CRA wins 1, loses 1 as authorities pursues pandemic profit clawbacks

Breadcrumb Path Hyperlinks Taxes Private Finance Jamie Golombek: Two new instances present glimpse into sorts of claims being reviewed and, consequently, denied Revealed Jul 27,…

by 


Jamie Golombek: Two new instances present glimpse into sorts of claims being reviewed and, consequently, denied

Article content material

Greater than 1,000 instances associated to previous COVID-19 advantages are actually winding their manner via Federal Courtroom as taxpayers wage battle with the Canada Income Company within the hopes of with the ability to hold on to their advantages as the federal government continues to attempt to claw them again from Canadians whom it determines have been ineligible.

Commercial 2

Article content material

Most of the instances heard so far hinge on eligibility and whether or not the taxpayer can show they certified for the advantages in gentle of generally questionable proof.

Article content material

Two new COVID-19 profit instances, determined earlier in July, give us a glimpse into the sorts of claims which are being reviewed and, consequently, denied. Every case concerned the Canada Restoration Profit (CRB).

The CRB was launched in late September 2020, on the finish of the Canada Emergency Response Profit (CERB) program, and was designed to supply monetary assist to eligible Canadians affected by COVID-19. To be eligible for the CRB for a given two-week interval, a person should have earned no less than $5,000 of (self-)employment earnings in 2019, 2020 or within the 12 months previous to the date of their first CRB software.

Article content material

Commercial 3

Article content material

CRB advantages are mostly chosen for overview when it’s unclear that the taxpayer earned no less than $5,000 of earnings in a previous qualifying interval. Every of the 2 latest instances concerned taxpayers requested to show they earned sufficient earnings.

The primary case handled a taxpayer who had utilized for the CRB for eight two-week intervals, from December 2020 via Could 2021. The taxpayer was contacted in August 2021 by a CRA agent who requested for proof that he had earned $5,000 previous to the primary profit interval.

In response, the taxpayer submitted a cheque dated Could 26, 2020, within the quantity of $5,085 that he claimed to have earned as earnings as a part of an actual property transaction. He didn’t present a corresponding financial institution assertion to indicate that these funds have been ever deposited.

Commercial 4

Article content material

The primary-level CRA overview officer concluded that the taxpayer didn’t qualify for the CRB since he didn’t earn $5,000 of earnings within the prior interval. The taxpayer then requested a second-level overview.

The second-level CRA officer reviewed the taxpayer’s prior returns, together with a financial institution assertion for June 2020 during which the taxpayer redacted the account quantity, account holder’s identify and transaction description previous to submitting it to the CRA. The cheque for $5,085 payable to the taxpayer was additionally submitted, however the department and monetary data numbers have been redacted by the taxpayer.

The CRA rejected the taxpayer’s declare for the CRB as each his 2019 and 2020 web fee earnings, as per his tax paperwork, have been unfavorable. “It was unclear that the (taxpayer’s) financial institution assertion was for his account because the statements have been closely redacted to the extent of omitting the (taxpayer’s) identify and account quantity,” the CRA stated.

Commercial 5

Article content material

The taxpayer then went to courtroom looking for a judicial overview of the CRA’s resolution. The decide’s function right here is to find out whether or not the CRA’s resolution to disclaim the taxpayer the CRB was “cheap.”

The decide reviewed the CRA pointers — Confirming CERB, CRB, CRSB and CRCB Eligibility — that set out the sort of proof acceptable to show a taxpayer earned no less than $5,000 in earnings. This proof can embrace invoices for providers rendered, documentation for receipt of funds, an inventory of bills to assist the web results of earnings and every other documentation.

The decide additionally thought of the cheque that redacted the taxpayer’s account quantity and the closely redacted financial institution assertion that omitted the taxpayer’s identify, account quantity and basically all different data aside from sufficient to indicate a “cell deposit” was made on June 2, 2020, within the quantity of $5,085.

Commercial 6

Article content material

That proof, mixed along with his “web unfavorable fee earnings” from his 2019 and 2020 tax paperwork, led the decide to conclude the CRA’s resolution to disclaim the CRB was, certainly, cheap.

The second case concerned a taxpayer who utilized for 27 two-week intervals of CRB from Sept. 27, 2020, to Oct. 9, 2021. Her prior interval earnings for the aim of assembly the $5,000 earnings take a look at consisted of $4,566.90 in employment earnings, and $550 in money she obtained for “home providers.” This self-employment earnings introduced her complete earnings to only above $5,000.

To assist the employment earnings, she had a T4 slip. But it surely was the opposite $550 that the CRA had bother believing. In assist of this earnings, she offered a letter from her uncle stating that he paid her $550 for home providers between January 2020 and March 2020, together with a receipt from her that she had obtained that quantity. She additionally offered her financial institution statements.

Commercial 7

Article content material

The CRA agent, nevertheless, concluded she didn’t meet the $5,000 take a look at since “the ($550) created from working for her uncle was a facet job round the home, (which she) can’t use … as earnings.”

This time, the decide held that the CRA’s resolution was “unreasonable” as a result of there was no foundation for its proposition that the $500 she obtained from her uncle for home providers did “not contribute to (her) earnings for functions of the CRB as a result of it was earned in a ‘facet job.’”

  1. Should you be hit with penalties and interest for late filing, you can always ask the Canada Revenue Agency to waive or cancel them under the taxpayer relief provisions.

    CRA, courtroom reject company’s ‘blame the accountant’ excuse

  2. For eligible individuals, the costs of moving can be significantly defrayed by claiming a tax deduction for your moving expenses, but only if you meet certain conditions.

    Courtroom backs CRA in rejecting couple’s shifting expense declare

  3. A RRIF is the most common successor of a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP), the other being the purchase of a registered annuity.

    Easy tax reforms for retirees the federal government might think about

In consequence, the decide ordered the matter be returned to a distinct CRA agent for reconsideration.

Jamie Golombek, CPA, CA, CFP, CLU, TEP, is the managing director, Tax & Property Planning with CIBC Personal Wealth in Toronto. Jamie.Golombek@cibc.com.

_____________________________________________________________

Should you appreciated this story, join extra within the FP Investor e-newsletter.

_____________________________________________________________

Article content material

Feedback

Postmedia is dedicated to sustaining a energetic however civil discussion board for dialogue and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Feedback could take as much as an hour for moderation earlier than showing on the positioning. We ask you to maintain your feedback related and respectful. We’ve got enabled e mail notifications—you’ll now obtain an e mail when you obtain a reply to your remark, there may be an replace to a remark thread you observe or if a person you observe feedback. Go to our Neighborhood Tips for extra data and particulars on the way to regulate your e mail settings.

Be a part of the Dialog