Unusual excuses do not sway courts after CRA denies CERB eligibility

Article content material

Till not too long ago, I by no means totally appreciated the that means behind the excuse, “The canine ate my homework.” That modified this previous summer season with the arrival of Jasper, our new golden retriever pet. Constant together with his breed’s genetic disposition, I seen he was a fast examine when it got here to retrieving the newspaper from the entrance stoop. Sadly, by the point the paper made it inside, it was not readable as he had shredded it to items.

Article content material

I can’t recall a taxpayer ever saying “the canine ate my homework” as a defence in court docket for failing to supply backup documentation that the Canada Income Company was requesting, however a few of the excuses they provide you with can sometimes pressure credulity. Take two latest instances coping with COVID-19 advantages eligibility, and the taxpayers’ unwillingness (or, maybe, lack of ability) to supply the required proof of revenue.

Article content material

The primary case, determined in late December 2023, concerned a self-employed taxpayer who utilized for and acquired the Canada Emergency Response Profit (CERB) for the total seven four-week durations and the Canada Restoration Profit (CRB) for the following 27 two-week durations. The CRA discovered her ineligible as a result of she had not earned a minimum of $5,000 of (self-)employment revenue within the prior interval.

The taxpayer had prior work expertise conducting patent agent- and engineering-related work. In 2018, she labored as a patent agent trainee at a nationwide mental property legislation agency. Previous to this, she labored as a patent agent in america.

In December 2019, the taxpayer allegedly acquired a job provide to work remotely as an impartial contractor for {an electrical} gear firm. On this function, she was to supply patent-related recommendation and analysis to her consumer and be paid US$6,200 (or roughly $8,000 on the time). On the taxpayer’s 2020 tax return, she claimed $4,200 for bills regarding the enterprise use of her house, leading to her 2020 web self-employed enterprise revenue totalling $3,800. This was under the $5,000 revenue eligibility threshold to obtain CERB or CRB.

Article content material

Article content material

After consulting with an accountant, the taxpayer not too long ago amended her 2020 tax return and adjusted her use-of-home bills right down to $2,100 since, in line with her, “she additionally used her work space for examine and leisure time.” After the modification, her self-employment web enterprise revenue was $5,900.

Her COVID-19 advantages had been chosen for evaluation by the CRA, and an agent referred to as her requesting documentation to confirm her self-employment revenue. She subsequently offered a single bill and several other letters from the corporate “with restricted element.” After conducting each a first- and second-level evaluation, the CRA decided she was not eligible as she hadn’t earned the requisite $5,000 of revenue.

The taxpayer appealed the CRA’s second-level determination to the Federal Courtroom requesting a judicial evaluation. The court docket’s function is to not substitute its determination for that of the CRA officer, however to find out whether or not the CRA’s determination was “cheap” contemplating the info and proof. An inexpensive determination is “one based mostly on an internally coherent and rational chain of research that’s justified, clear and intelligible in relation to the relevant factual and authorized constraints.”

Article content material

The decide reviewed all of the proof, together with the CRA’s detailed and complete determination stories. In these stories, the CRA agent famous the taxpayer had no earlier historical past of incomes self-employment revenue, and offered no documentation to help that she had really acquired the US$6,200, or that this quantity was despatched via licensed mail.

As well as, the bill submitted to the company by the taxpayer didn’t point out whether or not it had been paid, the kind of fee or the date of fee, and it wasn’t signed by both occasion. The letter settlement was not a proper contract and solely briefly indicated the character of the engagement. However maybe most significantly, all of the paperwork the taxpayer offered from the company had been created years after she claimed to have been paid the US$6,200, and failed to point the precise date of fee.

The CRA concluded the bill and accompanying letters from the company didn’t represent adequate convincing proof of a fee having been made to the taxpayer within the absence of an precise switch or receipt of cash. The decide acknowledged that the taxpayer “is actually entitled to be remunerated in money,” nevertheless it was her accountability to take care of adequate information with the intention to depend on money funds to help her eligibility for the CERB or CRB advantages.

Article content material

The decide concluded the CRA agent had “meticulously assessed the proof offered by (the taxpayer) and located it was inadequate to ascertain her eligibility.” The decide, due to this fact, dominated the CRA’s determination to disclaim the profit was cheap, because it had “all of the requisite attributes of transparency, justification, and intelligibility.”

The second COVID-19 advantages eligibility case, additionally determined in December 2023, was a follow-up determination of the Federal Courtroom involving a self-employed bookkeeper in British Columbia who operates his enterprise via quite a lot of firms. The CRA decided he was not entitled to the CRB on the premise he had not earned a minimum of $5,000 of (self-)employment revenue. In October 2022, the taxpayer utilized for judicial evaluation and succeeded on the premise that the CRA breached “procedural equity” by failing to advise him that it required additional documentation past his T4 and T4A slips.

Article content material

The CRA requested the taxpayer’s financial institution statements to confirm his revenue, however the taxpayer refused, saying: “I’m a personal citizen; I worth my proper to privateness and my civil liberties. I can not reveal private, non-public and confidential data corresponding to financial institution statements as I worth my proper to privateness and my civil liberties, as a personal citizen. Personally, I’m not a enterprise. Asking for my private, non-public and confidential statements, is a breach of my civil liberty.”

This didn’t go over properly with the decide, who dismissed the taxpayer’s second request for judicial evaluation: “It’s (the taxpayer’s) proper to refuse to supply the requested data; nonetheless, he can not now criticize that the CRA decided it had inadequate data to help his declare.”

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

When you favored this story, join extra within the FP Investor publication.

Article content material