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

Article content material

Greater than 1,000 circumstances associated to previous COVID-19 advantages are actually winding their means by way of Federal Courtroom as taxpayers wage battle with the Canada Income Company within the hopes of having the ability to dangle on to their advantages as the federal government continues to attempt to claw them again from Canadians whom it determines had been ineligible.

Article content material

Lots of the circumstances heard up to now 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 circumstances, determined earlier in July, give us a glimpse into the forms 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 at the very least $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

Article content material

CRB advantages are mostly chosen for overview when it’s unclear that the taxpayer earned at the very least $5,000 of earnings in a previous qualifying interval. Every of the 2 latest circumstances 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 durations, from December 2020 by way of Might 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 Might 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 had been ever deposited.

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 through which the taxpayer redacted the account quantity, account holder’s title 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 info numbers had 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, had been detrimental. “It was unclear that the (taxpayer’s) financial institution assertion was for his account because the statements had been closely redacted to the extent of omitting the (taxpayer’s) title and account quantity,” the CRA mentioned.

Article content material

The taxpayer then went to courtroom searching for a judicial overview of the CRA’s determination. The decide’s position right here is to find out whether or not the CRA’s determination to disclaim the taxpayer the CRB was “affordable.”

The decide reviewed the CRA pointers — Confirming CERB, CRB, CRSB and CRCB Eligibility — that set out the form of proof acceptable to show a taxpayer earned at the very least $5,000 in earnings. This proof can embrace invoices for companies rendered, documentation for receipt of funds, an inventory of bills to assist the online results of earnings and every other documentation.

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

Article content material

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

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

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

Article content material

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

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

Because of this, 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 Non-public Wealth in Toronto. Jamie.Golombek@cibc.com.

_____________________________________________________________

In the event you favored this story, join extra within the FP Investor e-newsletter.

_____________________________________________________________

Article content material