the form of tax deductions claimable for home-related expenses by qualifying individuals who work from home. And, such deductions, in varying forms, can be available whether an individual is an employee working on salary, or a commission employee.

Of course, as with any tax deduction, there are conditions which must be met in order to qualify. Employees, regardless of whether they earn a salary or are paid by commission, must meet one of the following conditions in order to claim any home office deduction.

• The home work space is where the individual mainly (more than 50% of the time) does their work; or
• the individual uses the workspace only to earn his or her employment income. He or she must also use it on a regular and continuous basis for meeting clients, customers, or other people in the course of his or her employment duties.

Once either of these threshold criteria is met, a broad range of costs become deductible by the employee. Specifically, a salaried employee can claim and deduct the part of specified costs that relate to his or her work space, such as the cost of electricity, heating and home maintenance.

Where an individual who qualifies under either of the criteria outlined above is a commission employee, an even broader range of costs become deductible. In addition to costs for electricity, heating, and home maintenance, a commission employee can also deduct a proportionate share of costs incurred for property taxes and home insurance.

There is no specific formula for determining the proportion of eligible costs which can be deducted for qualifying home office expenses. The employee can determine that percentage based on the square footage of the workspace as a percentage of the overall square footage of the home or he or she can make that calculation based on the number of rooms in the house relative the number of rooms used for work-related purposes. Whichever method is chosen, the most important consideration is that the approach taken (and the expenses claimed) be reasonable. In all cases, the Canada Revenue Agency can ask the taxpayer to provide documentation and support for claims made.

For example, an employee who lives in a 2000 square foot house and uses a 200 square foot room as a home office can (assuming the basic criteria outlined above are satisfied) claim 10% of his or her costs for electricity, heat, and home maintenance (where that maintenance involved the home work space) incurred during the tax year. If that employee works on commission, he or she can also deduct 10% of costs incurred for property taxes and home insurance.

There is one further requirement for employees who seek to deduct costs incurred in relation to a home office. Each such employee must file, with the income tax return for the year, a Form T2200. On that form, the employer must certify that the employee was required to use a portion of his or her home for work-related purposes, indicate what percentage of the employee’s duties were carried out at that home office and, finally, confirm that the employee is not being reimbursed for any home office expenses incurred. Where there is any kind of reimbursement provided, the employer must specify the type of expense reimbursed, and the amount of reimbursement. And, of course, the employee cannot claim a deduction for any expenses for which reimbursement was received.

In order to make a claim for home office expenses, there is clearly some paperwork involved. All employees seeking to make such a claim must total the amount of bills paid over the course of the year for electricity, heat, and any of the inevitable home maintenance costs. Those working on commission must also verify amounts paid for property taxes and home insurance. However, given that such efforts will produce a deduction from income for tax purposes for costs which would have been incurred in any case, it is likely that most employees would consider the return on that investment of time well worth it.

Tax scams have been around, probably, for about as long as Canada has had a tax system. They also have a tendency to proliferate at certain times of the year — often during tax return filing and assessment season, when it wouldn’t necessarily strike taxpayers as unusual to receive a communication purporting to be from the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), with a message regarding that person’s taxes — whether in relation to a tax refund or an amount of tax owing.

Tax scams have been around, probably, for about as long as Canada has had a tax system. They also have a tendency to proliferate at certain times of the year — often during tax return filing and assessment season, when it wouldn’t necessarily strike taxpayers as unusual to receive a communication purporting to be from the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), with a message regarding that person’s taxes — whether in relation to a tax refund or an amount of tax owing.

Most tax scams operate in one of two ways. In one, the taxpayer is promised money, in the form of a tax refund or credit, and required to log into or click on a link to a (fraudulent) website in order to collect the monies allegedly owed to them. The link leads, not to a federal government website, but to a “dummy” site very closely resembling the actual CRA website. The taxpayer must then, in order to have his or her “refund” processed, provide personal and financial information which can then be used by the tax scammer.

The other kind of scam informs the taxpayer, usually by a telephone call, that he or she owes money to the government, and that payment must be made forthwith. A failure to pay, the taxpayer is told, will mean damage to his or her credit rating, seizure of his or her assets, cancellation of his or her passport and/or social insurance card or other government-issued identification, deportation, or imprisonment. Further, such payment must be made only by bitcoin, wire transfer, or pre-paid credit card. This type of fraud has become so ubiquitous, in fact, that many businesses which provide money-transfer services post warnings on their premises to would-be users of the need to be aware of the fraud risk. And, needless to say, both the demand and the destination to which that money is sent are fraudulent, having nothing to do with any government department or authority.

The latter approach has been used very successfully in recent years to cheat Canadian taxpayers — often those who are particularly vulnerable by reason of age, infirmity, or lack of familiarity with Canadian laws. Recent media reports indicate that 60,000 Canadian taxpayers have made complaints about receiving such calls, and that more than $10,000,000 has been paid by victims of this particular scheme.

What’s even more concerning is that the perpetrators of the scam are becoming more sophisticated. Software used now has the ability to show, on call display, a false phone number that appears to be Canadian in origin — showing, for instance, an area code which would indicate that the call is originating from the Ottawa area. Consequently, it would be easy for the recipient of such a call to be reassured that the call was indeed originating from the CRA’s head office in Ottawa.

While Canadians are contacted every day by would-be fraud artists, there also seems to be something about a (purported) communication from the tax authorities which makes people especially vulnerable. Perhaps it is the fact that most Canadians are unfamiliar with the workings of a system with which they interact, in most cases, only once a year. It’s also possible that they are apprehensive about the real (or rumoured) powers of the CRA or the federal government to cause them grief, and therefore suggestible. Whatever the reason, it’s often the case that even those who would normally be able to discern that what they are being told doesn’t make sense seem to suspend their disbelief when dealing (by phone or by e-mail) with someone who purports to represent the tax authorities.

There are, in fact, several things about such a phone call that should alert the recipient to the fact that it’s not legitimate. First of all, if a taxpayer does owe money to the CRA, he or she will be first advised of that fact by mail and never by telephone — generally in his or her Notice of Assessment for a tax return filed. Second, the CRA would never suggest or require that a taxpayer send funds to the Agency by bitcoin, wire transfer, or by using a prepaid credit card. Any payment of money owed to the CRA is made online, through the CRA website, through the taxpayer’s financial institution (in person or online), or by mailing a cheque to the Agency. Finally, any suggestion that the CRA would (or could) cancel a taxpayer’s passport or other government issued ID for failure to make payment is simply ludicrous.

There is almost no limit to the number and variety of scams and phishing attempts that are carried out using the CRA’s name and new ones, which appear frequently, are usually identified on the CRA website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/scrty/frdprvntn/menu-eng.html. Unfortunately, many such scams originate outside Canada, limiting the ability of the CRA and law enforcement authorities to monitor or stop them. For the most part, therefore, the onus will fall on individual taxpayers to protect themselves, through a healthy degree of caution, and even skepticism.

The CRA suggests that, in order to avoid becoming a victim of such scams, taxpayers should keep the following general guidelines in mind.

The CRA will never:

• send an e-mail asking the taxpayer to divulge personal or financial information;
• ask for personal information of any kind by email or text message;

• request payment by prepaid credit cards;
• give taxpayer information to another person, unless formal authorization is provided by the taxpayer; or
• leave personal information on an answering machine.

When in doubt, a taxpayer should ask him or herself the following:

• Did I sign up to receive online mail through My Account, My Business Account, or Represent a Client?
• Did I provide my email address on my income tax and benefit return to receive mail online?
• Am I expecting more money from the CRA?
• Does this sound too good to be true?
• Is the requester asking for information I would not provide in my tax return?
• Is the requester asking for information I know the CRA already has on file for me?

In all instances, the recipient of a call which purports to be from the CRA should hang up and call the CRA Individual Income Tax Enquiries line at 1-800-959-8281. Service agents at that line will be able to access the taxpayer’s tax records and provide information on whether the taxpayer does indeed owe any funds to the CRA. As well, taxpayers who receive what seems to be a suspicious communication should report that by the calling Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre at 1-888-495-8501.

If the worst has already happened, and the taxpayer has been scammed, the Anti-Fraud Center has the following advice.

Step 1: Gather all information about the fraud. This includes documents, receipts, copies of emails, and/or text messages.

Step 2: Report the incident to local law enforcement. This ensures that police in that jurisdiction are aware of what scams are targeting their residents and businesses. Keep a log of all your calls and record all file or occurrence numbers.

Step 3: Contact the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre toll free at 1-888-495-8501 or through the Fraud Reporting System (FRS).

Step 4: Report the incident to the financial institution where the money was sent (e.g., money service business such as Western Union or MoneyGram, bank or credit union, credit card company, or internet payment service provider).

Step 5: If the fraud took place online through Facebook, eBay, a classified ad site such as Kijiji, or a dating website, be sure to report the incident directly to the website. These details can be found under "report abuse" or "report an ad."

Step 6: Victims of identity fraud should place flags on all their accounts and report to both credit bureaus, Equifax and TransUnion.

Finally, the Centre also warns that victims of fraud are often targeted a second or third time with the promise of recovering money previously lost. Their advice is never to send money to recover money. Where money has been sent, especially by bitcoin, the chances of recovering it are virtually nil.

Ironically, the extent to which most individuals are now comfortable transacting their tax and financial affairs online or over the phone, and the speed and anonymity of such transactions has made it easier in many ways for fraud artists to succeed. As always, the best defence against becoming a victim of such fraud artists is by refusing to provide personal or financial information, and especially never to make any kind of payment, whether by phone, e-mail or online, without first verifying the legitimacy of the request by contacting the CRA directly.

Or, as stated succinctly in a recent federal government statement on the subject: ”[O]ne point needs to be made crystal clear: anyone purporting to represent CRA to ask for money over the phone is a fraud.”

Tax-free savings accounts (TFSAs) have been around for nearly a decade now, having been introduced in 2009, and for most Canadians, a TFSA is now a regular part of their financial and tax planning strategies.

Tax-free savings accounts (TFSAs) have been around for nearly a decade now, having been introduced in 2009, and for most Canadians, a TFSA is now a regular part of their financial and tax planning strategies.

While TFSAs do not provide the tax deduction that an RRSP contribution creates, the strength of TFSAs lies in their great flexibility and the ability they give to Canadians to save, for short-term or long-term purposes, on a tax-free basis. Every Canadian aged 18 years of age and older can contribute a specified annual amount to a TFSA ($5,500 for 2018). Funds contributed to the TFSA are not deductible from income for tax purposes, but investment income earned by those funds is not taxed, either as it accrues or on withdrawal. Where a taxpayer does not contribute to a TFSA in a particular tax year, the contribution not made can be carried forward and that contribution made in any subsequent year. As well, TFSA holders can withdraw funds from their plan at any time, free of tax, and funds withdrawn can be re-contributed, but not until the following year. Therefore, each taxpayer’s contribution limit for a particular year is that year’s statutory annual amount, plus any allowable contributions not made in previous years and carried forward, plus amounts withdrawn in any previous year but not yet re-contributed.

The amount of the allowable TFSA contribution limit for a year has been something of a moving target since 2009: what follows is a listing of the maximum allowable annual contribution limits for each year since TFSAs were introduced.

• The annual TFSA dollar limit for the years 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012 was $5,000
• The annual TFSA dollar limit for the years 2013 and 2014 was $5,500
• The annual TFSA dollar limit for the year 2015 was $10,000
• The annual TFSA dollar limit for the years 2016, 2017, and 2018 was $5,500

It’s readily apparent that, especially where there are carryforward amounts and/or the taxpayer has made withdrawals from a TFSA, calculating one’s current year contribution room can be complex. At one time the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) notified taxpayers of their current-year TFSA contribution limit on the annual Notice of Assessment, but that is no longer the case. Now, the easiest way to find out one’s current year contribution limit is by calling the CRA’s Individual Income Tax Enquiries Line at 1-800-959-8281 or its automated Tax Information Phone Service (TIPS) line at 1-800-267-6999. Taxpayers who have registered for the Agency’s My Account online service can use that service to find the same information. It’s also possible to obtain from the CRA a TFSA Room Statement and a TFSA Transaction Summary, with the latter showing the contributions and withdrawals which have been made.

It’s important to stay within one’s overall contribution limit because exceeding that limit — even for one day — will result in the imposition of a penalty tax. Therefore, once a person figures out his or her total contribution limit for 2018, it is time to make sure that current contribution plans for the year will not put the taxpayer in an overcontribution position. Some taxpayers contribute on a regular, often monthly basis, while others are in the habit of depositing regular or irregular or periodic income receipts — like a tax refund, tax benefit amount, or a bonus from their employer — into their TFSA. Either way, after finding out one’s current year contribution limit, it is necessary to calculate how much has already been contributed in 2018. The difference between those two figures represents the balance which can be contributed before the end of the year without getting into an overcontribution position and incurring penalties. And it’s important to remember that if withdrawals have been or will be made during 2018, those amounts cannot be re-contributed until after the end of this year.

If it’s necessary to adjust regular contributions in order not to go “offside” by the end of the year, the best time to do it is obviously before getting into that overcontribution position. As soon as a taxpayer is in an overcontribution position, however, a penalty tax of 1% per month of the excess is imposed, even if the excess funds are withdrawn before the end of the month (i.e., as explained in the CRA guide to TFSAs, “[I]f, at any time in a month, you have an excess TFSA amount, you are liable to a tax of 1% on your highest excess TFSA amount in that month”).

Especially where TFSA contributions are set up to occur regularly, by automatic deposit or bank transfer, it’s easy to assume that everything has been taken care of and nothing further needs to be done with respect to such arrangements. However, an “out of sight and out of mind” approach rarely makes for good financial and tax planning, and checking on the status of one’s TFSA on a periodic (at least quarterly) basis can help to ensure that everything is as it should be, and that unnecessary penalties are avoided.

One final consideration — one of the strengths of a TFSA as a savings vehicle is the ability to re-contribute funds which have been withdrawn. However, as outlined above, such re-contributions cannot be made until after the end of the calendar year in which the withdrawal was made. For that reason, taxpayers who may be contemplating a TFSA withdrawal early in 2019, perhaps in order to make an RRSP contribution, or to pay for a winter vacation, should make that withdrawal before the end of 2018. That way, should funds become available (perhaps through the tax refund generated by the RRSP contribution) it will be possible to make the re-contribution in 2019. If the withdrawal is not made until 2019, re-contribution will not be possible (without incurring a penalty) until 2020.

TFSAs are valuable savings and planning vehicles for Canadians — perhaps the most flexible such vehicles available. It’s easy, however, to get tripped up on the rules governing TFSAs, especially the rules around withdrawals and re-contributions. To help keep taxpayers from running afoul of those rules, the CRA provides a lengthy and detailed publication on TFSAs, and that publication is available on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/publications/rc4466/tax-free-savings-account-tfsa-guide-individuals.html.

When the Canada Pension Plan was put in place on January 1,1966, it was a relatively simple retirement savings model. Working Canadians started making contributions to the CPP when they turned 18 years of age and continued making those contributions throughout their working life. Those who had contributed could start receiving CPP on retirement, usually at the age of 65. Once an individual was receiving retirement benefits, he or she was not required (or allowed) to make further contributions to the CPP. The CPP retirement benefit for which that individual was eligible therefore could not increase (except for inflationary increases) after that point.

When the Canada Pension Plan was put in place on January 1,1966, it was a relatively simple retirement savings model. Working Canadians started making contributions to the CPP when they turned 18 years of age and continued making those contributions throughout their working life. Those who had contributed could start receiving CPP on retirement, usually at the age of 65. Once an individual was receiving retirement benefits, he or she was not required (or allowed) to make further contributions to the CPP. The CPP retirement benefit for which that individual was eligible therefore could not increase (except for inflationary increases) after that point.

Retirement looks a lot different in 2018 than it did it 1966, and the Canada Pension Plan has evolved and changed to recognize those differences. What that means for the average Canadian is much more flexibility in determining how to structure both their contributions to the CPP and the receipt of CPP retirement benefits.

While greater flexibility in retirement income planning is always a good thing, having more choices brings with it the need to determine which choices are the right ones in one’s particular circumstances. And, when it comes to CPP, many Canadians must make a decision on when it makes sense to keep making CPP contributions.

The need to make that choice arises where a decision is made to continue to stay in the work force, whether part time or full time, even after beginning to receive CPP retirement benefits. While it has always been possible to work while receiving such benefits, it was, until 2012, not possible to make CPP contributions related to that work. A change made in that year, however, allowed individuals who continued to work while receiving the CPP retirement benefit to also continue to contribute to the Canada Pension Plan and, as a result, increase the amount of CPP retirement benefit they received each month. That benefit is the CPP Post-Retirement Benefit or PRB.

The rules governing the PRB differ, depending on the age of the taxpayer. In a nutshell, an individual who has chosen to begin receiving the CPP retirement benefit but who continues to work will be subject to the following rules:

• Individuals who are 60 to 65 years of age and continue to work are required to continue making CPP contributions.
• Individuals who are 65 to 70 years of age and continue to work can choose not to make CPP contributions. To stop contributing, such an individual must fill out Form CPT30, Election to stop contributing to the Canada Pension Plan, or revocation of a prior election. A copy of that form must be given to the individual’s employer, and the original sent to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). An individual who has more than one employer must make the same choice (to continue to contribute or to cease contributions) for all employers and must provide a copy of Form CPT30 to each.
• A decision to stop contributing can be changed, and contributions resumed, but only one change can be made per calendar year. To make that change, the individual must complete section D of Form CPT30, give one copy of the form to his or her employer, and send the original to the CRA.
• Individuals who are over the age of 70 and are still working cannot contribute to the CPP.

Overall, the effect of these new rules is that CPP retirement benefit recipients who are still working and who are under age 65, as well as those who are between 65 and 70 and choose not to opt out, will continue to make contributions to the CPP system and will continue, therefore, to earn new credits under that system. As a result, the amount of retirement benefits which they are entitled to will increase with each year’s additional contributions.

Where an individual makes CPP contributions while working and receiving CPP retirement benefits, the amount of any CPP PRB earned will automatically be calculated by the federal government, and the individual will be advised of any increase in that monthly CPP retirement benefit each year. The PRB will be paid to that individual automatically the year after the contributions are made, effective January 1 of every year. Since the federal government needs information about employer contributions made, the first annual payment of the PRB is usually issued in early April and includes a lump sum amount representing benefits back to January of that year. Thereafter, the PRB is paid monthly and the PRB amount is added to the individual’s CPP retirement benefit amount and issued as a single payment.

While the rules governing the PRB can seem complex (and certainly the actuarial calculations are), the individual doesn’t have to concern himself or herself with those technical details. For CPP retirement benefit recipients who are under age 65 or over 70, there is no decision to be made. For the former, CPP contributions will be automatically deducted from their paycheques and for the latter, no such contributions are allowed.

Individuals in the middle group — aged 65 to 70 — will need to make a decision about whether it makes sense, in their individual circumstances, to continue making contributions to the CPP. Some assistance in making that decision is provided on the federal government website at https://www.canada.ca/en/services/benefits/publicpensions/cpp/cpp-post-retirement/benefit-amount.html, which shows the calculations which would apply for individuals of different ages and income levels.

More information on the PRB generally is also available on that website at https://www.canada.ca/en/services/benefits/publicpensions/cpp/cpp-post-retirement.html.

For all but a very fortunate few, buying a home means having to obtain financing for the portion of the purchase price not covered by a down payment. For most buyers, especially first-time buyers, that means taking out a conventional mortgage from a financial institution.

For all but a very fortunate few, buying a home means having to obtain financing for the portion of the purchase price not covered by a down payment. For most buyers, especially first-time buyers, that means taking out a conventional mortgage from a financial institution.

The rules governing eligibility or such home financing have been in somewhat a state of flux over the past ten years. For a number of reasons, mortgage and home equity borrowing practices never reached the unsustainable levels recorded south of the border, and Canada was spared the catastrophic housing crash which occurred in the U.S. in 2008 and 2009. However, in the years after the financial crisis which followed that housing crash, interest rates hit historic lows. Those ultra-low rates, in combination with rising real estate values, resulted in a record level of borrowing as first-time buyers took advantage of the low rates to purchase more home than they might otherwise have been able to afford, and existing homeowners borrowed against their ever-increasing home equity.

Canadian government and banking officials were sufficiently concerned with the level of borrowing, and the potential exposure of borrowers, that several sets of changes were made between 2008 and 2017 to tighten home financing and mortgage lending rules. What follows is an outline of the rules which now apply to prospective purchasers of residential property across Canada.

The first such rule requires prospective buyers to put down a minimum down payment, which is set at a percentage of the property cost. The applicable percentage depends on the cost of the property to be acquired, as follows:

Purchase price of the home                                           Minimum required down payment

$500,000 or less                                                              5% of the purchase price

$500,000 to $999,999                                                      5% of the first $500,000; and 10% of the portion of the                                                                                                  purchase price over $500,000

$1,000,000 or more                                                          20% of the purchase price

Whatever the purchase price of the home, where the down payment made is less than 20% of that purchase (or, put another way, the mortgage amount is greater than 80% of the purchase price), that mortgage is characterized as a high-ratio mortgage. In that case, additional requirements are imposed.

Basically, where a mortgage is a high ratio mortgage, the prospective home owner must obtain (and pay for) mortgage default insurance, usually through the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). Such insurance means that, should the home owner default on the mortgage, CMCH will pay the remaining outstanding balance of that mortgage to the financial institution which provided the mortgage financing. CMHC mortgage loan insurance premiums range from 0.6% to 4.50% of the amount of the mortgage, depending on the size of the down payment (although mortgage default insurance is not available where the purchase price of a home is $1,000,000 or more). Home buyers who take mortgage default insurance can pay those premiums upfront, or can add them to the mortgage amount and pay them over the life of that mortgage.

Prospective home buyers, having put together funds for a down payment, are often most concerned about whether they will be able to qualify for a mortgage. Those concerns are often well-founded, as the rules which govern such qualifications have recently become more stringent.

Everyone who applies for a mortgage (whether or not that mortgage is a high-ratio mortgage) from a federally-regulated financial institution (which includes all of the major Canadian banks), must pass a “stress test”. That test, which measures the borrower’s debt repayment obligations as a percentage of income, is intended to ensure that the applicant will be able to meet his or her mortgage payment obligations, both at the current low rates, and in the almost certain event that those rates will increase.

In making that determination, lenders use two measures — the gross debt service (GDS) and total debt service (TDS) ratios. GDS is essentially a measure of the borrower’s cost of housing, including mortgage payments, property tax payments, the cost of heating and, in the case of condominium purchasers, 50% of condo fees. In all cases, the total of such costs should not be more than 32% of the applicant’s gross income. The TDS represents all of the applicant’s debt servicing costs, including both housing costs and the cost of servicing credit card, student loan, car loan, line of credit, and other debt. When it comes to TDS, lenders want total debt servicing costs to be less than 40% of the applicant’s gross income.

Essentially, then, in applying the stress test, lenders look at the total housing cost and total debt servicing costs which the applicant will have if the mortgage is approved, to see whether the GDS and TDS ratios fall within the acceptable percentage limits.

Lenders are now required to run that stress test using the higher of two rates, as shown below, and the applicant must, using the GDS and TDS ratios, qualify at the higher rate.

• Where the mortgage will be a high ratio mortgage (down payment of less than 20%), the bank must use the higher of the Bank of Canada’s conventional five-year mortgage rate, or the mortgage interest rate which the applicant will be paying.
• Where the mortgage is not a high ratio mortgage, the bank must use the higher of the Bank of Canada’s conventional five-year mortgage rate and the interest rate which the applicant will be paying, plus 2%.

The Bank of Canada’s current conventional 5-year mortgage rate is 5.34%.

The need to qualify for a mortgage at a rate higher than current rates, and higher than the mortgage interest rate which is actually being provided will undoubtedly affect prospective borrowers. In some cases, borrowers may have to “downsize” their home purchase budget to accommodate the new rules while in other instances, those hoping to get into the housing market may be forced to wait until they can accumulate a large down payment so as to reduce the amount of mortgage financing needed.  In all cases, however, the intent of the new rules is to ensure that, once the home purchase is made, the new homeowners will be in a position to meet the financial obligations that home ownership involves, over both the short and the long term.

The month of September marks both the end of summer and the beginning of the new school year for millions of Canadian children, teenagers, and young adults. And, whatever the age of the student or the grade level to which he or she is returning, there will inevitably be costs which must be incurred in relation to the return to school. Those costs can range from a few hundred dollars for school supplies for grade school and high school students to thousands (or tens of thousands) of dollars for the cost of post-secondary or professional education.

The month of September marks both the end of summer and the beginning of the new school year for millions of Canadian children, teenagers, and young adults. And, whatever the age of the student or the grade level to which he or she is returning, there will inevitably be costs which must be incurred in relation to the return to school. Those costs can range from a few hundred dollars for school supplies for grade school and high school students to thousands (or tens of thousands) of dollars for the cost of post-secondary or professional education.  

Unfortunately for those students (and their parents!) the kinds of assistance which can be obtained through our tax system to help offset those costs has been eroded over the past few years, as previously available tax credits were withdrawn.

At the grade school and high school levels, there are really no credits or deductions which can be claimed for education-related costs. Formerly, two tax credits (the fitness credit and the arts credit) were available to help offset the cost of extra-curricular activities for children under the age of 16, but both such credits were cancelled as of the end of 2016.

Parents who work outside the home and consequently need to arrange for and pay for after-school care for their children can, however, deduct the costs of that care, within specified limits. Those limits are based on the age of the child and the amount of family income for the year. Details of that child care tax deduction are outlined on the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/tax-return/completing-a-tax-return/deductions-credits-expenses/line-214-child-care-expenses.html.

Once children reach an age to pursue post-secondary education, costs escalate. In recognition of that fact, post-secondary students (and their parents) have benefited for many years from an “assist” through our tax system, which provides deductions and credits for some of the many associated costs. However, two of those credits are also not available for 2018 or subsequent years.

For many years post-secondary students were able to claim the education tax credit and the textbook tax credit. Both, unfortunately, were eliminated as of the end of 2016. It’s important to remember, however, that where education and textbook credits have been earned but not claimed in years before 2017, however, they are still available to be claimed by the student as carryover credits in 2017, 2018, or later years.

The good news is that a tax credit continues to be available for the single largest cost associated with post-secondary education — the cost of tuition. Any student who incurs more than $100 in tuition costs at an eligible post-secondary institution (which would include most Canadian universities and colleges) can still claim a non-refundable federal tax credit of 15% of such tuition costs. The provinces and territories also provide students with an equivalent provincial or territorial credit, with the rate of such credit differing by jurisdiction. At both the federal and provincial levels, the credit acts to reduce tax otherwise payable. Where a student doesn’t have tax payable for the year, as is often the case, credits earned can be carried forward and claimed by the student in a future year, or transferred (within limits) in the current year to a spouse, parent, or grandparent.

While the cost of living, whether in a student residence or off campus, can be significant, there is no federal deduction or credit provided for such expenses. Such costs are characterized as personal and living expenses, for which no tax deduction or credit has ever been allowed.

Most post-secondary students in Canada must incur some amount of debt in order to complete their education, and repayment of that debt is typically not required until after graduation. Once repayment starts, a tax credit can be claimed for the amount of interest being paid on such debt, in some circumstances. Students who are still in school and arranging for loans should, however, be mindful of the rules which govern that student loan interest tax credit. While all interest paid on a qualifying student is eligible for the credit, only some types of student borrowing will qualify. Specifically, only interest paid on government-sponsored (federal or provincial) student loans will be eligible for the deduction. It’s not uncommon (especially for students in professional programs, like law or medicine) to be offered lines of credit by a financial institution, often at advantageous or preferential interest rates. As well, financial institutions sometimes offer, once a student has graduated and begun to repay a government-sponsored student loan, to consolidate that student loan with other kinds of debt, also at advantageous interest rates. However, it should be kept in mind that interest paid on that line of credit (or any other kind of borrowing from a financial institution to finance education costs) will never be eligible for the student loan interest tax credit. As explained in the CRA publication on the subject, “ [I]f you renegotiated your student loan with a bank or another financial institution, or included it in an arrangement to consolidate your loans, you cannot claim this interest amount”. Students who are contemplating borrowing from a financial institution rather than getting a government student loan (or considering a consolidation loan which incorporates that student loan amount) must remember, in evaluating the benefit of any preferential interest rate offered by a financial institution, to take into account the loss of the student loan interest deduction on that borrowing in future years.

There are, as well, a number of credits and deductions which, while not specifically education-related, are frequently claimed by post-secondary students (for instance, moving expense deductions). The CRA publishes a very useful guide that summarizes most of the income rules which may apply to post-secondary students. That guide, entitled Students and Income Tax, was updated in August 2018 to include recent changes, and that current version is now available on the CRA website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/tg/p105/README.html.

The administrative policy of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) with respect to charities has been that no more than 10% of a registered charity’s resources can be allocated to non-partisan political activity. Where the CRA views a charity as having exceeded that threshold it may impose sanctions, up to and including revocation of a charity’s charitable registration status.

The administrative policy of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) with respect to charities has been that no more than 10% of a registered charity’s resources can be allocated to non-partisan political activity. Where the CRA views a charity as having exceeded that threshold it may impose sanctions, up to and including revocation of a charity’s charitable registration status.

Earlier this year, an Ontario court decision effectively struck down the rules limiting the involvement of charities in non-partisan political activity, including the CRA’s 10% ceiling rule, declaring those rules to be invalid and of no effect. That change was effective as of the date of the Court’s ruling, which was July 16, 2018.

Needless to say, that Court decision created considerable uncertainty in the charitable sector with respect to the current or future involvement by charities in any non-partisan political activities. The CRA has now made two announcements intended to alleviate that uncertainty.

First, the CRA has announced that it will be appealing the Court’s decision, which it believes contains “significant errors of law”. The hearing and decision in that appeal is at least several months away.

The CRA has, however, also announced that changes will be made, not just to its policy with respect to the permitted political activities of charities, but to the Income Tax Act provisions governing the permitted activities of registered charities. According to the CRA’s press release, which can be found on its website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/news/2018/08/statement-by-the-minister-of-national-revenue-and-minister-of-finance-on-the-governments-commitment-to-clarifying-the-rules-governing-the-political.html, the planned changes will allow charities to pursue their charitable purposes by engaging in non-partisan political activities and in the development of public policy. Charities will still be required to have exclusively charitable purposes, and restrictions against partisan political activities will remain.

Significantly, the CRA will implement the planned changes through amendments to the Income Tax Act, with the intention of introducing amending legislation in the fall of 2018. Consequently, the new rules governing political activities of charities will be, not simply administrative policy on the part of the CRA, but legal requirements under the Income Tax Act. As well, the planned legislative changes will apply retroactively, including to the audits and objections of registered charities which are currently suspended. Such suspensions will be lifted when the planned legislation is passed by Parliament.

The CRA’s announcement of the planned changes did not include a detailed outline of the planned changes. However, the Agency did indicate in its press release that such changes would be “consistent with” Recommendation #3 found in the report of the Agency’s Consultation Panel on the Political Activities of Charities. That Recommendation is as follows:

 “The Panel recommends that amendments:

1. retain the current legal requirement that charities must be constituted and operated exclusively for charitable purposes, and that political purposes are not charitable purposes;
2. fully support the engagement of charities in non-partisan public policy dialogue and development in furtherance of charitable purposes, retiring the term “political activities” which tends to be understood in common parlance as partisan and is therefore confusing, and clearly articulating the meaning of “public policy dialogue and development” to include: providing information, research, opinions, advocacy, mobilizing others, representation, providing forums and convening discussions; and
3. retain the prohibition on charities’ engaging in “partisan political activities” with the inclusion of “elected officials” (i.e. charities may not directly support “a political party, elected official or candidate for public office”) and the removal of the prohibition on “indirect” support, given its subjectivity.”

The full Report of the Panel is available on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/charities-giving/charities/resources-charities-donors/resources-charities-about-political-activities/report-consultation-panel-on-political-activities-charities.html.

There is an important caveat: the CRA has indicated that its planned legislative amendments would be “consistent with” the Panel Recommendation, and not that they would reflect that Recommendation in every respect. Consequently, the content of the amendments may well differ in one or more ways from the Panel Recommendation.

The CRA has indicated as well that, once the legislative amendments are in place, it will be providing ”supporting guidance”, in collaboration with the charitable sector, presumably through plain language publications outlining both the legislative changes and how the CRA intends to implement and administer those changes going forward. Stay tuned.

Two quarterly newsletters have been added—one dealing with personal issues, and one dealing with corporate issues.

Two quarterly newsletters have been added—one dealing with personal issues, and one dealing with corporate issues. They can be accessed below.

Corporate:

Issue #45 Corporate

Personal:

Issue #45 Personal

Millions of Canadians receive payments each month from the federal government and for younger Canadians, especially families with children, such payments will often include the monthly Canada Child Benefit (CCB).

Millions of Canadians receive payments each month from the federal government and for younger Canadians, especially families with children, such payments will often include the monthly Canada Child Benefit (CCB).

The current (2018-19) benefit year for the CCB runs from July to June and so the first payment of the that benefit year, was received by Canadian families on July 20. For some recipients, that payment may have been in a different amount than previous months, while others may not have received any benefit payment at all.

The reasons for such occurrences are two-fold. First, the amount of CCB payable is based on a family’s net income. For the first half of the year, the amount of payment is based on income from the second previous taxation year. So, eligibility for and the amount of any CCB paid during the January to June 2018 period was based on family net income for 2016. For the July to December 2018 period, the amount of benefits which a family can receive is based on that family’s net income for the 2017 tax year.

Of course, the only means by which the federal government can determine a family’s net income for 2017 (and consequently their entitlement to CCB) is from tax returns filed for that year. Where no tax returns have yet been filed for 2017, there will have been no CCB benefit paid in July of 2018. Taxpayers who have not yet filed for 2017 but who believe that they are eligible for CCB should file as soon as possible. Once the return(s) are filed and assessed, and the family is determined to be eligible for CCB benefits during the 2018-19 benefit year, such benefits will be paid retroactively, back to July 2018.

Where a family received CCB during the first half of 2018, and there was a change in family net income between 2016 an 2017, then the amount of CCB received in July 2018 will differ (up or down, depending on whether income increased or decreased from 2016 to 2017) from that received in June.

There is an additional reason why families may see a changed CCB benefit starting in July 2018. In 2016, the federal government announced that CCB benefits would be indexed to inflation beginning in July 2020. However, that implementation date was moved up to July 2018, so benefits are fully indexed to changes in the Consumer Price Index as of that date.

Taxpayers who want to confirm that the amount of their CCB benefit for the 2018-19 benefit year is correct can go to CRA website at www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/child-family-benefits/canada-child-benefit-overview/canada-child-benefit-we-calculate-your-ccb.html, where the calculation of the CCB is outlined. Or, an explanation of the benefits received can be had by calling the Agency’s Benefits Enquiries toll-free phone line at 1-800-387-1193. The hours of service for that phone line are Monday to Friday, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

Achieving charitable registration status is a significant step, and a significant benefit, to any organization. The organization itself becomes exempt from income tax and, in addition, is able to issue tax receipts for donations made to it, which allow donors to claim a federal and provincial tax credit based on the amount of such donations. The ability to issue such tax receipts gives a charitable organization a measurable advantage when it comes to fundraising.

Achieving charitable registration status is a significant step, and a significant benefit, to any organization. The organization itself becomes exempt from income tax and, in addition, is able to issue tax receipts for donations made to it, which allow donors to claim a federal and provincial tax credit based on the amount of such donations. The ability to issue such tax receipts gives a charitable organization a measurable advantage when it comes to fundraising.

The other, less tangible, benefit of becoming a registered charity is that such organizations are more likely to be (correctly) perceived as legitimate charities, having undergone a degree of scrutiny by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) in order to obtain registered charity status, and being subject to ongoing reporting requirements in order to maintain that status.

In order to obtain and retain status as a registered charity, an organization must fulfill a number of requirements. Specifically, as outlined on the CRA website, any organization functioning as a registered charity must be resident in Canada, must be established and operated for charitable purposes, and must devote its resources (funds, personnel, and property) to charitable activities.

In relation to the requirements for “charitable purposes” and “charitable activities”, an organization must generally have purposes that include one or more of the following: the relief of poverty, the advancement of education, the advancement of religion, and other purposes that benefit the community (where such purposes have been found by the courts to be charitable in nature).

The devil, as always, is in the details, and the types of activities which charities can engage in in the pursuit of those charitable purposes has always been a subject of discussion and, often, dispute between the charitable sector and the CRA. In particular, there is something of an ongoing dispute with respect to the extent to which charities can engage in activities which are political (in a non-partisan sense) in nature. Such non-partisan political activity, while allowed, is subject to strict limits under specific provisions of the Income Tax Act and the CRA policies interpreting those provisions. The Act requires that a registered charity devote “substantially all” of its resources to charitable activities, but provides that where the charity devotes part of its resources to non-partisan political activities and those non-partisan political activities are “ancillary and incidental to its charitable activities”, the resources devoted to such activities will be considered to be used in charitable activities. As a matter of administrative policy, the CRA has taken the position that no more than 10% of a registered charity’s resources should be expended on partisan political activity or, put another way, that at least 90% of its resources should be devoted to non-political charitable activities. A recent Court decision, however, has thrown most of those rules around non-partisan political activities of charities into doubt.

The case began when, in 2016, a registered charity — Canada Without Poverty — challenged the CRA’s administrative policy limiting registered charities to using no more than 10% of their resources for political activities related to their charitable purposes. That challenge was based on the argument that the organization could not achieve its charitable purposes without engaging in political activity, and that the restrictions placed by the CRA’s policies on the extent of such activities were a violation of the right to free expression granted by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The Court agreed with the charity which brought the challenge and held that the CRA’s view that a charity could spend only up to 10% of its resources on non-partisan political activities was a violation of the Charter and that the entire provision of the Income Tax Act which restricted non-partisan political activities and therefore political expression by a registered charity was also contrary to the Charter, and that there was no justification for such restriction.

The Court did emphasize that it was not speaking of partisan political activities, which remain out of bounds for registered charities. However, as the law now stands following the Court’s decision on July 16, charities are able to engage in non-partisan political activities without regard for the limits which were formerly imposed by the Income Tax Act and by the CRA’s administrative policies in enforcing that Act.

It is likely that, given the potentially significant consequences which follow from the Court’s decision, the federal government will appeal that decision to a higher Court, seeking to have it reversed. That process of appealing the Court decision is one which will take at least several months, if not longer, but it’s a process that will be closely followed by many organizations and individuals working in the charitable sector.

Sometime around the middle of August, millions of Canadians will receive unexpected mail from the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), and that mail will contain unfamiliar and unwelcome news. Specifically, the enclosed form will advise the recipient that, in the view of the CRA, he or she should make instalment payments of income tax on September 15 and December 15 of 2018 — and will helpfully identify the amounts which should be paid on each date.

Sometime around the middle of August, millions of Canadians will receive unexpected mail from the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), and that mail will contain unfamiliar and unwelcome news. Specifically, the enclosed form will advise the recipient that, in the view of the CRA, he or she should make instalment payments of income tax on September 15 and December 15 of 2018 — and will helpfully identify the amounts which should be paid on each date.

No one particularly likes receiving unexpected mail from the tax authorities and correspondence which suggests that the recipient should be making payments of tax to the CRA during the year (instead of when he or she files the return for the year next April) is likely to be both perplexing and somewhat alarming. It is fair to say that most Canadians aren’t familiar with the payment of income tax by instalments, and are therefore at a loss to know how to proceed the first time they receive an instalment reminder.

The reason that the instalment payment system is unfamiliar to most Canadians is that most of us pay income taxes during our working lives through a different system. Every Canadian employee has tax automatically deducted from his or her paycheque (“at source”), before that paycheque is issued, and that tax is remitted by the employer to the CRA, on the employee’s behalf. Such deductions and remittances accrue to the employee’s behalf, and they are credited with those remittances when filing the annual tax return for that year. It’s an efficient system, but it’s also one which is largely invisible to the employee, and certainly one which operates without the need for the employee to take any steps on his or own. When someone begins to receive income through a source other than employment (for instance, the newly self-employed or newly retired), it is consequently not particularly surprising that the individual wouldn’t know that it is now his or her responsibility to make specific arrangements for the payment of income tax.

Adding to the potential confusion, most employees who retire are accustomed to having only a single source of income. Once in retirement, however, there are likely multiple such sources of income, including Canada Pension Plan benefits and Old Age Security payments, and perhaps monthly amounts received from an employer-sponsored registered pension plan (RPP) or a registered retirement income fund (RRIF). Unless the individual so directs, none of the payors of those kinds of income will deduct income tax from the payments and remit them to the federal government on the individual’s behalf.

Canadian tax rules provide that, where the amount of tax owed when a return is filed by the taxpayer is more than $3,000 ($1,800 for Quebec residents) in the current (2018) year and either of the two previous (2016 and 2017) years, that taxpayer may be subject to the requirement to pay income tax by instalments.

The reason that first instalment reminders are issued in August has to do with the schedule on which Canadians file their tax returns. The amount of tax payable on filing for the immediately preceding year can’t be known until the tax return for that year has been filed and assessed, and the tax return filing deadline for individuals is April 30 (or June 15 for self-employed taxpayers and their spouses). Consequently, by the end of July, the CRA will have the information needed to determine whether a particular taxpayer should receive a first instalment reminder for the current year.

Taxpayers who receive that first instalment reminder in August may also be puzzled by the fact that it is a “reminder” and not a “requirement” to pay. The reason for that is that those who receive it are not actually required by law to make instalment payments of tax. There are, in fact, three options open to the taxpayer who receives an instalment reminder.

First, the taxpayer can pay the amounts specified on the reminder, by the respective due dates of September 15 and December 15. A taxpayer who does so can be certain that he or she will not have to pay any interest or penalty charges even if he or she does have to pay an additional amount on filing in the spring of 2019. If the instalments paid turn out to be more than the taxpayer’s tax liability for 2018, he or she will of course receive a refund on filing.

Second, the taxpayer can make instalment payments based on the total amount of tax which was owed and paid for the 2017 tax year. Where a taxpayer’s income has not changed between 2017 and 2018 and his or her available deductions and credits remain the same, the likelihood is that total tax liability for 2018 will be the same or slightly less than it was in 2017, owing to the indexation of tax brackets and tax credit amounts. Once that figure is determined, 75% of the total amount should be paid on or before September 15 and the remaining 25% paid on or before December 15.

Third, the taxpayer can estimate the amount of tax which he or she will actually owe for 2018 and can pay instalments based on that estimate. Where a taxpayer’s income has dropped from 2017 to 2018 and there will consequently be a reduction in tax payable, this option may be worth considering. Taxpayers who wish to pursue this approach can obtain the information needed to estimate current year taxes (federal and provincial tax brackets and rates) on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/frequently-asked-questions-individuals/canadian-income-tax-rates-individuals-current-previous-years.html#federal. And, as in option 2, 75% of the total tax determined to be payable for 2018 should be paid on or before September 15, and the remaining 25% paid on or before December 15 of this year.

All of this may seem like a lot of research and calculation effort, especially when one considers that many Canadians don’t even prepare their own tax returns. And those who don’t want to be bothered with the intricacies of tax calculations can pay the amounts set out in the Instalment reminder, secure in the knowledge that they will not incur any penalty or interest charges and that, should those amounts ultimately represent an overpayment of taxes, that overpayment will be recovered and refunded when the 2018 return is filed next spring.

Once they have resigned themselves to the realities of the tax instalment system, the next question that most taxpayers have is how such payments can be made. Not surprisingly, the CRA provides taxpayers with a lot of options when it comes to making instalment payments, and those options include the following:

• Visa Debit
• Online banking
• Debit card
• Pre-authorized debit (not applicable when using EFILE)
• Credit card
• At the taxpayer’s financial institution using Form INNS3, Instalment Remittance Voucher

More information on how to make instalment payments of tax can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/making-payments-individuals/paying-your-income-tax-instalments/you-pay-your-instalments.html.

Between February and July 2018, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) received and processed just over 28 million individual income tax returns filed for the 2017 tax year. The CRA’s self-imposed processing turnaround goal for each of those returns is to complete its assessment and to issue a Notice of Assessment within two to six weeks, depending on the filing method.

Between February and July 2018, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) received and processed just over 28 million individual income tax returns filed for the 2017 tax year. The CRA’s self-imposed processing turnaround goal for each of those returns is to complete its assessment and to issue a Notice of Assessment within two to six weeks, depending on the filing method.

The effort of processing those returns and issuing 28 million Notices of Assessment consumes the bulk of the CRA’s time and resources during the February to June filing season. However, the sheer volume of returns and the processing turnaround timelines mean that the CRA does not (and cannot possibly) do a manual review of the information provided in a return prior to issuing the Notice of Assessment. Rather, all returns are scanned by the Agency’s computer system and a Notice of Assessment is then issued.

In addition, the CRA has for many years been encouraging taxpayers to fulfill their filing obligations online, through one of the Agency’s electronic filing services. This year, just under 25 million (or 88%) of the returns were filed by electronic means. While e-filing means that the turnaround for processing of returns is much quicker, there is, by definition, no paper involved. The Canadian tax system has always been what is termed a “self-assessing” system, in which taxpayers report income earned and claim deductions and credits to which they believe they are entitled. Prior to the advent of e-filing there were means by which the CRA could easily verify claims made by taxpayers. Where returns were paper-filed, taxpayers were usually required to include receipts or other documentation to prove their claims, whatever those claims were for. For the 88% of returns which were filed this year by electronic means, no such paper trail exists. Consequently, the potential exists for misrepresentation of such claims (or simple reporting errors) on a large scale.

The CRA’s response to that risk is to carry out a post-assessment review process, in which the Agency asks taxpayers to back up or verify claims for credits or deductions which were made on the return filed this past spring. That post-assessment review process for tax returns for the 2017 tax year is now underway.

There are two components to the post-assessment review process — the Processing Review Program and the Matching Program, and the first component starts in the month of August. That Processing Review Program, as the name implies, is a review of various deductions or credits claimed on returns, while the Matching Program compares information reported on the taxpayer’s return with information provided to the CRA by third-party sources (like T4s filed by employers or T5s filed by banks or other financial institutions).

Being selected for review under either program means, for the individual taxpayer, the possibility of receiving unexpected correspondence from the CRA. Receiving such correspondence from the tax authorities is almost guaranteed to unsettle the recipient taxpayer, even where there’s no reason to believe that anything is wrong. But, it’s an experience which will be shared this summer and fall by about 3 million Canadian taxpayers.

A taxpayer whose return is selected as part of the Processing Review Program will be asked to provide verification or proof of deductions or credits claimed on the return -usually by way of receipts or such documentation. The Matching Program, on the other hand, involves comparison by the CRA of information received from different sources (i.e., matching up the amount of employment income reported by a taxpayer with the amount showing on the T4 slip issued by that taxpayer’s employer). Where the figures match up, there is no need for the further action by the CRA. Where they don’t, the taxpayer will likely be contacted with a request for an explanation of the discrepancy.

Of course, most taxpayers are not concerned so much with the kind of program or programs under which they are contacted as they are with why their return was singled out for review. Many taxpayers assume that it’s because there is something wrong on their return, or that the letter is the start of an audit, but that’s not necessarily the case. Returns are selected by the CRA for post-assessment review for a number of reasons. Under the Matching Program, where a taxpayer has filed a return containing information which does not agree with the corresponding information filed by, for instance, his or her employer, it’s likely that the CRA will want to follow up to find out the reason for the discrepancy. As well, Canada’s tax laws are complex and, over the years, the CRA has determined that there are areas in which taxpayers are more likely to make errors on their return. Consequently, a return which includes claims in those areas (like medical expenses, support payments and legal fees) may have an increased chance of being reviewed. Where there are deductions or credits claimed by the taxpayer which are significantly different or greater than those claimed in previous returns, that may attract the CRA’s attention. And, if the taxpayer’s return has been reviewed in previous years and, especially, if an adjustment was made following that review, subsequent reviews may be more likely. Finally, many returns are picked for post-assessment review simply on the basis of random selection.

Regardless of the reason for the follow-up, the process is the same. Taxpayers whose returns are selected for review will receive a letter from the CRA, identifying the deduction or credit for which the CRA wants documentation or the income or deduction amount about which a discrepancy seems to exist. The taxpayer will be given a reasonable period of time — usually a few weeks from the date of the letter — in which to respond to the CRA’s request. That response should be in writing, attaching, if needed, the receipts or other documentation which the CRA has requested. All correspondence from the CRA under its review programs will include a reference number, which is usually found in the top right-hand corner of the CRA’s letter. That number is the means by which the CRA tracks the particular inquiry, and should be included in the response sent to the Agency. It’s important to remember, as well, that it’s the taxpayer’s responsibility to provide proof, where requested, of any claims made on a return. Where a taxpayer does not respond to a CRA request and does not provide such proof, the Agency will proceed on the basis that the requested verification or proof does not exist, and will reassess accordingly.

Taxpayers who have registered for the CRA’s online tax program My Account (or whose representative is similarly registered for the Agency’s Represent a Client online service) can submit required documentation electronically. More information on how to do so can be found on the CRA website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rvws/sbmttng-eng.html.

Regardless of how requested documents are submitted, it is possible that the CRA will send a follow-up letter, or the taxpayer may be contacted by telephone, with a request from the Agency for more information.

One word of caution — as most Canadians have heard by now, there is a persistent tax scam operating in which taxpayers are contacted by telephone by someone falsely claiming to be from the CRA and the perpetrators of that scam have become increasingly sophisticated in recent years. Such fraudulent callers generally indicate that a review of the taxpayer’s return shows that additional taxes are owed, and insist that immediate payment is required, by wire transfer of funds or pre-paid credit card. It is implied, or stated, that failure to make immediate payment by such means will result in arrest and imprisonment or, for recent immigrants, immediate deportation.

Taxpayers should be aware that payment of taxes is never requested in this way, or by either of those methods, and that the threat of immediate imprisonment or deportation is simply ludicrous. While the CRA can and does contact taxpayers by phone, any CRA representative will have the reference number which appeared in the CRA’s initial letter and should be prepared to quote that number to the taxpayer in order to establish that the call is an authentic one. If the caller cannot provide that number, then it’s not a call from the CRA. As well, the CRA does not correspond with taxpayers on confidential tax matters by e-mail. The only legitimate e-mail which a taxpayer might receive from the CRA is one which advises that there is a new message for that taxpayer in his or her online account with the CRA — and only taxpayers who have previously registered for the CRA’s My Account service would receive such an e-mail. Any other type of e-mail claiming to be from the CRA is not legitimate and should be deleted without opening.

Whatever the reason a particular return was selected for post-assessment review by the CRA, one thing is certain. A prompt response to the CRA’s enquiry, providing the Agency with the information or documentation requested will, in the vast majority of cases, bring the matter to a speedy conclusion, to the satisfaction of both the CRA and the taxpayer. To assist taxpayers in understanding the process and in responding to Agency requests, the CRA recently issued a Tax Tip summarizing its return review process, which can be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/news/newsroom/tax-tips/tax-tips-2018/tax-return-reviewed.html. The CRA website also includes more detailed information on the return review process, which is available at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/review-your-tax-return-cra.html.

The start of the calendar year also marks the beginning of the tax year for individuals and consequently most tax changes are scheduled to take effect as of January 1 of each year. However, the federal and provincial budgets are brought down in the late winter and spring, and those budgets can include announcements of tax changes which will take effect later in the year (often, but not exclusively, on July 1, being halfway through the tax year). As well, where a change in tax rates, credits, or income brackets announced in the budgets is made effective as from the beginning of the tax and calendar year, individuals will first notice that change when their payroll withholdings are adjusted starting in July.

The start of the calendar year also marks the beginning of the tax year for individuals and consequently most tax changes are scheduled to take effect as of January 1 of each year. However, the federal and provincial budgets are brought down in the late winter and spring, and those budgets can include announcements of tax changes which will take effect later in the year (often, but not exclusively, on July 1, being halfway through the tax year). As well, where a change in tax rates, credits, or income brackets announced in the budgets is made effective as from the beginning of the tax and calendar year, individuals will first notice that change when their payroll withholdings are adjusted starting in July.

What follows is a listing of significant federal and provincial tax changes which are currently scheduled to come into effect during the remainder of the 2018 tax year.

Federal

Indexation of Child Tax Benefits

In its 2016 Budget, the federal government replaced the existing Canada Child Tax Benefit with the Canada Child Benefit program. The new program provides lower and middle income Canadian families with a non-taxable monthly benefit, with the amount of that benefit dependent on family size and income.

When the CCB program was introduced, one of the terms of that program was that  benefits payable would be indexed, starting in July  2020. However, in the fall of 2017, the federal government announced that such indexation would be accelerated, such that all CCB benefits will be indexed to changes in the Consumer Price Index, starting in  July 2018.

Indexation of benefits will take place automatically starting in July, and there is no requirement or need for CCB recipients to take any action.

British Columbia

Interactive Digital Media Tax Credit extended

The B.C. Interactive Digital Media tax credit, which was scheduled to expire at the end of August, 2018, has been extended for a period of five years and so it will be available until August 31, 2023.

Manitoba

Carbon tax introduced effective September 1

Manitoba’s carbon tax will impose a $25 tax per tonne of greenhouse gas emissions beginning on September 1, 2018 and will apply to gas, liquid, and solid fuel products intended for combustion in the province.

Corporate tax credit programs extended

The Manitoba Book Publishing Tax Credit and the Cultural Industries Printing Tax Credit were both scheduled to expire on December 31, 2018. Both have been extended for one year, to December 31, 2019.

Ontario

Changes to personal income tax rates and brackets

Previously, Ontario was one of only two Canadian provinces to levy a personal income tax surtax. However, it was announced in this year’s Budget that the surtax would be eliminated, and that tax brackets and rates would be adjusted to compensate for that change.

Although the change in the rate structure is effective as of the beginning of 2018, changes to income tax source deductions which reflect that change will be implemented starting in July.

Prince Edward Island

Change to basic personal amount

In this year’s Budget, the province announced that the basic personal tax credit amount, which is claimable by all PEI residents, would be increased in two steps. The first stage of that change will see the amount for 2018 increase from $8,160 to $8,660.

Although the change is effective as of the beginning of the calendar year, it will first be reflected in payroll deductions made for provincial income tax starting in July 2018.

It shouldn’t be news to anyone that severe weather events are becoming more and more common. And, although Canada is known for its winters, it’s usually spring and summer that bring the kinds of weather-related disasters that can force Canadians to leave (or even lose) their homes and which can upend their lives for days, weeks, or even months.

For the past few years, spring floods have been succeeded by summer droughts and forest fires, and the timing of those events unfortunately coincides with the time of year during which most individual tax filing and payment deadlines fall. The filing deadline for 2017 returns for most taxpayers fell on April 30, 2018, which was also the deadline for final payment of all individual taxes owed for 2017. Self-employed individuals and their spouses were required to file a return for 2017 by June 15, 2018. Finally, for taxpayers who pay individual income tax by instalment, the due date for the second instalment payment of income taxes for 2018 was also June 15.

It shouldn’t be news to anyone that severe weather events are becoming more and more common. And, although Canada is known for its winters, it’s usually spring and summer that bring the kinds of weather-related disasters that can force Canadians to leave (or even lose) their homes and which can upend their lives for days, weeks, or even months.

For the past few years, spring floods have been succeeded by summer droughts and forest fires, and the timing of those events unfortunately coincides with the time of year during which most individual tax filing and payment deadlines fall. The filing deadline for 2017 returns for most taxpayers fell on April 30, 2018, which was also the deadline for final payment of all individual taxes owed for 2017. Self-employed individuals and their spouses were required to file a return for 2017 by June 15, 2018. Finally, for taxpayers who pay individual income tax by instalment, the due date for the second instalment payment of income taxes for 2018 was also June 15.

For anyone facing circumstances which threaten their economic or physical well-being, dealing with tax obligations is, understandably, far down the list of priorities. And, while those tax obligations won’t just go away, the tax authorities can and will ensure that such individuals are not unfairly penalized when they can’t, as a result, meet those obligations on a timely basis.  

The ability of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) to provide relief to taxpayers in such circumstances arises from their Taxpayer Relief Program. That program allows the Minister to waive or cancel any interest or penalty charges that would be imposed as a consequence of the taxpayer’s failure to meet his or her tax obligations, where that failure was caused by events or circumstances outside the taxpayer’s control. While most such applications are the result of natural disasters, administrative relief can also be provided where the taxpayer is suffering from significant financial hardship. Whatever the reason for the application, it is important to note that only interest and penalty charges can be waived. The Minister has no authority, no matter how dire the circumstances, to waive the payment of actual taxes owed.

Most requests for relief filed will likely be requests to waive the imposition of interest or penalties related to one or more late filings or late payments in connection with one or more of these deadlines. There is a specific process by which such requests are to be made. The CRA issues a prescribed form — RC4288, Request for Taxpayer Relief, which can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms/rc4288.html. While use of the form is not mandatory — a letter to the CRA will suffice — using the prescribed form will ensure that all of the information needed by the Agency to make a decision on the request for relief is provided. For each such request, that information includes:

• the taxpayer’s name, address, and telephone number;
• the taxpayer’s social insurance number (SIN), account number, partnership number, trust account number, business number (BN), or any other identification number assigned to the taxpayer by the CRA;
• the tax year(s) or fiscal period(s) involved;
• the facts and reasons supporting that the interest or penalty were mainly caused by factors beyond the taxpayer’s control;
• an explanation of how the circumstances affected the taxpayer’s ability to meet his or her tax obligations;
• the facts and reasons supporting the inability to pay the penalties or interest assessed or charged, or to be assessed or charged;
• any relevant documentation; and
• a complete history of events including any measures that have been taken (e.g., payments and payment arrangements, and when they were taken to resolve the non-compliance).

In addition, where the relief request is based on financial hardship, the taxpayer must provide full financial disclosure, including statements of income and expenses. In order to provide full financial disclosure, the CRA recommends that taxpayers use Form RC376, Taxpayer Relief Request — Statement of Income and Expenses and Assets and Liabilities for Individuals. That form is available on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms/rc376.html.

All relief requests are to be sent to a particular tax centre or Tax Services office, depending on the taxpayer’s province of residence. A listing of the addresses of all such centres and offices is available on the CRA website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/gncy/cmplntsdspts/sbmtrqst-eng.html, and the same information is included on the RC4288 form. The request cannot be e-mailed, as the CRA does not communicate taxpayer-specific information by e-mail.

Each relief request is assigned to a CRA official, who may, if necessary, contact the taxpayer to obtain clarification of the information provided, or to seek additional information.  In any case, a determination will be made of whether the taxpayer’s request for interest or penalty relief is to be approved in full, approved in part, or denied, based on the following considerations:

• the taxpayer’s history of compliance with his or her tax obligations;
• whether or not the taxpayer knowingly allowed an arrears balance to exist upon which arrears interest has accrued;
• whether or not the taxpayer exercised a reasonable amount of care in conducting his or her tax affairs, and whether or not negligence or carelessness has been demonstrated; and
• whether or not the taxpayer acted quickly to remedy any delay or omission.

The decision made will be communicated to the taxpayer, with reasons provided where the request is only partially approved, or is denied. At the same time, the taxpayer will be given information on the options available where the CRA has made a decision with which the taxpayer does not agree.

When natural or man-made disaster occurs, individuals living in the affected areas are clearly those most affected, but they are not the only ones. This spring, the CRA issued a news release reminding taxpayers of the availability of the Taxpayer Relief Program. It noted in that release that first responders who work to help in such circumstances may also seek relief under the Program, where such work has meant that they were unable to meet their tax filing and/or payment obligations. That press release can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/news/2018/05/government-of-canada-offers-taxpayer-relief-to-canadians-affected-by-flooding.html.

Most Canadians, understandably, think about taxes only when such thoughts can’t be avoided — once or twice a year. The first such time is, of course, when the annual return must be filed at the end of April (or mid-June for the self-employed). And some, but not all, taxpayers turn their minds to taxes when the annual RRSP contribution deadline rolls around.

Most Canadians, understandably, think about taxes only when such thoughts can’t be avoided — once or twice a year. The first such time is, of course, when the annual return must be filed at the end of April (or mid-June for the self-employed). And some, but not all, taxpayers turn their minds to taxes when the annual RRSP contribution deadline rolls around.

The unfortunate reality, however is that most often taxpayers who are sitting down to prepare their annual return, or waiting to hear the results from someone else’s preparation of that return, have no idea of what the bottom line is going to be. Everyone, of course, hopes for a big tax refund, or at least not to have a big tax bill to pay. But the fact is that the refund or tax payable figure which appears at the bottom of page 4 of one’s tax return shouldn’t be — and doesn’t have to be — a surprise, and it’s not necessary to be a tax professional to acquire that knowledge. A few steps taken during the year can eliminate any disappointments or unpleasant surprises at tax filing time — and mid-year is a good time to take those steps, for several reasons.

By the end of June, all Canadians should have filed a return for the previous tax year, and most will have received the Notice of Assessment which summarizes their tax situation for that year — income, deductions, credits, and tax payable. July also marks the halfway point for the payment of income tax by individual taxpayers for the current taxation year. Employees will have made six months of payments toward their income tax bill for the year, through deductions at source from each paycheque, and taxpayers who pay their income tax by instalment will already have made two of the four tax instalment payments due during 2018. Finally, the federal government and most of the provinces provide refundable tax credit or benefit programs to eligible taxpayers, and those programs are generally administered by means of monthly or quarterly payments to recipients. The current benefit year for most such programs runs from July 2018 to June 2019.

All of this makes the month of July a good time to assess one’s current year tax situation, make sure that everything is on track, and put in place any adjustments needed to help ensure that there are no unpleasant tax surprises when filing one’s tax return for 2018 next spring. As the calendar year goes on, the opportunities to make a significant difference to one’s current year tax and benefit situation diminish.

For the majority of individual taxpayers there are two basic steps involved in a mid-year tax checkup. First, all tax filing obligations, if not yet done, should be brought up-to-date. Second, it’s necessary to ensure that tax payment obligations for the current tax year are on track to be met, and to make any required adjustments if they are not.

For all taxpayers, the due date for filing of the return for 2017 has passed and any return not yet filed is now late. Many taxpayers know that filing on time is important in order to avoid late-filing penalties and interest charges. Most do not, however, realize that a failure to file, even where no tax is owed, will mean losing access, at least temporarily, to federal and provincial refundable tax credits which are paid  monthly or quarterly to eligible taxpayers.

Eligibility for a number of such credits (the GST/HST credit and the Canada Child Benefit, for instance) are based, in part, on the taxpayer’s income and, of course, that income is determined from the annual tax return. The month of July 2018 marks the beginning of the 2018-19 benefit year for such credits, and benefits paid for that 2018-19 year are based on the taxpayer’s income for 2017. Where a taxpayer hasn’t filed a return for 2017, the federal government can’t determine whether the taxpayer is eligible for any benefits and, if so, what the amount of those benefits will be. Consequently, any payment of such benefits will cease as of July 2018. Once the return is filed and assessed, payment of credits owed can be made retroactively, but there will be a delay. 

Once the return for 2017 has been filed and a Notice of Assessment for that year has been issued by the Canada Revenue Agency and received by the taxpayer, the next step can be taken. In the best-case scenario, there will have been little or no tax owed on filing and little or nothing by way of a refund. While many taxpayers view a big tax refund as “found money”, the reality is that in most cases a large tax refund means that the taxpayer has overpaid their taxes during the year, and thereby provided the government with an interest-free loan. (No interest is paid on overpayments of tax by the taxpayer prior to the return filing date). In the opposite scenario – a large tax balance owed on filing, the converse is true and generally the taxpayer has paid insufficient tax, whether by way of deductions at source or by tax instalments, through the year. Either way, it’s in the taxpayer’s best interests to make sure that that scenario doesn’t repeat itself for 2018.

To do that, the taxpayer has to come up with a reasonably good estimate of the amount of tax which will be owed for 2018. Most taxpayers, especially employees, will know by mid-year what their total income will be for 2018. Taxpayers whose income hasn’t changed much from 2017 to 2018 can get a good sense of what their tax liability for 2018 will be simply by using the 2017 income tax return form for their province of residence to make that calculation - using, of course, their anticipated income for 2018. (In arriving at that income amount, it’s important to remember to include, in addition to employment income, any other income receipts – for instance, interest received or withdrawal(s) from an RRSP.) If anything, a calculation done using a return form from 2017 will slightly overstate the taxpayer’s tax liability for 2018, owing to the indexation of tax brackets and tax credit amounts. For those who wish to be more precise in their calculation, information on the tax rate brackets and credit amounts which apply for 2018 can be found on the Canada Revenue Agency website at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/fq/txrts-eng.html#previousyears.

Once a rough idea of one’s tax liability for 2018 is arrived at, it’s necessary to figure out whether income tax payments made to date, either by source deductions or instalment payments, match up with that tax liability figure, recognizing that by this point in the year, approximately one-half of 2018 taxes should already have been paid. If they haven’t, and particularly if there is a shortfall which will mean a balance owing when the tax return for 2018 is filed next spring, the taxpayer will need to take steps to remedy that. Employees can arrange to have the amount of tax withheld at source from each paycheque increased to make up for the shortfall, while those who pay by instalment can increase the amount of the instalment payments to be made in September and/or December to close the gap.

It’s also possible, especially where a taxpayer is making expenditures which will result in one of more large deductions from income for 2018 (for example, for child care expenses, deductible support payments or an RRSP contribution) to find that taxes are being overpaid. Employees who find themselves in that situation can file a FormT1213 – Request to Reduce Tax Deductions at Source, which is available on the CRA website at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pbg/tf/t1213/README.html with the Agency. On that form, the taxpayer identifies the amounts which will be deducted on the return for the year and, once the CRA verifies that those deductible expenditures are being made, it will authorize the taxpayer’s employer to reduce the amount of tax which is being withheld at source to take account of that deduction. For taxpayers who pay tax by instalments, the process is a simpler one – such taxpayers can simply adjust the amount of instalment payments made in September and/or December to reflect their actual tax liability for 2018.

Most taxpayers, once the return for the past year is filed and assessed, are disinclined to deal with tax matters again before it is absolutely required. Notwithstanding, the investment of a couple of hours of time half way through the year, to make sure that one’s current year tax payments are in order, can help avoid a big tax bill next spring.

By the end of June, all individual taxpayers have filed their 2017 income tax returns and most will have received a Notice of Assessment outlining the Canada Revenue Agency’s (CRA’s) conclusions with respect to their income and tax position for the year. In most cases, the Notice of Assessment won’t vary a great deal from the information provided by the taxpayer in his or her return. Where it does, and the change is to the taxpayer’s detriment — the amount of income assessed is greater than that reported by the taxpayer, or a deduction or credit is denied — then the taxpayer must decide whether to dispute the CRA’s assessment.

By the end of June, all individual taxpayers have filed their 2017 income tax returns and most will have received a Notice of Assessment outlining the Canada Revenue Agency’s (CRA’s) conclusions with respect to their income and tax position for the year. In most cases, the Notice of Assessment won’t vary a great deal from the information provided by the taxpayer in his or her return. Where it does, and the change is to the taxpayer’s detriment — the amount of income assessed is greater than that reported by the taxpayer, or a deduction or credit is denied — then the taxpayer must decide whether to dispute the CRA’s assessment.

The first step is always to contact the CRA to find out, if it’s not clear from the Notice of Assessment, where the discrepancy lies and what caused it. The quickest way to get that information is through a call to the CRA’s Individual Income Tax Enquires line at 1-800-959-8281. When that call is made, it’s necessary to have a copy of the return filed and the Notice of Assessment on hand. Those documents will have the information needed to satisfy the CRA’s information security requirements, and will also make it easier to communicate the nature of the problem (and any explanation of that problem).

Where, however, the explanations provided don’t satisfy the taxpayer, where the amounts in issue are significant, or where the taxpayer genuinely believes that the CRA’s assessment is in error, the next step to take is the filing of a Notice of Objection. Doing so formally advises the CRA that the taxpayer is disputing his or her tax liability for the taxation year in question. Not incidentally, the filing of an Objection also brings to a halt most efforts undertaken by the CRA to collect taxes which it considers owing for the taxation year under dispute (although, if the taxpayer is eventually found to owe the amount in dispute, interest will have accumulated in the interim).  Where the taxpayer files an Objection, the CRA’s collection efforts are suspended until 90 days after the date the CRA’s decision on that Objection is sent to the taxpayer. In some cases, however, those collection efforts will not be brought to a halt, in whole or in part. Tax collection efforts by the CRA are not deferred where the amounts in dispute are those which the taxpayer was required to withhold and remit to the CRA, such as employee income tax deductions at source. As well, the CRA is required to postpone collection action on only 50% of the amount in dispute, where that dispute involves a charitable donation tax credit or deduction claimed in connection with a tax shelter arrangement.

There is a time limit by which any Objection must be filed, albeit a reasonably generous one. Individual taxpayers must file an Objection by the later of 90 days from the mailing date of the Notice of Assessment (the date found at the top of page 1) or one year from the due date of the return which is being disputed. So, for tax returns for the 2017 tax year, the one-year deadline (which is usually, but not always, the later of those two dates) would be April 30, 2019 (or June 15, 2019 for self-employed taxpayers and their spouses).  As with most things related to taxes, it’s best not to put it off. At the very least, if the taxpayer is ultimately found to owe some or all of the taxes assessed by the CRA, interest will have accrued on those taxes for the entire period since the filing due date and, if the filing of the Objection is delayed, the CRA may well have already commenced its collection efforts. Certainly, if the deadline is imminent, it’s necessary to file a Notice of Objection in order to preserve the taxpayer’s appeal rights, even if discussions with the CRA are still ongoing.

Taxpayers who have registered with the CRA’s online services feature My Account can file their Notice of Objection online at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/esrvc-srvce/tx/ndvdls/myccnt/menu-eng.html. The taxpayer provides information with respect to the assessment being disputed and the reasons why the assessment is being disputed and submits those reasons by clicking on the Submit button at the bottom of the "Register my formal dispute - review" page.

Taxpayers who are disputing their tax assessment can scan and send supporting documents relating to that dispute to the Agency. If the CRA has requested that the taxpayer provide specific documents, he or she will have been provided with a case or reference number which is used to submit the document or documents. Where that’s not the case, and the taxpayer doesn’t have a case or reference number, it is still possible to submit documents online. In either case, there are some technical requirements which must be met when scanning and sending documents to the CRA. Each file submitted must have a unique name and must be in one of a number of file formats, many of which — like .doc, .pdf. and jpg. — will already be familiar to most taxpayers. As well, the total size of the documents submitted can’t exceed 150 MB. Once documents are successfully submitted, the taxpayer will receive a confirmation number and a reference number.  That reference number (or the one previously provided by the CRA) can be used at any time to submit additional documents.

While filing a dispute through My Account is certainly faster than mailing hard copy of the Notice of Objection, not all taxpayers want to use that option. In particular, those who are not already registered with My Account may not wish to undertake the registration process simply in order to file a single Notice of Objection. Taxpayers who choose instead to mail hard copy of a Notice of Objection can find the most current version of the CRA’s standardized T400A, Objection (which was updated and re-issued in June 2018), on the CRA’s website at https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/cra-arc/formspubs/pbg/t400a/t400a-18e.pdf.

Taxpayers aren’t obligated to use the CRA’s official Notice of Objection form — any communication which makes it clear that the taxpayer is objecting to his or her Notice of Assessment will do. Nonetheless, there’s no reason not to use the standardized form, and there are benefits to doing so. Using the T400A form will make it clear to the CRA that a formal objection is being filed, will present the necessary information in a format with which the Agency is familiar, and will also mean that no required information is inadvertently omitted. It’s also helpful to include a copy of the Notice of Assessment which is being disputed. Taxpayers should also consider ensuring proof of both delivery and time of delivery by sending the form in a way which provides for tracking and proof of delivery (e.g., registered mail or courier). The CRA has two appeal intake centres, which are as follows:

Western Intake Centre                                     Eastern Intake Centre

Vancouver Tax Service Office                          Sudbury Tax Service Office

9737 King George Boulevard                           1050 Notre-Dame Avenue

PO Box 9070, Station Main                              Sudbury ON P3A 5C1

 Surrey BC V3T 5W6

Taxpayers having a postal code starting with letters A to P should send their objection to the Eastern Intake Centre, while those with a postal code starting with the letters R to Y should send their objection to the Western Intake Centre.

It’s also possible to contact either of the Intake Centres by phone or fax, at the following numbers.

Eastern Intake Centre

Toll Free Public Enquiries Line: 1-866-242-3161 (English), 1-866-276-0969 (French)
Local Public Enquiries Line: 705-671-0238 (English), 705-677-7764 (French)
Fax: 1-866-443-4955, Local: 705-671-0388

Western Intake Centre

Public Enquiries Line: 1-800-959-5513
Fax: 1-866-489-6832, Local: 604-587-2672

Any follow-up by phone or fax should be to the Centre to which the Objection was sent.

Eventually (at least several weeks being the usual time frame) the CRA will respond to the Objection. In the course of making its decision, the Agency may or may not contact the taxpayer for further discussions of the issues in dispute. Should the taxpayer be contacted, he or she may be asked to provide representations outlining his or her position, in writing or at a meeting. Through such representations and meetings, it may be possible for the taxpayer and the CRA to come to an agreement on the taxpayer’s tax liability. In either case, the CRA will either confirm its original assessment or change it. If the original assessment is changed, the CRA will issue a Notice of Reassessment outlining the changes. If the taxpayer continues to disagree with the CRA’s position, the next step is an appeal to the Tax Court of Canada, which must be filed within 90 days after the CRA issues its assessment or reassessment. While in many instances (generally where amounts in dispute are relatively small) taxpayers are allowed by law to represent themselves before the Tax Court, it is generally a good idea, once things reach this point, to consult a tax lawyer before taking that next step.

The CRA also publishes a useful pamphlet entitled Resolving Your Dispute: Objection and Appeal Rights under the Income Tax Act, and the most recent release of that publication can be found on the CRA website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/tg/p148/README.html.         

For several generations, reaching one’s 65^th birthday marked the transition from working life to full retirement, and, usually, receipt of a monthly employee pension, along with government-sponsored retirement benefits. That is no longer the reality. The age at which Canadians retire can now span a decade or more, and retirement is more likely to be a gradual transition than a single event.

For several generations, reaching one’s 65^th birthday marked the transition from working life to full retirement, and, usually, receipt of a monthly employee pension, along with government-sponsored retirement benefits. That is no longer the reality. The age at which Canadians retire can now span a decade or more, and retirement is more likely to be a gradual transition than a single event.

Today, Canadians can choose to begin receiving benefits from government-sponsored retirement benefit programs between the ages of 60 and 70. Canada Pension Plan retirement benefits can begin as early as age 60, and taxpayers can start collecting Old Age Security benefits at age 65. Receipt of income from either of those government- sponsored retirement income plans can also be deferred until the age of 70, but no later.

As well, the employer-sponsored pension plan is no longer available as a source of guaranteed retirement income for the majority of retirees. Instead, such retirees have (hopefully) saved for retirement through a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP). Holders of such plans are required to collapse their RRSP by the end of the year in which they turn 71 years of age. And, the decision made on what to do with the funds within that RRSP will affect the individual’s income for the remainder of his or her life.

While the actual decision is a complex one, the options available to a taxpayer who must collapse an RRSP are actually quite few in number — three, to be precise. They are as follows:

• collapse the RRSP and include all of the proceeds in income for that year;
• collapse the RRSP and transfer all proceeds to a registered retirement income fund (RRIF); and/or
• collapse the RRSP and purchase an annuity with the proceeds.

It’s not hard to see that the first option doesn’t have much to recommend it. Collapsing an RRSP without transferring the balance to a RRIF or purchasing an annuity means that every dollar in the RRSP will be treated as taxable income for that year. In most cases, that will mean losing nearly half of the RRSP proceeds to income tax. And, while any amount left can then be invested, tax will be payable on all investment income earned.

As a practical matter, then, the choices come down to two: a RRIF or an annuity. And, as is the case with most tax and financial planning decisions, the best choice will be driven by one’s personal financial and family circumstances, risk tolerance, cost of living, and the availability of other sources of income to meet that cost of living.

The annuity route has the great advantages of simplicity and reliability. In exchange for a lump sum amount paid by the taxpayer, the annuity issuer agrees to pay the taxpayer a specific sum of money, usually once a month, for the remainder of the annuitant’s life. Annuities can also provide a guarantee period, in which the annuity payments continue for a specified time period (5 years, 10 years), even if the taxpayer dies during that time. The amount of monthly income which can be received depends, of course, on the amount paid in, but also on the gender and, especially, the age of the taxpayer. Currently, annuity rates for each $100,000 paid to the annuity issuer by a taxpayer who is 70 years of age range from $579 to $643 per month for a male taxpayer and from $515 to $572 for a female taxpayer (the actual rate is set by the company which issues the annuity). Those rates do not include any guarantee period.

For taxpayers whose primary objective is to obtain a guaranteed life-long income stream without the responsibility of making any investment decisions or the need to take any investment risk, an annuity can be an attractive option. There are however, some potential downsides to be considered. First, an annuity can never be reversed. Once the taxpayer has signed the annuity contract and transferred the funds, he or she is locked into that annuity arrangement for the remainder of his or her life, regardless of any change in circumstances that might mean an annuity is no longer suitable. Second, unless the annuity contract includes a guarantee period, there is no way of knowing how many payments the taxpayer will receive. If he or she dies within a short period of time after the annuity is put in place, there is no refund of amounts invested — once the initial transfer is made at the time the annuity is purchased, all funds transferred belong to the annuity company. Third, most annuity payment schedules do not keep up with inflation — while it is possible to obtain an annuity in which payments are indexed, having that feature will mean a substantially lower monthly payout amount. Finally, where the amount paid to obtain the annuity represents most or all of the taxpayer’s assets, entering into the annuity arrangement means that the taxpayer will not be leaving an estate for his or heirs.

The second option open to taxpayers is to collapse the RRSP and transfer the entire balance to a registered retirement income fund, or RRIF. A RRIF operates in much the same way as an RRSP, with two major differences. First, it’s not possible to contribute funds to a RRIF. Second, the taxpayer is required to withdraw an amount from his or her RRIF (and to pay tax on that amount) each year. That minimum withdrawal amount is a percentage of the outstanding balance, with that percentage figure determined by the taxpayer’s age at the beginning of the year. While the taxpayer can always withdraw more in a year, or make lump sum withdrawals (and pay tax on those withdrawals), he or she cannot withdraw less than the minimum required withdrawal for his or her age group.

Where a taxpayer holds savings in a RRIF, he or she can invest those funds in the same investment vehicles as were used while the funds were held in an RRSP and those funds can continue to grow on a tax-sheltered basis, in the same way as funds in an RRSP. While the ability to continue holding investments that can grow on a tax-sheltered basis provides the taxpayer with a lot of flexibility, and the potential for growth in value, those benefits have a price in the form of investment risk. As is the case with all investments, the investments held within a RRIF can increase in value — or decrease — and the taxpayer carries the entire investment risk. When things go the way every investor wants them to, investment income is earned while the taxpayer’s underlying capital is maintained but, of course, that result is never guaranteed.

On the death of a RRIF annuitant, any funds remaining in the RRIF can pass to the annuitant’s spouse on a tax-free basis. Where there is no spouse, the remaining funds in the RRIF will be income to the RRIF annuitant in the year of death, and any balance after tax is paid will become part of his or her estate, available for distribution to beneficiaries.

While the above discussion of RRIFs versus annuities focuses on the benefits and downsides of each, it is not necessary (and in most cases not advisable) to limit the options to an either/or choice. It is possible to achieve, to a degree, the seemingly irreconcilable goals of lifetime income security and the potential for capital (and estate) growth. Combining the two alternatives — annuity and RRIF — either now or in the future, can go a long way toward satisfying both objectives.  

For everyone, in retirement or not, all spending is a combination of non-discretionary and discretionary items. The first category is made up mostly of expenditures for income tax, housing (whether rent or the cost of maintaining a house), food, insurance costs, and (especially for older Canadians) the cost of out-of-pocket medical expenses. The second category of discretionary expenses includes entertainment, travel, and the cost of any hobbies or interests pursued. A strategy which utilizes a portion of RRSP savings to create a secure lifelong income stream to cover non-discretionary costs can remove the worry of outliving one’s money, while the balance of savings can be invested through a RRIF, for growth and to provide the income for non-discretionary spending.

Such a secure income stream can, of course, be created by purchasing an annuity. As well, although most taxpayers don’t necessarily think of them in that way, the Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security have many of the attributes of an annuity, with the added benefit that both are indexed to inflation. By age 71, all taxpayers who are eligible for CPP and OAS will have begun receiving those monthly benefits. Consequently, in making the RRIF/annuity decision at that age, taxpayers should include in their calculations the extent to which CPP and OAS benefits will pay for their non-discretionary living costs.

As of June 2018, the maximum OAS benefit for most Canadians (specifically, those who have lived in Canada for 40 years after the age of 18) is about $590 per month. The amount of CPP benefits receivable by the taxpayer will vary, depending on his or her work history, but the maximum current benefit which can be received at age 65 is about $1,050. (Where receipt of either benefit is deferred past the age of 65, those amounts go up.) As a result, a single taxpayer who receives the maximum CPP and OAS benefits at age 65 will have just under $20,000 in annual income (just over $1,600 per month). And, for a married couple, of course, the combined total annual income received from CPP and OAS can approach $40,000 annually, or $3,200 per month. While $20,000 a year isn’t enough to provide a comfortable retirement, for those who go into retirement in good financial shape — meaning, generally, without any debt — it can go a long way toward meeting non-discretionary living costs. In other words, most Canadians who are facing the annuity versus RRIF decision already have a source of income which is effectively guaranteed for their lifetime and which is indexed to inflation. Taxpayers who are considering the purchase of an annuity to create the income stream required to cover non-discretionary expenses should first determine how much of those expenses can already be met by the combination of their (and their spouse’s) CPP and OAS benefits. The amount of any annuity purchase can then be set to cover off any shortfall.

While the options available to a taxpayer at age 71 with respect to the structuring of future retirement income are relatively straightforward, the number of factors to be considered in assessing those factors and making that decision are not. All of that makes for a situation in which consulting with an independent financial adviser on the right mix of choices and investments isn’t just a good idea, it’s a necessary one.

It’s something of an article of faith among Canadians that, as temperatures rise in the spring, gas prices rise along with them. Whether that’s the case every year or not, this year statistics certainly support that conclusion. In mid-May, Statistics Canada released its monthly Consumer Price Index, which showed that gasoline prices were up by 14.2%. As of the third week of May, the per-litre cost of gas across the country ranged from 125.2 cents per litre (in Manitoba) to 148.5 cents per litre (in British Columbia). On May 23, the average price across Canada was 135.2 cents per litre, an increase of more than 25 cents per litre from last year’s average on that date.

It’s something of an article of faith among Canadians that, as temperatures rise in the spring, gas prices rise along with them. Whether that’s the case every year or not, this year statistics certainly support that conclusion. In mid-May, Statistics Canada released its monthly Consumer Price Index, which showed that gasoline prices were up by 14.2%. As of the third week of May, the per-litre cost of gas across the country ranged from 125.2 cents per litre (in Manitoba) to 148.5 cents per litre (in British Columbia). On May 23, the average price across Canada was 135.2 cents per litre, an increase of more than 25 cents per litre from last year’s average on that date.

While in some cases Canadians can reduce the impact of gas price increases by reducing the amount of driving they do, the practical reality is that, for most of us, driving a car every day can’t be avoided, and gasoline is consequently a non-discretionary expense. That’s especially true for those who must drive to work each day and, increasingly, that drive is becoming a longer and longer one, as individuals and families move further and further from their workplace location in search of affordable housing. Finally, for many Canadians a car is their only transportation option, when they live in places that are not served by public transit, or the available transit isn’t a practical daily option.

Unfortunately, for most taxpayers, there’s no relief provided by our tax system to help alleviate the cost of driving as the cost of driving to work and back home, as well as the cost of driving that isn’t work-related, is considered a personal expense for which no deduction or credit can be claimed, no matter how great the cost. That said, there are some (fairly narrow) circumstances in which employees can claim a deduction for the cost of work-related travel.

Those circumstances exist where an employee is required, as part of his or her terms of employment, to use a personal vehicle for work-related travel. For instance, an employee might, as part of his or her job, be required to see clients at their own premises for the purpose of meetings or other work-related activities and be expected to use his or her own vehicle to get to such meetings. If the employer is prepared to certify on a Form T2200 that the employee was ordinarily required to work away from his employer’s place of business or in different places, that he or she is required to pay his or her own motor vehicle expenses and that no tax-free allowance was provided by the employer for such expenses, the employee can deduct actual expenses incurred for such work-related travel. Those deductible expenses include the following:

• fuel (gasoline, propane, oil);
• maintenance and repairs;
• insurance;
• license and registration fees;
• interest paid on a loan to purchase the vehicle;
• eligible leasing costs for the vehicle; and
• depreciation, in the form of capital cost allowance.

In almost all instances, a taxpayer will use the same vehicle for both personal and work-related driving. Where that’s the case, only the portion of expenses incurred for work-related driving can be deducted and the employee must keep a record of both the total kilometres driven and the kilometres driven for work-related purposes. And, of course, receipts must be kept to document all expenses incurred and claimed.

While no limits (other than the general limit of reasonableness) are placed on the amount of costs which can be deducted in the first four categories listed above, there are limits and restrictions with respect to allowable deductions for interest, eligible leasing costs, and depreciation claims. The rules governing those claims and the tax treatment of employee automobile allowances and available deductions for employment-related automobile use generally are outlined on the Canada Revenue Agency website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/ddctns/lns206-236/229/slry/mtrvhcl-eng.html.

In larger urban centres, and in the nearby cities and suburbs which are served by inter-city transit, many commuters utilize that transit as a way of avoiding both the stress of a drive to work in rush hour traffic and the associated costs. And, for a time, such commuters were able to claim a tax credit to help mitigate the cost of using such transit. Unfortunately, the federal public transit tax credit was eliminated in 2017, such that it could be claimed only for costs incurred for transit use before July 1, 2017. It was not possible to carry the credit over and claim it in a subsequent taxation year, so the last claim anyone could make for the public transit tax credit was on the 2017 annual tax return.

No amount of tax relief is going to make driving, especially for a lengthy daily commute, an inexpensive proposition. But, that said, seeking out and claiming every possible deduction and credit available under our tax rules can at least help to minimize the pain.

By the middle of May 2018, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) had processed just over 26 million individual income tax returns filed for the 2017 tax year. Just over 14 million of those returns resulted in a refund to the taxpayer, while about 5.5 million returns filed and processed required payment of a tax balance by the taxpayer. Finally, about 4.4 million returns were what are called “nil” returns — returns where no tax is owing and no refund claimed, but the taxpayer is filing in order to provide income information which will be used to determine his or her eligibility for tax credit payments (like the federal Canada Child Benefit or the HST credit )

By the middle of May 2018, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) had processed just over 26 million individual income tax returns filed for the 2017 tax year. Just over 14 million of those returns resulted in a refund to the taxpayer, while about 5.5 million returns filed and processed required payment of a tax balance by the taxpayer. Finally, about 4.4 million returns were what are called “nil” returns — returns where no tax is owing and no refund claimed, but the taxpayer is filing in order to provide income information which will be used to determine his or her eligibility for tax credit payments (like the federal Canada Child Benefit or the HST credit ).

No matter what the outcome of the filing, all returns filed with and processed by the CRA have one thing in common: they result in the issuance of a Notice of Assessment (NOA) by the Agency, outlining the taxpayer’s income, deductions, credits, and tax payable for the 2017 tax year, whether the taxpayer will be receiving a refund or whether he or she has a balance owing and, in either case, the amount involved. The amount of any refund or tax payable will appear in a box at the bottom of page 1, under the heading “Account Summary”. On page 2 of the NOA, the CRA lists the most important figures resulting from their assessment, including the taxpayer’s total income, net income, taxable income, total federal and provincial non-refundable tax credits, total income tax payable, total income tax withheld at source and the amount of any refund or balance owing. Page 2 also includes an explanation of any changes made by the CRA to the taxpayer’s return during the assessment process and provides information on unused credits (like tuition and education credits) which the taxpayer had earned and can carry forward and claim in future years. On page 3 of the NOA, the taxpayer will find information on his or her total RRSP contribution room (i.e., maximum allowable RRSP contribution) for 2018. Finally, page 4 provides information on how to contact the CRA with questions about the information provided on the NOA, on how to change the return filed and on how to dispute the CRA’s assessment of the individual’s tax liability.

In most cases, the information contained in the Notice of Assessment is the same as that provided by the taxpayer in his or her return, perhaps with a few arithmetical corrections made by the CRA. In a minority of cases, the information presented in the Notice of Assessment will differ from that provided by the taxpayer in his or her return. Where that difference means an unanticipated refund, or a refund larger than the one expected, it’s a good day for the taxpayer. In some cases, however, the Notice of Assessment will inform the taxpayer of an unexpected amount of tax owed.

When that happens, the taxpayer must figure out why, and to decide whether or not to dispute the CRA’s conclusions. Many such discrepancies are the result of an error made by the taxpayer in completing the return. A lot of information from a variety of sources is reported on even the most straightforward of returns and it’s easy to overlook, for instance, a T5 slip reporting less than fifty dollars in interest income earned. Even though most returns are now prepared using tax software (for 2017 returns, over 87% of returns were prepared using such software) which minimizes the chance of arithmetical errors, mistakes can still occur. Such tax software relies, in the first instance, on information input by the user with respect to amounts found on T4, T5, and other information slips. No matter how good the software, it can’t account for income information which the taxpayer hasn’t included in the inputs. In other cases, the taxpayer might transpose figures when entering them, such that an income amount of $18,456 on the T4 becomes $14,856 on the tax return. Once again, the tax software has no way of knowing that the information input was incorrect and will calculate tax owing on the basis of the figures provided.

Where there is additional tax owing because of an error or omission made by the taxpayer in completing the return, and the CRA’s figures are correct, disputing the assessment doesn’t really make sense. There is, as well, a persistent tax “myth” that if a taxpayer doesn’t receive an information slip (T4 or T5, as the case might be) for income received during the year, that income doesn’t have to be reported and therefore isn’t taxable. The myth, however, is just that. All taxpayers are responsible for reporting all income received and paying tax on that income, and the fact that an information slip was lost, mislaid, or never received doesn’t change anything. The CRA receives a copy of all information slips issued to Canadian taxpayers, and its systems will cross-check to ensure that all income is accurately reported.

There are, however, instances in which the CRA and the taxpayer are in disagreement over substantive issues, and those issues most often involve claims for deductions or credits. For instance, the CRA may have disallowed an individual’s claim for a medical expense, or for a deduction claimed for a business expenditure, which the taxpayer believes to be legitimate. When that happens, the taxpayer must decide whether to dispute the assessment.

Before making that decision, and whatever the nature of the dispute, the first step is always to contact the CRA for an explanation of the reasons why the change was made. While the information provided in the NOA is a good summary of the taxpayer’s tax situation for the year, it may not always be clear to the taxpayer precisely why there is an increase in the amount of tax which he or she must pay for the year. It is no longer possible to have a face-to-face meeting with a CRA representative at a Tax Services Office to obtain such information, as in-person services were discontinued a few years ago. Taxpayers who want more information about their Notice of Assessment must now call or write to the CRA. The first step to be taken would be a call to the Individual Income Tax Enquiries line at 1-800-959-8281, to obtain more detailed information. If that call doesn’t resolve the taxpayer’s questions, he or she can write to or fax the Tax Centre which processed the return. The name of that Tax Centre can be found in the top left hand corner of the first page of the Notice of Assessment, and fax numbers and mailing addresses for the Tax Centres are available on the CRA website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/cntct/prv/txcntr-eng.html. Communication with a Tax Centre can only be done by fax or mail, as phone numbers for Tax Centres are not available to the public.

While the Canadian real estate market seems, by all accounts, to have retreated from the record pace it was setting in 2017, there is still plenty of activity. According the statistics released by the Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA), more than 35,000 homes were sold across Canada in the month of April alone. And that means that an equal number of households will be moving in the upcoming months.

While the Canadian real estate market seems, by all accounts, to have retreated from the record pace it was setting in 2017, there is still plenty of activity. According the statistics released by the Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA), more than 35,000 homes were sold across Canada in the month of April alone. And that means that an equal number of households will be moving in the upcoming months.

Individuals and families move for any number of reasons, and those moves can be local or long distance. Whatever the reason for the move, or the distance to the new location, all moves have two things in common — stress and cost. Even where the move is a desired one — moving to attend university, or because of the purchase of a first home — moving represents the upheaval of one’s life and, where the move is for a long distance, or involves a large family home, the costs can be very significant. There is not much that can diminish the stress of moving, but the associated costs can be offset somewhat by a tax deduction which may be claimed for many of those costs.

While its common to refer simply to the “moving expense deduction”, as though it were available in all circumstances, the reality is that there is no general deduction available for moving costs. In order to be tax deductible, such moving costs must be incurred in specific and relatively narrow circumstances. Our tax system allows taxpayers to claim a deduction only where the move is made to get the taxpayer closer to his or her new place of work, whether that work is a transfer, a new job, or self-employment. Specifically, moving expenses can be deducted where the move is made to bring the taxpayer at least 40 kilometres closer to his or her new place of work. That requirement is satisfied where, for instance, a taxpayer moves from Toronto to Ottawa to take a new job. It’s also met where a taxpayer is transferred by his or her employer to another job in a different location and the taxpayer’s move will bring him or her at least 40 kilometres closer to the new work location. It’s not met where an individual or family move up the property ladder by selling and purchasing a new home in the same town or city.

It’s not, as well, actually necessary to be a homeowner in order to claim moving expenses. The list of moving-related expenses which may be deducted is basically the same for everyone — homeowner or tenant — who meets the 40-kilometre requirement. Students who are moving to take a summer job (even if that move is back to the family home) can also make a claim for moving expenses where that move meets the 40-kilometre requirement.

It's important to remember, however, that even where the 40-kilometre requirement is met, it is possible to deduct moving costs only from employment or self-employment (business) income earned at the new location — there is no deduction possible from other types of income, like investment income or employment insurance benefits.

The general rule is that a taxpayer can claim reasonable amounts that were paid for moving himself or herself, family members, and household effects. In all cases, the moving expenses must be deducted from employment or self-employment income earned at the new location. Where the move takes place later in the year, and moving costs are significant, it is possible that the amount of income earned at the new location in the year of the move will be less than deductible moving expenses incurred. In such instances, those expenses can be carried over and deducted from income earned at the new location in future years.

Within the general rule, there are a number of specific inclusions, exclusions, and limitations. The following is a list of expenses which can be claimed by the taxpayer without specific dollar figure restrictions (but subject, as always, to the overriding requirement of “reasonableness”).

• traveling expenses, including vehicle expenses, meals and accommodation, to move the taxpayer and members of his or her family to their new residence (note that not all members of the household have to travel together or at the same time);
• transportation and storage costs (such as packing, hauling, movers, in-transit storage, and insurance) for household effects, including such items as boats and trailers;
• costs for up to 15 days for meals and temporary accommodation near the old and the new residences for the taxpayer and members of the household;
• lease cancellation charges (but not rent) on the old residence;
• legal or notary fees incurred for the purchase of the new residence, together with any taxes paid for the transfer or registration of title to the new residence (excluding GST or HST);
• the cost of selling the old residence, including advertising, notary or legal fees, real estate commissions, and any mortgage penalties paid when a mortgage is paid off before maturity; and
• the cost of changing an address on legal documents, replacing driving licences and non-commercial vehicle permits (except insurance), and costs related to utility hook-ups and disconnections.

It sometimes happens that a move to the new home takes place before the old residence is sold. In most such circumstances, the taxpayer is entitled to deduct up to $5,000 in costs incurred for the maintenance of that residence while it is vacant and efforts are being made to sell it. Specifically, costs including interest, property taxes, insurance premiums, and heat and utilities expenses paid to maintain the old residence while efforts were being made to sell it may be deducted. If any family members are still living at the old residence, or it is being rented, no deduction is available. As well, a claim for such home maintenance expenses is not allowed where the taxpayer delayed selling, for investment purposes or until the real estate market improved.

It may seem from the forgoing that virtually all moving-related costs will be deductible; however, there are some costs for which the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) will not permit a deduction to be claimed, as follows:

• expenses for work done to make the old residence more saleable;
• any loss incurred on the sale of the old residence;
• expenses for job-hunting or house-hunting trips to another city (for example, costs to travel to job interviews or meet with real estate agents);
• expenses incurred to clean or repair a rental residence to meet the landlord’s standards;
• costs to replace such personal-use items as drapery and carpets;
• mail forwarding costs; and
• mortgage default insurance.

To claim a deduction for any eligible costs incurred, supporting receipts must be obtained. While the receipts do not have to be filed with the return on which the related deduction is claimed, they must be kept in case the CRA wants to review them.

Anyone who has ever moved knows that there are an endless number of details to be dealt with. In some cases, the administrative burden of claiming moving-related expenses can be minimized by choosing to claim a standardized amount for certain types of expenses. Specifically, the CRA allows taxpayers to claim a fixed amount, without the need for detailed receipts, for travel and meal expenses related to a move. Using that standardized, or flat rate method, taxpayers may claim up to $17 per meal, to a maximum of $51 per day, for each person in the household. Similarly, the taxpayer can claim a set per-kilometre amount for kilometres driven in connection with the move. The per-kilometre amount ranges from 45 cents for Alberta to 60.5 cents for the Yukon Territory. In all cases, it is the province or territory in which the travel begins which determines the applicable rate.

These standardized travel and meal expense rates are those which were in effect for the 2017 taxation year — the CRA will be posting the rates for 2018 on its website early in 2019, in time for the tax filing season.

Once eligibility for the moving expense deduction is established, the rules which govern the calculation of the available deduction are not complex, but they are very detailed. The best summary of those rules is found on the form used to claim such expenses — the T1-M, which was updated and re-issued by the CRA in January of this year. The current version of the form can be found on the CRA’s website at https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/cra-arc/formspubs/pbg/t1-m/t1-m-17e.pdf, and more information is available at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/ddctns/lns206-236/219/menu-eng.html. Details of the allowable amounts which may be claimed for standardized moving-related meal and travel expenses can be found on the same website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/ddctns/lns248-260/255/rts-eng.html.

Two quarterly newsletters have been added—one dealing with personal issues, and one dealing with corporate issues.

Two quarterly newsletters have been added—one dealing with personal issues, and one dealing with corporate issues. They can be accessed below.

Corporate:

Issue #44 Corporate

Personal:

Issue #44 Personal

For almost a decade now, Canadians have been living, and borrowing, in an ultra-low interest rate environment. As of the end of April 2018, the bank rate (from which commercial interest rates are derived) stood at 1.5%. The last time that the bank rate was over 1.5% was in December of 2008. Effectively, adult Canadians who are under the age of 30 have had no experience of managing their finances in high (or even, by historical standards, ordinary) interest rate environments.

For almost a decade now, Canadians have been living, and borrowing, in an ultra-low interest rate environment. As of the end of April 2018, the bank rate (from which commercial interest rates are derived) stood at 1.5%. The last time that the bank rate was over 1.5% was in December of 2008. Effectively, adult Canadians who are under the age of 30 have had no experience of managing their finances in high (or even, by historical standards, ordinary) interest rate environments.

The prolonged period of low interest rates which followed the financial crisis of 2008-09 coincided, not surprisingly, with an explosion in the amount of debt owed by both individual Canadians and by families. In the fall of 2005, the ratio of debt to disposable income for an average Canadian family stood at 93%. In the third quarter of 2017 that ratio stood at just less than double that amount, or 171%.

For several years financial advisers and government and banking officials have been sounding warnings that the debt loads which Canadians were carrying were likely sustainable only at the extremely low interest rates then in effect. Their concern was that when, inevitably, those rates returned to historically “normal” levels the burden of repaying, or even servicing those debts, would be unsustainable.

Whether those warnings were or weren’t heeded is becoming a moot question, as the era of reliably ultra-low interest rates is effectively coming to an end. The Bank of Canada has raised interest rates three times in the past 10 months, in July and September 2017 and again in January of 2018. Prior to July 2017, the last interest rate increase took place in September of 2010. As well, as the Bank has made clear in its regular announcements on the subject, the longer-term interest rate trend is an upward one.

When talking about debt, and debt management, it’s important to remember that not all debt is created equal. Specifically, it’s necessary to draw a distinction between secured and unsecured debt. Put simply, the former is debt which is secured by the value of an underlying asset and, if the debtor fails to make payments on the debt, the lender is entitled to seize that underlying asset and sell it to satisfy any outstanding debt amount owed. The type of secured debt most familiar to Canadians is, of course, a mortgage. Unsecured debt, on the other hand, is provided solely on the strength of the borrower’s promise to repay, and credit cards are the most common example of unsecured debt owed by Canadians.

While any type of debt can cause problems for borrowers, when interest rates go up it’s usually those who are carrying unsecured debt who are the first to feel the pinch. Not only is the rate of interest payable on unsecured debt always higher than that levied on secured debt, the interest rate on unsecured debt is usually a “variable” rate, meaning that it will go up every time interest rates increase, and the monthly minimum payment required will increase proportionately. And, of course, debtors whose debt is secured by an underlying asset and who find that such debt is no longer manageable always have the “out” of selling that asset and using the proceeds to retire the outstanding balance of the loan, while those who owe unsecured debt have no such option.

It’s easy to assume from the overall figures respecting the debt load of Canadians that having an outstanding balance on one or more credit cards or lines of credit is the norm. However, an Ipsos Global News year-end poll discloses some perhaps unexpected results, with both good and bad implications. Those survey results, which can be found on the Ipsos website at https://www.ipsos.com/en-ca/news-polls/2017-year-end-debt, was done in December of 2017. It found that the average unsecured (i.e., non-mortgage) debt held by individual Canadians was $8,539.50. However, the survey also found that nearly half of Canadians (46%) had no consumer debt whatsoever. Consequently, when it comes to debt, Canadians seem to fall about evenly into one of two very distinct and different groups. The minority (by a small percentage) are free of any unsecured debt – no line of credit debt and no credit card balances. But it’s a very different picture for the other 54% who are carrying, on average, around $15,000 in unsecured debt per person. And, for 12% of those surveyed, the amount of unsecured debt owed was more than $25,000.

For anyone who is carrying outstanding unsecured debt, the obvious advice is to get the debt paid down as quickly as possible, especially when interest rates are rising. That is, however, easier said than done, especially when the interest component of the debt, and consequently the required monthly minimum payments, are steadily increasing. Between 19% and 22% of respondents in the IPSO Global News poll indicated that they were “not very comfortable” or “not at all comfortable” with their ability to meet their current monthly debt payment obligations and/or their ability to pay down their debt in a timely manner.

Even where repayment of the debt over the short term isn’t a realistic expectation, such individuals are not without options. The best strategy to be pursued by those carrying significant amounts of unsecured debt which can’t be paid off over the short-term would be to try to lower the interest rate on such debt. There are a couple of ways in which that can be done.

If the debtor owns an asset (usually a house) against which he or she can borrow, turning the debt from unsecured to secured, the interest rate payable on such borrowing will certainly be lower than the rate currently being paid. Where there is no such asset, the debtor can seek a consolidation loan from a financial institution, in which all of the outstanding debts from every source are combined into a single loan at a lower rate of interest, and a fixed repayment schedule. Much unsecured debt owed by Canadians is in the form of credit card debt, which carries some of the highest interest rates around.

If neither of those options are available, then the next step would be to try to obtain a lower credit card interest rate. If the debt is in good standing – that is, payments have been made on time and in at least the minimum amount – the credit card company may be willing to reduce the interest rate imposed, especially if it is clear that the borrower will not be able to continue to make payments at higher rates. If the credit card company is unwilling to do so, the debtor may be able to seek out better rates elsewhere. Credit card companies regularly seek to bring in new business by offering the opportunity to transfer in balances from other cards and to have those balances benefit from a very low (or even 0%) rate of interest for a period of time – usually 6 months to a year. Where a new card with a much lower interest rate can be obtained, regular payments made will reduce the outstanding balance more quickly, since less of that payment is going to meet interest charges.

Each of these options assumes a willingness and an ability on the part of the individual to make debt repayment a priority, working on his or her own. For some, that’s not easy, or even possible. As well, some individuals are already in financial difficulty - unable to make the minimum monthly required payment, or having missed payments and being pursued by collection agencies. In both those situations, obtaining help to deal with the debt repayment process is likely needed. That help is available through debt and credit counselling provided by any number of non-profit agencies. Those agencies work with individuals, and with their creditor(s), to create both a realistic budget and a manageable debt repayment schedule. More information on the credit counselling process, and a listing of such non-profit agencies can be found at http://creditcounsellingcanada.ca/.

The arrival of warmer weather signals both the start of spring and the approaching end of the school year. For many families, it also means the need to begin researching the availability of suitable child care or summer daytime or overnight camp arrangements for the summer months. There are many such options available to parents, but what each of those options have in common is a price tag – sometimes a steep one. Some options, like day camps provided by the local recreation authority or municipality can be relatively inexpensive, while the cost of others, like summer-long residential camps or elite level sports or arts camps, can run to the thousands of dollars.

The arrival of warmer weather signals both the start of spring and the approaching end of the school year. For many families, it also means the need to begin researching the availability of suitable child care or summer daytime or overnight camp arrangements for the summer months. There are many such options available to parents, but what each of those options have in common is a price tag – sometimes a steep one. Some options, like day camps provided by the local recreation authority or municipality can be relatively inexpensive, while the cost of others, like summer-long residential camps or elite level sports or arts camps, can run to the thousands of dollars.

The good news for families which must incur such expenditures is that in many cases a deduction for all or part of the costs incurred can be claimed on the tax return for the year. And, since eligible expenditures can be deducted from income on a dollar-for-dollar basis, that means that income used to pay eligible child care expenses is effectively not subject to income tax. The bad news is that some of the deductions or credits which could be claimed in recent years are no longer available.

This year, any offset provided by the tax system with respect to summer child care costs can only be claimed through the general deduction provided for child care costs. That deduction, which is not specific to summer child care costs but is available for such costs incurred year-round, allows parents who must incur child care costs in order to work (whether in employment or self-employment) or, in some cases to attend school, to deduct those costs from income, within specified limits.

The calculation process set out on Form T778, which is used to determine the amount of any allowable deduction from income for child care expenses incurred can seem quite complex. However, at the end of the day, the amount of child care expenses which can be deducted is the least of three numbers, and only one of those numbers requires a calculation. The steps involved in doing so are as follows.

First, the amount of any deduction for child care expenses is limited to two-thirds of the taxpayer’s “earned income” for the year. The income figure used to calculate the two-thirds figure is, generally, the amount shown on Line 150 of the annual tax return. Where the family incurring child care expenses is a two-income family, and both spouses are working, the claim is made by the spouse with the lower net income, and consequently his or her net income is used to determine the two-thirds of income figure.

The second figure to be determined is the amount actually paid for eligible child care costs during the year. While virtually any licensed child care arrangement will qualify, more informal arrangements may not. Specifically, no deduction is available for amounts paid to most family members to provide child care. So, it’s not possible for a working spouse to pay the stay-at-home parent to provide child care, nor is it possible to pay an older sibling who is under the age of 18 to provide such services, and to claim a deduction for those expenses incurred. As well, where a claim is made for a deduction for child care expenses on the annual return, the claimant must obtain (and be prepared to provide to the tax authorities) the social insurance number of the individual providing the care as well as a receipt showing the amounts paid, whether to an individual or an organization.

 The third figure to be determined is the one which requires some calculation. Basically, the rules governing the deduction of child care expenses impose a maximum deduction per child per year (referred to as the “basic limit”), with that basic limit dependent on the age and health of the particular child. As well, where expenses are incurred for overnight camps or boarding schools, the amount deductible for such costs is similarly capped.

For 2018, the following overall limits apply:

• $5,000 in costs per year for a child who was born from 2002 to 2011;
• $8,000 in costs per year for a child who was born in 2012 or later;
• $11,000 in costs per year for a child who was born in 2018 or earlier, for whom the disability amount can be claimed.

Similar restrictions are placed on the amount of costs which can be deducted for overnight camp or boarding school fees, and those are as follows:

• $125 per week for a child who was born from 2002 to 2011;
• $200 per week for a child who was born in 2012 or later; and
• $275 per week for a child who was born in 2018 or earlier, for whom the disability amount can be claimed.

Taking all of these figures into account, the computation of a deduction for child care expenses for a typical Canadian family would look like this.

A two-income family has two children and both parents are employed. One spouse earns $60,000 per year, while the other earns $45,000. In 2018, one child is nine years old and the other is five. Neither child is disabled. Both children are in full-day school and so, during the school year, the family pays $400 per month for each child for after-school care. During the eight weeks of summer school vacation, both of the children attend a local full-day summer camp, for which the cost is $250 per week per child.

• The first step is to determine the two-thirds of income figure. Since it is the lower-income spouse who must make the deduction claim, that figure is two-thirds of $45,000, or $30,000. Consequently, any deduction for child care expenses for the year cannot exceed $30,000.

• The second calculation is the total amount of child care expenses paid for each child:

• • $400 per month for 10 months of after-school care, or $4,000
  • $250 per week for eight weeks of summer camp, or $2,000.

Total child care expenses for the year for each child is therefore $6,000.

• The last step is to determine the basic limit for child care expenses for each child, as follows:

The basic limit for the five-year-old (who was born in 2012 or later) is $8,000, and so the entire $6,000 in child care expenses incurred can be deducted.

The basic limit for the nine-year-old (who was born between 2002 and 2011) is $5,000, and so only $5,000 of the $6,000 in expenses incurred can be deducted for the year.

The total deduction available for child care expenses incurred for the 2018 tax year will therefore be $5,000 plus $6,000, or $11,000. That deduction is calculated on Form T778 and the deduction amount transferred to Line 214 of the tax return filed by the lower-income spouse for 2018 year, reducing his or her taxable income from $45,000 to $34,000, and resulting in a federal tax savings of about $1,650. The same deduction is claimed as well for provincial tax purposes, and the amount of provincial tax saved will depend on the tax rates imposed by the province in which the family lives.

In previous years, parents were also able to claim two other federal tax credits – the Children’s Fitness Tax Credit and the Children’s Arts Tax Credit – in respect of qualifying costs incurred. Unfortunately, those credits were reduced as of the start of the 2016 tax year and were entirely eliminated as of the beginning of 2017. Consequently, no such credits can be claimed for formerly eligible costs which are incurred during 2018.

Parents wishing to find out more about the child care expense deduction, and perhaps to calculate the maximum deduction which will be available to them for the 2018 tax year should consult Form T778 E (17). That form, which includes detailed information on the rules governing the deduction and how to make the claim, can be found on the Canada Revenue Agency website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms/t778.html.

There are a number of income sources available to Canadians in retirement. Those who participated in the work force during their adult life will have contributed to the Canada Pension Plan and will be able to receive CPP retirement benefits as early as age 60. Earning income from employment or self-employment will also have entitled those individuals to contribute to a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP). A shrinking minority of Canadians will be able to look forward to receiving benefits from an employer-sponsored pension plan.

There are a number of income sources available to Canadians in retirement. Those who participated in the work force during their adult life will have contributed to the Canada Pension Plan and will be able to receive CPP retirement benefits as early as age 60. Earning income from employment or self-employment will also have entitled those individuals to contribute to a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP). A shrinking minority of Canadians will be able to look forward to receiving benefits from an employer-sponsored pension plan.

Each of those income sources requires that an individual has made contributions during his or her working life in order to receive benefits in retirement. The fourth major source of retirement income for Canadians – the Old Age Security (OAS) program – does not. Entitlement to OAS is based solely on the number of years of Canadian residence, and individuals who have been Canadian residents for 40 years after the age of 18 can receive full OAS benefits, as early as age 65. As of the second quarter of 2018, those eligible for full OAS benefits receive $589.59 per month.

The OAS program is distinct from other sources of retirement income in another, less welcome way, in that it is the only such income source for which the federal government can require repayment by the recipient. That repayment requirement comes about through the OAS “Recovery Tax”, which is universally known as the OAS “clawback”.

While the rules governing the administration of the clawback can be confusing, the concept is a simple one. Anyone who receives OAS benefits during the year and has income for that year of more than $75,910 (for 2018) must repay a portion of those benefits. That repayment, or clawback, is administered by requiring repayment when the tax return for that year is filed the following April.

For example, an individual who receives full OAS during 2017 and has net income for the year of $82,000 will be subject to the clawback. He or she must repay OAS amounts received at a rate of 15 cents (or 15%) of every dollar of income over the clawback income threshold, as in the following example for the 2017 tax year:

Total OAS benefit for the year — $6,900

Total income for the year — $82,000

OAS income clawback threshold for 2017 — $74,788

Income over clawback threshold — $7,212 × 15% = $1081.80

Repayment amount required — $1081.80

The federal government becomes aware of an individual’s income for 2017 only once the tax return for that year is filed, usually by April 30 of 2018. Consequently, the required repayment amount of $1081.80 will become apparent when the return for the year is prepared, and will be included in any amount which must be paid on filing. As well, in the following benefit year (which will run from July 2018 to June 2019), OAS benefits received will be reduced by the same amount as the OAS repayment from the previous year. In the case of the above example, the monthly reduction of benefits would be $90.15 ($1081.80 divided by 12 months).

As of 2018, the OAS clawback affects only individuals who have an annual income of at least $75,000, and it’s arguable that at such income levels, the clawback requirement is unlikely to impose significant financial hardship. Nonetheless, the OAS clawback is a perpetual irritant to those affected, perhaps because of the sense that they are being penalized for being disciplined savers, or good managers of their finances during their working years, in order to ensure a financially comfortable retirement.

While any sense of grievance can’t alter the reality of the OAS clawback, there are strategies which can be put in place to either minimize or, in some cases, entirely eliminate one’s exposure to that clawback. Some of those planning considerations are better addressed earlier in life, prior to retirement: however, it’s not too late, once one is already receiving OAS, to make arrangements to avoid or minimize the clawback.

In all cases, no matter what strategy is employed, the goal is to “smooth” one’s income from year to year, so that net income for each year comes in under the OAS clawback threshold and, not incidentally, minimizes exposure to the higher federal and provincial income tax rates which apply once taxable income approaches the six-figure mark.

The starting point, for taxpayers who are approaching retirement, is to determine how much income will be received from all sources during retirement, based on CPP and OAS entitlement, any savings accrued through an RRSP and any benefits which will be received from an employer-sponsored pension plan.

Anyone who has an RRSP must begin receiving income from that RRSP in the year after that person turns 71. However, it’s possible to begin receiving income from an RRSP at any time. Similarly, an individual who is eligible for CPP retirement benefits can begin receiving those benefits anytime between age 60 and 70, with the amount of monthly benefit receivable increasing with each month receipt is deferred. The same calculation applies to OAS benefits, which can be received as early as age 65 or deferred up until age 70.

Once the amount of annual income is determined, strategies to smooth out that income can be put in place. Those strategies can include receiving income from an RRSP prior to the required withdrawal date of age 72, so as to reduce the total amount within the RRSP and so thereby reduce the likelihood of having a large “bump” in income when required withdrawals kick in at age 72.

Taxpayers are sometimes understandably reluctant to take steps which they view as depleting their RRSP savings, but receiving income from an RRSP doesn’t mean spending that income. While tax has to be paid on any withdrawals (whether the taxpayer is under or over the age of 71), after-tax amounts received can be contributed to the taxpayer’s tax-free savings account (TFSA), where they can compound free of tax. And, when the taxpayer has need of those funds, in retirement, they can be withdrawn free of tax, and they won’t count towards income for purposes of the OAS clawback.

Taxpayers who are married can “even out” their income by using pension income splitting, so that neither of them has sufficient income to be affected by the clawback. Using pension income splitting, the spouse who has qualifying income over the OAS clawback threshold can notionally re-allocate the “excess” income to his or her spouse on the annual return. That income is then considered to be income of the recipient spouse, for purposes of both income tax and the OAS clawback. To be eligible for pension income splitting, the income to be reallocated must be private pension income, which is generally income from an RRSP or registered retirement income fund (RRIF), or from an annuity or an employer-sponsored pension plan. More information on the kinds of income eligible for pension income splitting, and the mechanics of the process, can be found on the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/pension-income-splitting.html.

It is not at all uncommon now for Canadians to continue to work full-time or, more commonly, part-time, past the age of 65. Where that’s the case, it may make sense to defer receipt of OAS benefits for a few years, until the individual leaves the workforce. That’s especially the case where income received from employment, together with other sources of income, pushes the taxpayer’s annual income over the OAS clawback threshold. And, where receipt of such OAS benefits is deferred, the monthly amount received will go up, meaning that the eventual OAS benefits can go further toward making up the difference when income from employment ceases.

Finally, as outlined above, where a taxpayer must repay OAS benefits on filing his or her return for the previous year, any such benefits paid in the current benefit year are automatically reduced by the same amount. That practice is based on the assumption that income will not vary significantly from year to year. Where that’s not the case, and the taxpayer‘s income for a particular year is significantly higher because of a one-time event (e.g., the taxable sale of property or investments), the taxpayer can take action to avoid having monthly OAS benefit payments reduced in the following year. To do so, he or she must file a Request to Reduce OAS Recovery Tax at Source (T1213 (OAS) E (17)), which can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/cra-arc/formspubs/pbg/t1213_oas/t1213oas-17e.pdf. On that form, the taxpayer will provide information about his or her income sources and deductions for the current year, to show that he or she will not be subject to the OAS recovery tax for the year (or that such tax well be lower than the previous year’s). Once the Request is submitted, and it is approved by the CRA, it takes about two months for the change to be reflected in monthly benefit payments.

By the end of April 2018, more than 20 million individual income tax returns for the 2017 tax year will have been filed with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). And, inevitably, some of those returns will contain errors or omissions that must be corrected – last year the CRA received about 2 million requests for adjustment(s) to an already-filed return.

By the end of April 2018, more than 20 million individual income tax returns for the 2017 tax year will have been filed with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). And, inevitably, some of those returns will contain errors or omissions that must be corrected – last year the CRA received about 2 million requests for adjustment(s) to an already-filed return.

Most Canadians now prepare their returns (or have those returns prepared by a tax professional) using tax return preparation software. The use of such software significantly reduces the chance of making a clerical or arithmetical error, like entering an amount on the wrong line or adding a column of figures incorrectly. However, no matter how good the software, it can work only with the information that is provided to it. Sometimes taxpayers prepare and file a return, only to later receive a tax information slip that should have been included on that return. It’s also easy to make an inputting error when transposing figures from an information slip (a T4 from one’s employer, for instance) into the software. Whatever the cause, where the figures input are incorrect or information is missing, those errors or omissions will be reflected in the final (incorrect) result produced by the software.

When the error or omission is discovered in a return which has already been filed, the question is how to make things right. The first impulse of many taxpayers is to file another return, in which the complete and correct information is provided, but that’s not the right answer. There are, however, several ways in which a mistake or omission on an already-filed tax return can be corrected. And this year, taxpayers have more options than were previously available to them in doing so.

The vast majority of Canadians either file their return online, using the CRA’s NETFILE service, or engage a tax return preparer to file the return using the Agency’s EFILE service. Last year, fully 86% of individual tax returns were filed using one or the other of those methods.

This year, taxpayers who filed online, whether through NETFILE or EFILE, can advise the CRA of an error or omission in an already-filed return electronically, using the Agency’s ReFILE service. That service, which can be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/e-services/e-services-businesses/refile-online-t1-adjustments-efile-service-providers.html, allows taxpayers to make corrections to an already-filed return online, using the CRA website.

Essentially, taxpayers whose returns have been filed online (through NETFILE or EFILE) can file a correction to that already-filed return, using the same tax return preparation software that was used to prepare the return. Those taxpayers who used NETFILE to file their return can file an adjustment to a return for 2017 or 2016. Where the return was filed using EFILE, the EFILE service provider can file adjustments for returns filed for the 2017, 2016, or 2015 tax years.

There are limits to the ReFILE service. The online system will accept a maximum of 9 adjustments to a single return, and ReFILE cannot be used to make changes to personal information, like the taxpayer’s address or direct deposit details. There are also some types of tax matters which cannot be handled through ReFILE, like applying for a disability tax credit or child and family benefits.

It’s also possible to make a change or correction to a return using the CRA’s “My Account” service (through the “Change My Return” option), but that choice is available only to taxpayers who have already registered for the My Account service. As well, the changes/corrections which can be made using ReFILE are the same as those which can be done through My Account, without the need to become registered for My Account, a process which takes a few weeks.

Taxpayers who wish to make changes or corrections which cannot be made through ReFILE or My Account (or those who just don’t wish to use the online option) can paper-file an adjustment to their return. The paper form to be used is Form T1-ADJ E (2018), which can be found on the CRA website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pbg/tf/t1-adj/README.html. Those who are unable to print the form off the website can order a copy to be sent to them by mail by calling the CRA’s individual income tax enquiries line at 1-800-959-8281. There is no limit to the number of changes or corrections which can be made using the T1-ADJ E (2018) form.

The use of the actual T1-ADJ form isn’t mandatory – it’s also possible to file an adjustment request by sending a letter to the CRA – but using the prescribed form has two benefits. First, it makes clear to the CRA that an adjustment is being requested and two, filling out the form will ensure that the CRA is provided with all the information needed to process the requested adjustment. And, whether the request is made using the T1 Adjustment form or by letter, it’s necessary to include any relevant documents – the information slip summarizing the income not reported, or the receipt for an expense inadvertently not claimed.

Hard copy of a T1-ADJ (or a letter) is filed by sending the completed document to the appropriate Tax Center, which is the one to which the tax return was originally mailed. A listing of Tax Centres and their addresses can be found on the CRA website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/cntct/prv/txcntr-eng.html. A taxpayer who isn’t sure any more which Tax Centre his or her return was sent to can go to www.cra-arc.gc.ca/cntct/tso-bsf-eng.html on the CRA website and select his or her location from the listing found there. The address for the correct Tax Centre will then be provided. Similar information is also provided on the T1ADJ form.

Where a taxpayer discovers an error or omission in a return already filed, the impulse is to correct that mistake as soon as possible. However, no matter which method is used to make the correction – ReFILE, My Account, or the filing of a T1-ADJ in hard copy, it’s necessary to wait until the Notice of Assessment for the return already filed is received. Corrections to a return submitted prior to the time that return is assessed simply can’t be processed by the CRA.

Once the Notice of Assessment is received, and an adjustment request is made, it will take at least a few weeks, usually longer, before the CRA responds. The Agency’s estimate is that such requests which are submitted online have a turnaround time of about two weeks, while those which come in by mail take about eight weeks. Not unexpectedly, all requests which are submitted during the CRA’s peak return processing period between March and July will take longer.

Sometimes the CRA will contact the taxpayer, even before a return is assessed, to request further information, clarification, or documentation of deductions or credits claimed (e.g., receipts documenting medical expenses claimed, or child care costs). Whatever, the nature of the request, the best course of action is to respond promptly, and to provide the requested documents or information. The CRA can assess only on the basis of the information with which it is provided, and it is the taxpayer’s responsibility to provide support for any deduction or credit claims made. Where a request for information or supporting documentation for a claimed deduction or credit is ignored by the taxpayer, the assessment will proceed on the basis that such support does not exist. Providing the requested information or supporting documentation can usually resolve the question to the CRA’s satisfaction, and its assessment of the taxpayer’s return can then proceed.

Virtually no one looks forward to dealing with the need to file a tax return each spring, and while some of that reluctance is undoubtedly due to the complexity of our tax system, there’s another factor at work.

Many (even most) taxpayers don’t know, until they have actually completed their return for the year, whether additional taxes will be owed. And, no matter what the taxpayer’s financial circumstances, finding out that money is owed to the tax authorities is bad news.

Virtually no one looks forward to dealing with the need to file a tax return each spring, and while some of that reluctance is undoubtedly due to the complexity of our tax system, there’s another factor at work.

Many (even most) taxpayers don’t know, until they have actually completed their return for the year, whether additional taxes will be owed. And, no matter what the taxpayer’s financial circumstances, finding out that money is owed to the tax authorities is bad news.

For many taxpayers that bad news can create a real cash flow crunch.  Statistics show that a substantial number of Canadians and Canadian families live paycheque to paycheque, and so would not be in a financial position to manage an unexpected tax bill, especially where that bill is due in the next few weeks. For a number of reasons, the better approach for such taxpayers is to try to obtain the necessary funds from private sources.  For those who don’t have the means to pay a tax bill out of existing resources, that likely means borrowing the needed funds. While that means paying interest on the borrowing, the interest cost incurred will likely be less than that which would be levied by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). 

If a tax bill can’t be paid in full out of either current resources or available credit, the CRA is open to making a payment arrangement with the taxpayer. While the CRA would rather get paid on time and in full, its ultimate goal is to collect the full amount of taxes owed. Consequently, the CRA provides taxpayers who simply can’t pay their bill for the year on time and in full with the option of paying an amount owed over time, through a payment arrangement.

There are two avenues available to taxpayers who want to propose such a payment arrangement. The first is a call to the CRA’s TeleArrangement service at 1-866-256-1147. When making such a call, it is necessary for the taxpayer to provide his or her social insurance number, date of birth, and the amount entered on line 150 of the last tax return for which the taxpayer received a Notice of Assessment. (For taxpayers who are up to date on their tax filings, that will be the Notice of Assessment for the return for the 2016 tax year). The TeleArrangement Service is available Monday to Friday, from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. EST.

Taxpayers who would rather speak directly to a CRA employee can call the Agency’s debt management call centre at 1-888-863-8657. That centre is open Monday to Friday from 7 a.m. to 11 p.m. EST.

No matter what payment arrangement is made, the CRA will levy interest charges on any amount of tax owed for the 2017 tax year which is not paid on or before April 30, 2018. Interest charges levied by the CRA tend to add up quickly, for two reasons. First, the interest charged by the CRA on outstanding tax amounts is, by law, higher than current commercial rates. For the second quarter of 2018 (April 1 to June 30), that rate is 6%. Second, interest charges levied by the CRA are compounded daily, meaning that each day interest is levied on the previous day’s interest charges. It is for these reasons that a taxpayer is, where at all possible, likely better off arranging private borrowing in order to pay any taxes owing by the April 30 deadline.

Finally, there is one strategy which is, in all circumstances, a bad one. Taxpayers who can’t pay their tax bill by the deadline sometimes conclude that there is no point in filing if payment can’t be made. Those taxpayers are wrong. Where an amount of tax is owed and the return isn’t filed on time, there is an immediate tax penalty imposed of 5% of the outstanding tax amount – and interest charges start accruing on that penalty amount (as well as on the outstanding tax balance) immediately. For each month that the return isn’t filed, a further penalty of 1% of the outstanding tax amount is charged, to a maximum of 12 months. Higher penalty amounts are charged, for a longer period, where the taxpayer has incurred a late-filing penalty within the past three years. In a worst-case scenario, the total penalty charges can be 50% of the tax amount owed – and that doesn’t count the compound interest which is levied on all penalty amounts. In all cases, no matter what the circumstances, the right answer is to file one’s tax return on time. This year, for most taxpayers, that means filing on or before Monday April 30, 2018. For self-employed taxpayers (and their spouses) the filing deadline is Friday June 15, 2018. However for all taxpayers, the payment deadline for all 2017 income tax owed is Monday, April 30, 2018.

The reach of Canada’s system is broad – residents of Canada are taxed on their world-wide income, and the income or capital amounts that escape the Canadian tax net are few and far between.

One of the most significant of those exceptions, particularly for individual Canadian taxpayers, is the “principal residence exemption”. Plainly put, when a Canadian taxpayer sells his or her home, the proceeds of sale are not included in his or her income for the year (and therefore not taxed), no matter how much that home has appreciated in value since it was acquired. And, of course, given the real estate market conditions that have prevailed in recent years, especially in some urban centers, the difference between the original cost of the family home and its later sale price can be very substantial.

The reach of Canada’s system is broad – residents of Canada are taxed on their world-wide income, and the income or capital amounts that escape the Canadian tax net are few and far between.

One of the most significant of those exceptions, particularly for individual Canadian taxpayers, is the “principal residence exemption”. Plainly put, when a Canadian taxpayer sells his or her home, the proceeds of sale are not included in his or her income for the year (and therefore not taxed), no matter how much that home has appreciated in value since it was acquired. And, of course, given the real estate market conditions that have prevailed in recent years, especially in some urban centers, the difference between the original cost of the family home and its later sale price can be very substantial.

There are good reasons for the favourable tax treatment that is accorded family homes (or “principal residences, in tax parlance). A home is often the largest financial asset owned by an individual or a family, and for many Canadians, home ownership forms the basis of their overall financial plan and, often, their retirement plans.

 As is always the case in tax, definitions matter. And, for purposes of the principal residence exemption, such principal residence can be any one of the following types of properties:

• house;
• cottage;
• condominium;
• apartment in an apartment building;
• apartment in a duplex; or
• a trailer, mobile home, or houseboat.

In order to claim the principal residence exemption on the sale of one’s home, of whatever description, it’s also necessary that the taxpayer own the property (alone or jointly with another person, usually a spouse), has used that property as his or her principal residence at some point during the year, and designate the property as the principal residence on the tax return for the year of sale.

The reference to a tax return may be puzzling to taxpayers who have sold homes but never made any designation on their return for the year. However, concerns about speculation in the housing market led the federal government, in 2016, to make changes which would provide it with more information with respect to properties that were changing hands and on which the principal residence exemption was being claimed. As of 2016 (and subsequent years) taxpayers who sell their homes must complete and include Schedule 3 Capital Gains (or Losses) with their return for the year of sale. And, as of the 2017 tax year, they must also file Form T2091(IND) Designation of a Property as a Principal Residence by an Individual (Other Than a Personal Trust). That form, which is not included in the General Income Tax Return package for 2017, can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms/t2091ind.html.

On the T2091, the taxpayer must provide the following information:

• the address of the property;
• the year the property was acquired; and
• the amount for which the property was sold.

The taxpayer must also certify the number of years the property sold was used as a principal residence during the period of ownership. 

None of these new rules or requirements alter the basic tax treatment of the sale of a principal residence – the proceeds of sale of a property that was used throughout the period of ownership as the only principal residence of a Canadian resident remain tax-free. The only thing that has changed is the requirement to report on the sale, providing information on the number of years of ownership and the sale price, and certifying the number of those years of ownership during which the property was used as one’s principal residence.

Where the property sold was acquired after 1981 and was used during the entire period of ownership as a principal residence of a Canadian resident, the reporting requirements are relatively straightforward. There are, however, some other situations in which determining whether and to what extent monies received on the sale of one’s home will qualify for the principal residence exemption is more complex, and professional advice may be warranted.

First, prior to 1982, it was possible for each spouse in a marriage to claim the principal residence exemption. Typically, one spouse would claim the exemption on the family home, while the other spouse would claim the exemption with respect to the family cottage. The rules changed in 1982 to eliminate that practice. Consequently, where a married taxpayer is selling a property which was purchased prior to 1982 and a principal residence exemption was previously claimed on a second property which the taxpayer and his or her spouse owned, it would be prudent to obtain professional tax advice on the proper reporting of the current sale.

As well, the principal residence exemption is available only to residents of Canada. Where the person selling a principal residence was a non-resident at any time during the period of ownership, the amount of principal residence exemption claimable may be affected.

A taxpayer who sells a principal residence during the year must report that sale on Schedule 3 to the Return, and that Schedule is always filed as part of the Return, regardless of the filing method used. However, the filing requirements with respect to the T2091 form differ, depending on how the taxpayer files his or her return. Where a return is paper-filed, the T2091 must be completed, signed and filed with the return. Where the taxpayer uses any of the electronic filing requirements, the T2091 is not filed with the return, but must be kept and produced if the CRA requests it.

Finally, the requirement to report the details of the sale of a principal residence is a relatively new one. The obligation to do so is not particularly well known and there is nothing in the 2017 Income Tax Guide to alert taxpayers to that requirement. It is, therefore, entirely possible that an affected taxpayer will be unaware of such requirement and will fail to report. And, since the tax authorities have no way of knowing that a sale of a principal residence has taken place, it’s unlikely that they would ask for that information in the course of assessing the return. Such failure is, however, relatively easily remedied – the taxpayer need only (once the Notice of Assessment for the return has been received) file a T1 Adjustment in which the necessary information is provided. Generally, the CRA will accept that amendment to the return, but it does have the power to impose a penalty for the initial failure to report. That penalty is equal to $100 per month during which the reporting is late, to a maximum of $8,000.

More information on the new reporting requirements can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/tax-return/completing-a-tax-return/personal-income/line-127-capital-gains/principal-residence-other-real-estate/sale-your-principal-residence.html.

While everyone knows that the best results are obtained when tax and financial planning take place on an ongoing basis, the reality is that most Canadians focus on their tax situation only once a year, at tax filing time. And the harsher reality is that, by then, the opportunity to take steps which will make a significant difference in one’s tax liability for 2017 is lost.

While everyone knows that the best results are obtained when tax and financial planning take place on an ongoing basis, the reality is that most Canadians focus on their tax situation only once a year, at tax filing time. And the harsher reality is that, by then, the opportunity to take steps which will make a significant difference in one’s tax liability for 2017 is lost.

Most actions needed to reduce one’s tax payable for the 2017 tax year – making political contributions, selling investments at a loss, or paying professional or union dues which qualify for a credit or deduction – must have been taken on or before December 31, 2017. And the last such opportunity – making an RRSP contribution to be claimed on the 2017 return – vanished after the RRSP contribution deadline of March 1, 2018.

That said, all is not lost for taxpayers seeking to reduce their tax burden for 2017. There are a number of factors to consider, and a few strategies to contemplate, when completing the return for 2017. Those considerations and strategies, which generally involve the timing of claims made (or not made) on the return can make a measurable difference in the amount of tax payable for the year.

It may seem counterintuitive, or even illogical, to not claim every available deduction and credit in order to obtain the best possible tax result for the year. However, for both medical and charitable tax credit claims, albeit for different reasons, there are situations in which it makes sense to defer an available claim until a future year, or to transfer the claim to another person.

Claiming charitable donations

Taxpayers are entitled to make a claim on the annual tax return for charitable donations made in the current (2017) year or any of the previous five years. The reason it can sometimes makes sense not to claim a charitable donation in the year it was made arises from the way in which the charitable donations tax credit is structured to encourage higher donations.

That credit, at both the federal and provincial/territorial levels, is a two-tier credit. Federally, the first $200 in donations receives a credit of 15% of the total donation, or $30. However, donations above the $200 level receive a credit equal to 29% of the donation amount over $200.

Take, for example, a taxpayer who contributes $1,200 to a charity each year. Where he or she claims that donation on the annual return each year, that claim will result in a federal credit of $320 ($200 × 15%, plus $1000 × 29%). Where, however, the same taxpayer defers the claim to the following year and claims a total of $2,400 in donations on a single return, he or she will receive a federal credit of $668. ($200 × 15%, plus $2,200 × 29%). Where the donations are accumulated and claimed once every five years, the federal credit received will be $1,712 ($200 × 15%, plus $5,800 × 29%). Under each scenario, the total charitable donation made is the same, but the amount of credit received increases with each year that the claim is deferred. Since each of the provinces and territories provide a two-tier credit (at different rates, depending on the jurisdiction), the same result will be seen when calculating the provincial/territorial credit.

Medical expense tax credit

Notwithstanding our publicly funded health care system, there are a great (and increasing) number of medical and para-medical expenses for which coverage is not provided and which must be paid on an out-of-pocket basis. In many instances, it’s possible to claim a medical expense tax credit for those out-of-pocket costs.

The federal credit for such expenses is 15% of allowable expenses. As is usually the case, the provinces and territories also provide a credit for the same expenses, albeit at different rates.

Many taxpayers find the rules on the calculation of a medical tax credit claim confusing, with some justification. First, there is an income threshold imposed. Eligible medical expenses are those expenses which exceed 3% of net income, or (for 2017) $2,268, whichever is less. Put in more practical terms, the rule for 2017 is that any taxpayer whose net income is less than $75,500 will be entitled to claim medical expenses that are greater than 3% of his or her net income for the year. Those having income over $75,500 will be limited to claiming qualifying expenses which exceed the $2,268 threshold.

The other aspect of the medical expense tax credit which can be confusing is the calculation of the optimal time period. Unlike most credit claims, the medical expense tax credit can be claimed for qualifying expenses which were paid in any 12-month period ending during the tax year. While confusing, such rule is beneficial, in that it allows taxpayers to select the particular 12-month period during which medical expenses (and the resulting credit claim) is highest. The only restrictions are that the selected 12-month period must end during the calendar year for which the return is being filed and, of course, any expenses which were claimed on a previous return cannot be claimed again. 

While only expenses which exceed the $2,268/3% threshold may be claimed, it is also possible to aggregate expenses incurred within a family and make a single claim for those expenses on the return of one spouse. Specifically, the rules allow families to aggregate medical expenses incurred for each spouse and for all children born in 2000 or later. While medical expenses incurred by a single family member might not be enough to allow him or her to make claim, aggregating those expenses is very likely (especially for a family that does have private medical insurance coverage) to mean that total expenses will exceed the applicable threshold.

In determining who will make the medical tax credit claim for a family, there are two points to remember. Since total medical expenses claimable are those which exceed the 3% of net income/$2,268 threshold, whichever is less, the greatest benefit will be obtained if the spouse with the lower income makes the claim for total family medical expenses. However, the medical expense credit is a non-refundable one, meaning that it can reduce tax otherwise payable, but cannot create (or increase) a refund. Therefore, it’s necessary that the spouse making the claim have tax payable for the year of at least as much as the credit to be obtained, in order to make full use of that credit.

Finally, there are a huge number and variety of medical expenses which individuals and families may incur, and the rules governing which can be claimed and in what circumstances, are very specific. In some cases, for instance, a doctor’s prescription will be required, while in others it will not. A listing of medical expenses eligible for the credit, and any ancillary requirements, such as a prescription, can be found on the Canada Revenue Agency website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/tax-return/completing-a-tax-return/deductions-credits-expenses/lines-330-331-eligible-medical-expenses-you-claim-on-your-tax-return.html#mdcl_xpns.

The rules surrounding income tax are complicated and it can seem that for every rule there is an equal number of exceptions or qualifications. There is, however, one rule which applies to every individual taxpayer in Canada, regardless of location, income, or circumstances. That rule is that income tax owed for a year must be paid, in full, on or before April 30 of the following year. This year, that means that individual income taxes owed for 2017 must be remitted to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) on or before Monday, April 30, 2018. No exceptions and, absent extraordinary circumstances, no extensions.

The rules surrounding income tax are complicated and it can seem that for every rule there is an equal number of exceptions or qualifications. There is, however, one rule which applies to every individual taxpayer in Canada, regardless of location, income, or circumstances. That rule is that income tax owed for a year must be paid, in full, on or before April 30 of the following year. This year, that means that individual income taxes owed for 2017 must be remitted to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) on or before Monday, April 30, 2018. No exceptions and, absent extraordinary circumstances, no extensions.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the CRA tries to make it as easy as possible for taxpayers to remit what they owe, by providing a wide range of methods by which payment can be made. There are, in fact, no fewer than seven separate options available to individual residents of Canada in paying their taxes for the 2017 tax year. The options open to taxpayers who must make a payment to the taxman are set out below.

Pay using online banking

Millions of Canadians do most or all of their banking using the online services of their particular financial institution. The list of financial institutions through which a payment can be made to the CRA is a lengthy one (available at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/pay-online-banking.html), and includes all of Canada’s major banks and credit unions.

The specific steps involved in making that payment will differ slightly for each financial institution, depending on how their online payment systems are configured. What’s important to remember is that the nature of the payment (i.e., current year tax return, as distinct from current year tax instalment payments) must be specified, and the taxpayer’s social insurance number must be provided, in order to ensure that the payment is credited to the correct account.

It is not necessary to access any particular CRA form in order to make an online payment of taxes through one’s financial institution.

Paying at your financial institution

For those who don’t use online banking, or simply prefer to make a payment in person, it is possible to pay a tax amount owed at the bank. Doing so, however, requires that the taxpayer have a personalized remittance form.

Since that remittance is specific to the taxpayer, it’s not possible to simply print that form from the CRA website. However, taxpayers who wish to obtain such a personalized remittance form can do so by calling the CRA’s Individual Income Tax Enquiries line at 1-800-959 8281 and requesting that one be sent to them by mail.

Using the CRA’s My Payment

The CRA also provides an online payment service called My Payment. There is no fee charged for the service, and it’s not necessary to be registered for any of the CRA’s other online services in order to use My Payment.

What is necessary is that the taxpayer have a debit card with a VISA Debit, Debit MasterCard, or InteracOnline logo from a participating Canadian financial institution, as My Payment is set up to accept payment using only those cards. Anyone intending to use My Payment should first confirm that the amount of any payment to be made is within the daily or weekly transaction limits imposed by the particular financial institution.

A list of participating financial institutions for each type of card, and more details on this payment method, can be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/e-services/payment-save-time-pay-online.html.

Payment by credit card

While it is possible to pay one’s taxes using a credit card, such payments can only be made through third-party service providers (that is, payments by credit card cannot be made directly to the CRA), and such third-party service providers will impose a fee for the service.

There are only two such service providers listed on the CRA website, and links to each are available at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/pay-credit-card.html.

Payment through a service provider

There are a number of third party service providers which will accept payments and remit them on the taxpayer’s behalf to the CRA. However, the majority of such services are more oriented toward providing services to businesses, and most of those listed on the CRA website do not handle payments of individual income tax amounts owed.

The full listing of third-party service providers can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/pay-a-service-provider.html.

Payment by pre-authorized debit

It’s possible to set up a pre-authorized debit (PAD) arrangement with the CRA, authorizing them to debit the account for an amount of taxes owed, on dates specified by the taxpayer.

Individuals who make instalment payments of tax throughout the year may already have such an arrangement in place and can certainly use that existing arrangement to arrange a PAD of any balance of taxes owed for the 2017 tax year. However, any such arrangement must be made at least five business days before the payment due date of April 30. A taxpayer who makes a payment of taxes only once a year is likely better off using another of the available payment methods.

This year, there is another option for taxpayers who have their return prepared and E-FILED by an authorized electronic filer. Such taxpayers can have that E-FILER set up a PAD agreement on their behalf in order to make a “one-time” payment for a current year tax amount owed. Details on how to make that arrangement are outlined on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/pay-authorized-debit.html.

Payment by cash or debit card

It is still possible to pay one’s taxes in cash, or by using a debit card. Such payments are made, not at CRA offices, but at Canada Post outlets.

However, while a cash payment may be a low-tech option, the requirements for making a cash or debit card payment are not. In order to do so, the taxpayer will need a self-generated QR (quick response) code. Such code can be created by following a link found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/corporate/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/pay-canada-post.html. The QR code created is provided to a clerk at a Canada Post outlet, who uses the information in the code to properly credit the payment made. Service fees are levied for this payment method.

It’s important for all taxpayers to realize that the payment deadline of April 30 requires that the CRA receive payment by that date. The Agency considers that a payment has been made only when it actually receives that payment, or the payment is received by a member of the Canadian Payments Association (which would include most Canadian financial institutions).

The majority of payment options now available to Canadians involve online transactions or the use of third party service providers. Both such methods can mean some delay in receipt of the payment by the CRA, as a result of the time required for processing of the payment by the financial institution or third party. Consequently, taxpayers who make their tax payments online or using a third-party service provider are well advised to consider that time lag in deciding when to make their payment; waiting until April 30 to do so likely isn’t a good idea.

Those who make their payment in person at a financial institution (using a personalized remittance form, as outlined above) can make their payment on April 30, as the date stamped on the remittance form is considered to be the date on which such payment is received by the CRA.

The number and variety of tax payment methods available to individual taxpayers can, in and of itself, be somewhat confusing. The CRA provides a chart on its website identifying each possible payment method, and the kinds of payments which can be made through each. That chart can be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/determine-your-payment-method.html.