Newsletters

Sometime during the month of February, millions of Canadians will receive mail from the Canada Revenue Agency. 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 16 and June 15 of this year.

Sometime during the month of February, millions of Canadians will receive mail from the Canada Revenue Agency. 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 16 and June 15 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 Canada Revenue Agency. 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 (2020) tax year and either of the two previous (2018 or 2019) 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 2020 and either 2018 or 2019. 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 2020. If the total of instalment payments made during 2020 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 2021.

Second, the taxpayer can make instalment payments based on the amount of tax which was owed for the 2019 tax year. Where a taxpayer’s income has not changed significantly between 2019 and 2020 and his or her available deductions and credits remain the same, the likelihood is that total tax liability for 2020 will be slightly less than it was in 2019, 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 2020 and can pay instalments based on that estimate. Where a taxpayer’s income will decrease significantly from 2019 to 2020, 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 2020 tax year is filed in the spring of 2021. 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 2020 – until March 31, 2020 – 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.

To help taxpayers make a decision on how to respond to an Instalment Reminder, detailed information on the instalment payment system is available on the Canada Revenue Agency 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.

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 requires 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 2019, the federal tax rate applied to about the first $48,000 of taxable income is 15%, while the federal rate applied to approximately the next $48,000 of such income is 20.5%. So, an individual who has $95,000 in taxable income would pay federal tax of about $16,835: if that $95,000 was divided equally between such individual and his or her spouse, each would have $47,500 in taxable income and the total federal family tax bill would be $14,250.

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 2019 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 website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms/t1032.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 2019. 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 21000 of his or her 2019 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 11600. 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 2019 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 2019. 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 2019 General Income Tax and Benefit Guide should refer to the CRA website at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/pensionsplitting/, where more detailed information is available.

If there is one invariable “rule” of financial and retirement planning of which most Canadians are aware, it is the unquestioned wisdom of making regular contributions to a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP). And it is true that for several decades the RRSP was only tax-sheltered savings and investment vehicle available to most individual Canadians.

If there is one invariable “rule” of financial and retirement planning of which most Canadians are aware, it is the unquestioned wisdom of making regular contributions to a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP). And it is true that for several decades the RRSP was only tax-sheltered savings and investment vehicle available to most individual Canadians.

Eleven years ago, however, that reality changed with the introduction of Tax-Free Savings Accounts (TFSAs). Since then, taxpayers have had a choice of which savings and investment vehicle better meets their short term and long term financial objectives, and this is the time of year when most Canadians make that choice.

It should be said that there’s nothing wrong, and a lot right, with making the maximum allowable contribution to both one’s TFSA and one’s RRSP every year. However, doing both assumes the availability of a level of discretionary income that just isn’t the financial reality in which most Canadians live and plan. In addition, there are circumstances in which making a contribution to one type of plan or the other is clearly the better choice, and sometimes the only choice. Some of those circumstances are as follows.

• For Canadians over the age of 71, there is no choice. All individual Canadians must collapse their RRSPs by the end of the year in which they turn 71, and no RRSP contributions can be made after that time. A TFSA is the only tax-sheltered savings vehicle to which taxpayers over age 71 can contribute. Many of those taxpayers, however, have transferred their RRSP savings to a registered retirement income fund (RRIF) and are required to withdraw a specified percentage of funds from that RRIF each year. For taxpayers who are in the fortunate position of having such income in excess of current cash flow needs, that excess can be contributed to a TFSA. While the RRIF withdrawals must still be included in income and taxed in the year of withdrawal, 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.

• The minority of working taxpayers who are members of registered pension plans (RPPs) will also likely find savings through a TFSA the better or even the only option. The maximum amount which can be contributed to an RRSP in a given year is generally 18% of the previous year’s income, to a specified dollar amount ceiling. However, any allowable contribution is reduced, for members of RPPs, by the amount of benefits accrued during the year under their pension plan. Where the RPP is a particularly generous one, RRSP contribution room may be minimal, or even non-existent, and a TFSA contribution the logical alternative.

At the other end of the age spectrum, younger Canadians whose savings goals are likely more short-term are usually better off saving through a TFSA.

• Where savings are being accumulated for an expenditure which is likely to occur within the next five years – for example, putting together money for a new car or for wedding costs, the TFSA is clearly the better choice. Taxpayers in that situation are sometimes tempted to make an RRSP contribution instead, in order to get a tax refund, and then to withdraw the funds when the planned expenditure is to be made. However, while choosing that option will provide a deduction on this year’s return and probably generate a tax refund, tax will still have to be paid when the funds are withdrawn from the RRSP a year or two later. And, more significantly from a long-term point of view, using an RRSP in this way will eventually erode one’s ability to save for retirement, as RRSP contributions which are withdrawn from the plan cannot be replaced. While the amounts involved may seem small, the loss of compounding on even a relatively small amount over 25 or 30 years can make a significant dent in one’s ability to save for retirement.

 The greatest tax benefit of contributing to an RRSP is realized when contributions are made when income (and therefore tax payable) is high, and the intention is to withdraw those funds when both income and the rate of tax payable on that income is lower. Where that’s not the case, saving through a TFSA can make more sense, as in the following situations.

• Taxpayers who are expecting their income to rise significantly within a few years – for example 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 against income which would be taxed at the much higher rate, generating a tax savings. And, if a need for funds should arise in the meantime, a tax-free TFSA withdrawal can always be made.

• Lower income taxpayers, for whom there isn’t likely to be a great difference between pre- and post-retirement income are likely better off saving through a TFSA. That’s especially the case where those taxpayers may be eligible in retirement for means-tested government benefits like the Guaranteed Income Supplement or tax credits like the GST /HST credit or age credit. Withdrawals made from an RRSP or RRIF during retirement will be included in income for purposes of determining eligibility for such benefits or credits, and lower-income taxpayers could find that such withdrawals have pushed their income to a level which reduces or eliminates their eligibility. On the other hand, monies withdrawn from a TFSA are not included in income for the purpose of determining eligibility for any government benefits or tax credits, so saving through a TFSA will ensure that receipt of such benefits is not put at risk.

There’s no denying that the Canadian tax system is complex, even for individuals with relatively straightforward tax and financial circumstances. As well, significant costs can follow if a taxpayer gets it wrong when filing the annual tax return. Sometimes those costs are measured in the amount of time needed to straighten out the consequences of mistakes made on the annual return; in a worst-case scenario, they can involve financial costs in the form of interest charges or even penalties levied for a failure to remit taxes payable on time or in the right amount. Whatever the reason, fewer and fewer individuals are willing to brave the annual trip through the 8 pages (as of 2019) of the federal tax return (plus a seemingly innumerable related federal schedules and provincial tax forms), and that means that the percentage of Canadians who have their return prepared by someone who has, presumably, more expertise, has continued to rise.

There’s no denying that the Canadian tax system is complex, even for individuals with relatively straightforward tax and financial circumstances. As well, significant costs can follow if a taxpayer gets it wrong when filing the annual tax return. Sometimes those costs are measured in the amount of time needed to straighten out the consequences of mistakes made on the annual return; in a worst-case scenario, they can involve financial costs in the form of interest charges or even penalties levied for a failure to remit taxes payable on time or in the right amount. Whatever the reason, fewer and fewer individuals are willing to brave the annual trip through the 8 pages (as of 2019) of the federal tax return (plus a seemingly innumerable related federal schedules and provincial tax forms), and that means that the percentage of Canadians who have their return prepared by someone who has, presumably, more expertise, has continued to rise.

Whether that someone else is a willing family member or friend, or a professional tax preparer and/or tax filing service, or an accountant, having someone else prepare the return means, in most cases, that the taxpayer will be dealing with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) through a representative and must provide authorization for that representative.

It sometimes comes as a surprise to taxpayers that the CRA will not – and, in fact, cannot – provide a taxpayer’s personal tax information to anyone other than that taxpayer, unless written authorization has been provided in advance, or the taxpayer him or herself is there to provide verbal authorization. While it may seem reasonable for a spouse who does the tax returns for the entire family or for an adult child completing a return for an elderly parent to be given access to information needed to complete that return, the restrictions on the release of such information are, in fact, very much in the best interests of the taxpayer. Most such requests for another individual’s personal tax information are genuine and well-intentioned, but that’s not, unfortunately, always the case.

The forum used to name and authorize a representative is the T1013 - Authorizing or Cancelling a Representative, and that form is available on the CRA website at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pbg/tf/t1013/README.html).

The first decision which must be made by a taxpayer who is authorizing a representative is the level of authority he or she wants to grant to a representative and that, in turn, will depend on what he or she wants the representative to be able to do The T1013 form provides for two levels of authorization by a representative. Broadly speaking the first, Level 1 access provides the representative with the right to receive information while the higher Level 2 access enables the representative to make changes to the taxpayer’s account. Where a taxpayer does not specify a level of access when authorizing a representative, the CRA will automatically assign the lower Level 1 access to that representative. The specific rights granted to a representative at each level are as follows.

Where a representative has been provided by the taxpayer with Level 1 access, the CRA can disclose the following information to that representative:

• information given on the taxpayer’s income tax return;
• adjustments to the taxpayer’s income tax return;
• information about the taxpayer’s RRSP, Home Buyers' Plan, TFSA, and Lifelong Learning Plan;
• the taxpayer’s accounting information, including balances, payment on filing, and instalments or transfers;
• information about the taxpayer’s benefits and credits (Canada child tax benefit, universal child care benefit, GST/HST credit, working income tax benefit); and
• the taxpayer’s marital status (but not information related to his or her spouse or common-law partner).

A Level 1 representative is not allowed to request changes (adjustments and transfers) to the taxpayer’s account.

A representative who has been provided by the taxpayer with Level 2 access has all the powers of a Level 1 representative, as well as the right to ask for adjustments to the taxpayer’s income, deductions, non-refundable tax credits; and accounting transfers. A Level 2 representative is also able to submit a request for taxpayer relief, to file a notice of objection or an appeal on the taxpayer’s behalf and to request remittance vouchers on behalf of the taxpayer.

There are some actions which cannot be taken by either a Level 1 or a Level 2 representative. A representative authorized by the filing of a T1013, regardless of level of authorization, will not be allowed to change the taxpayer’s address, marital status,  direct deposit information, or any pre-authorized debit agreement.

A taxpayer naming a representative through a T1013 must also decide whether he or she wants the representative to have online access to the taxpayer’s account, or to be able to deal with the CRA on his or her behalf only by telephone or in writing. Where the authorization provides only for the latter (no online access), the taxpayer can specify the tax years for which access is being authorized, and the level of authorization granted for each such year. Where online access is authorized, however, that access must be for all tax years, although the taxpayer can still specify the level (Level 1 or Level 2) of access to be allowed. It’s also important to note that where a taxpayer names a firm or business as the representative, he or she can also specify, by name, the individual within that firm or business to authorization is being granted. Finally, the taxpayer can also specify a date on which the authorization will expire, if he or she wishes to do so.

The CRA will be making changes to the procedures by which an individual taxpayer can authorize a representative, and current information provided on the CRA website indicates that, as of February 10, 2020, the following changes will be made.

The current T1013 form used to authorize or cancel a representative will be available until February 10, at which time it will be replaced by a new form – AUT-01, Authorize a Representative for Access by Phone and Mail.

Under the new system, there will be two different processes – one to allow a representative access by mail or phone and a second to provide a representative with online access. The new form to be used to authorize mail or phone access will be the AUT-01 Authorize a Representative for Access by Phone or Mail. Taxpayers who wish to provide a representative with online access must use an e-authorization process, which is not yet available on the CRA website. More information on the new processes can, however, be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/news/newsroom/tax-tips/tax-tips-2020/changing-how-representatives-authorized.html.

It seems that T1013s already filed by taxpayers will continue to be in effect and that there will be no need for taxpayers who have filed the T1013 to file another or different form after February 10, 2020.

It is readily apparent that naming someone as your representative with the CRA, by whatever method, and even at the lowest level for a limited period of time, gives that person access to an enormous amount of personal tax and financial information. Taxpayers should be aware, when providing an authorization, exactly what they have agreed to and for what length of time. Where a taxpayer engages the services of a tax return preparation service, for instance, that service will frequently ask the taxpayer to sign an authorization enabling them to act as the taxpayer’s representative with the CRA. It’s a reasonable request, given that the tax return preparer may need to contact the CRA to obtain information – for example, from prior year returns – which is needed to prepare the tax return for the current year. Taxpayers who authorize a representative in such circumstances should, however, be careful to ensure that the authorization is limited, usually to the specific time during which the return will be prepared. Not infrequently, taxpayers have been asked to sign an authorization which does not specify any time frame and are surprised to find that such an authorization is still in effect, giving the representative the right to obtain information about that taxpayer, even years later, long after the taxpayer had finished his or her dealings with the tax return preparation service.

The need to designate a representative to deal on one’s behalf with the CRA is fairly commonplace. However, giving another person access to your personal tax information, even for a limited purpose or a limited time, is a significant step which should not be taken without some thought. Where it is determined that providing such access is necessary, careful consideration should be given to the level of access needed, the tax years for which access is required and, possibly most important, providing a date on which that authorization will expire.

The Employment Insurance premium rate for 2020 is decreased to 1.58%.

The Employment Insurance premium rate for 2020 is decreased to 1.58%.

Yearly maximum insurable earnings are set at $54,200, making the maximum employee premium $856.36.

As in previous years, employer premiums are 1.4 times the employee contribution. The maximum employer premium for 2020 is therefore $1,198.90.

The Quebec Pension Plan contribution rate for employees and employers for 2020 is 5.7%, and maximum pensionable earnings are $58,700. The basic exemption is $3,500.

The Quebec Pension Plan contribution rate for employees and employers for 2020 is 5.7%, and maximum pensionable earnings are $58,700. The basic exemption is $3,500.

The maximum employee premium for the year is $3,146.40, and the maximum employer contribution is the same.

The Canada Pension Plan contribution rate for 2020 is increased to 5.25% of pensionable earnings for the year.

The Canada Pension Plan contribution rate for 2020 is increased to 5.25% of pensionable earnings for the year.

The maximum pensionable earnings for the year will be $58,700, and the basic exemption is unchanged at $3,500.

The maximum employer and employee contributions to the plan for 2020 will be $2,898.00 each, and the maximum self-employed contribution will be $5,796.

Dollar amounts on which individual non-refundable federal tax credits for 2020 are based, and the actual tax credit claimable, will be as follows:

Dollar amounts on which individual non-refundable federal tax credits for 2020 are based, and the actual tax credit claimable, will be as follows:

                                                                   Credit amount                        Tax credit

Basic personal amount                                       $12,298                             $1844.70

Spouse or common law partner amount              $12,298                              $1844.70                

Eligible dependant amount                                 $12,298                             $1844.70

Age amount                                                      $7,637                               $1145.55

Net income threshold for erosion of credit           $38,508

Canada employment amount                              $1,245                                $186.75

Disability amount                                              $8,576                                $1286.40

Adoption expenses credit                                  $16,563                               $2,484.45

Medical expense tax credit threshold amount      $2,397                                     

The indexing factor for federal tax credits and brackets for 2019 is 1.9%. The following federal tax rates and brackets will be in effect for individuals for the 2020 tax year:

The indexing factor for federal tax credits and brackets for 2019 is 1.9%. The following federal tax rates and brackets will be in effect for individuals for the 2020 tax year:

Income level                           Federal tax rate

$12,298 - $48,535                         15%

$48,536 - $97,069                        20.5%

$97,070 - $150,473                       26%

$150,474 - $214,368                     29%

Above $214,368                            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 2020 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 2020 are listed below.

RRSP deduction limit increased

The RRSP current year 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 $147,222.

TFSA contribution limit unchanged

The TFSA contribution dollar limit for 2020 is unchanged at $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 2020 contribution limit by calling the Canada Revenue Agency’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 2020

Millions of individual taxpayers pay income tax by quarterly instalments, which are due on the 15^th day of each of March, June, September and December 2020.

The actual tax instalment due dates for 2020 are as follows:

Monday March 16, 2020

Monday June 15, 2020

Tuesday September 15, 2020

Tuesday December 15, 2020

Old Age Security income clawback threshold

For 2020, the income level above which Old Age Security (OAS) benefits are clawed back is $79,054.

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 2019 tax year is Thursday April 30, 2020.

Taxpayers (other than the self-employed and their spouses) must file an income tax return for 2019 on or before Thursday April 30, 2020.

Self-employed taxpayers and their spouses must file a 2019 income tax return on or before Monday June 15, 2020.

Alberta

The general corporate income tax rate will decrease from 11% to 10%, effective January 1, 2020.

The provincial education and tuition tax credits are eliminated as of the 2020 taxation year.

Indexation of personal income tax credits and income brackets is eliminated as of January 1, 2020.

The provincial Scientific Research and Experimental Development (SR&ED) tax credit is eliminated as of January 1, 2020.

Alberta

The general corporate income tax rate will decrease from 11% to 10%, effective January 1, 2020.

The provincial education and tuition tax credits are eliminated as of the 2020 taxation year.

Indexation of personal income tax credits and income brackets is eliminated as of January 1, 2020.

The provincial Scientific Research and Experimental Development (SR&ED) tax credit is eliminated as of January 1, 2020.

Newfoundland and Labrador

The Newfoundland and Labrador Temporary Deficit Reduction Levy, which was in effect from 2016 to 2019, is eliminated.

Ontario

The provincial small business corporate tax rate is reduced from 3.5% to 3.2%, effective as of January 1, 2020. That rate applies on the first $500,000 of active business income of eligible corporations.

Prince Edward Island

The basic personal amount is increased to $10,000. 

Between now and the end of February 2020, Canadians will receive a variety of receipts for expenditures made during the 2019 taxation year. Some of those expenditure receipts will support a tax deduction or credit claim to be made by the recipient on his or her 2019 tax return, while others will not. And, it’s not always easy for a taxpayer to know when such a credit or deduction is or is not available to be claimed. While the Canadian individual income tax return is only four pages long, the information on those four pages is supported by 13 supplementary federal schedules, dealing with everything from the calculation of capital gains to determining required Canada Pension Plan contributions by self-employed taxpayers.

Between now and the end of February 2020, Canadians will receive a variety of receipts for expenditures made during the 2019 taxation year. Some of those expenditure receipts will support a tax deduction or credit claim to be made by the recipient on his or her 2019 tax return, while others will not. And, it’s not always easy for a taxpayer to know when such a credit or deduction is or is not available to be claimed. While the Canadian individual income tax return is only four pages long, the information on those four pages is supported by 13 supplementary federal schedules, dealing with everything from the calculation of capital gains to determining required Canada Pension Plan contributions by self-employed taxpayers.

All of this complexity makes it easy for the majority of individuals who only deal with our tax system once a year to overlook valuable deduction and credit claims which may be available to them. One such deduction is that available for payments made during the taxation year for annual union, professional, or similar dues.

It’s particularly easy to overlook an available claim for that deduction because of where it appears on the annual return. Although there are forms used by self-employed taxpayers to claim business-related costs and forms used by employees to claim allowable employment expenses, the deduction for union or professional dues doesn’t appear on either type of form. 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, limitations on the kinds of expenses which may be claimed and the circumstances in which a taxpayer is entitled to claim those expenses. 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. The cost of maintaining membership in other, voluntary associations, even if related to one’s trade or profession, is not. So, for example, if membership in a given association does not affect professional status (e.g., the Canadian Bar Association for lawyers) dues paid to maintain that membership are not deductible. If, on the other hand, membership (and the payment of fees or dues) is necessary to maintain professional status (e.g., the applicable provincial Law Society for the lawyer) the dues paid to that organization are deductible.

As well, invoices received for annual membership costs can cover a number of different charges and levies, and not all of those costs will be deductible. The policy of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) 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. A taxpayer cannot 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 by an employee, 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.

In some cases, an employer is willing to cover the cost of an employee’s professional dues as part of the 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, he or she 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, for both self-employed taxpayers and employees can be found on the CRA website at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/ddctns/lns206-236/212/menu-eng.html.

While Canadians benefit from a publicly funded health care system, there are nonetheless a large, and increasing, number of medical expenses which are not covered by provincial health care plans. As well, with the rise in part-time positions and contract work — the “gig” economy — an increasing number of Canadians do not enjoy coverage for such costs through employer-sponsored private insurance. 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.

While Canadians benefit from a publicly funded health care system, there are nonetheless a large, and increasing, number of medical expenses which are not covered by provincial health care plans. As well, with the rise in part-time positions and contract work — the “gig” economy — an increasing number of Canadians do not enjoy coverage for such costs through employer-sponsored private insurance. 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.

The good news, where such costs must be paid for partially or entirely by the taxpayer, is that our tax system provides a medical expense tax credit to help offset those costs. Unfortunately, the computation of such credit and, in particular, the timing of making a claim for that 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 over 3% of the taxpayer’s net income, or $2,352, whichever is less, can be claimed for purposes of the medical expense tax credit on the taxpayer’s return for 2019. The Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) provides a lengthy list of qualifying expenditures, together with information on any requirements for a prescription or other medical authorization or documentation for a particular type of expenditure, and that list can be found on the CRA website at www.cra-arc.gc.ca/medical/#mdcl_xpns.

Put in terms that are more easily understood, the rule for 2019 is that any taxpayer whose net income is less than $78,400 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 $78,400 will be limited to claiming qualifying expenses which exceed the $2,352 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 2019 will produce the greatest amount eligible for the credit. That determination will obviously depend on the amount of medical expenses and, in particular, when those medical expenses were incurred. Consequently, there is no universal rule of thumb that can be used.

Medical expenses incurred by family members — the taxpayer, his or her spouse, dependent children who were born in 2002 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 approaches, it’s a good idea to add up the medical expenses which have been incurred during 2019, as well as those paid during 2018 and not claimed on the 2018 return. Once those totals are known, it will be easier to determine whether to make a claim for 2019 or to wait and claim 2019 expenses on the return for 2020. And, if the decision is to make a claim for 2019, knowing what medical expenses were paid, and when, will enable the taxpayer to determine the optimal 12-month period for the claim.

Finally, it’s also a good idea to look at the timing of medical expenses which will have to be paid early in 2020. Where those are significant expenses (for instance, a particularly costly medication which must be taken on an ongoing basis, or necessary dental work) it may make sense, where cash flow considerations allow, to accelerate the payment of those expenses to December 2019, so that they can be included in 2019 totals and claimed on the 2019 return.  

For most Canadians, registered retirement savings plans (RRSPs) don’t become top of mind until near the end of February, as the annual contribution deadline (which, for 2019 contributions, will be March 2, 2020) approaches. When it comes to tax-free savings accounts (TFSAs), most Canadians are aware that there is no contribution deadline for such plans, so that contributions can be made at any time or even carried forward to a subsequent taxation year. Consequently, neither RRSPs nor TFSAs tend to be a priority when it comes to year-end tax planning.

For most Canadians, registered retirement savings plans (RRSPs) don’t become top of mind until near the end of February, as the annual contribution deadline (which, for 2019 contributions, will be March 2, 2020) approaches. When it comes to tax-free savings accounts (TFSAs), most Canadians are aware that there is no contribution deadline for such plans, so that contributions can be made at any time or even carried forward to a subsequent taxation year. Consequently, neither RRSPs nor TFSAs tend to be a priority when it comes to year-end tax planning.

Notwithstanding those facts, there are considerations which apply to both RRSPs and TFSAs in relation to the approach of the end of calendar year. Failing to take those considerations into account can mean the permanent loss of contribution room, a loss of flexibility when it comes to making withdrawals or having to pay more tax than necessary when funds are withdrawn. Some of those considerations are outlined below.

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

While most RRSP contributions to be deducted on the return for 2019 can be made anytime up to and including March 2, 2020, there is one important exception to that rule.

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.

Make spousal RRSP contributions before December 31

Under Canadian tax rules, a taxpayer can make a contribution to an 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 2019, the contributor can claim a deduction for that contribution on his or her return for 2019. The spouse can then withdraw that amount as early as January 1, 2022 and have it taxed in his or her own hands. If the contribution isn’t made until January or February of 2020, the contributor can still claim a deduction for it on the 2019 tax return, but the amount won’t be eligible to be taxed in the spouse’s hands on withdrawal until January 1, 2023. It’s an especially important consideration for couples who are approaching retirement who may plan on withdrawing funds in the relatively new future. Even where that’s not the situation, making the contribution before the end of the calendar year will ensure maximum flexibility should the need for an unplanned withdrawal arise.

Accelerate any planned TFSA withdrawals into 2019

Each Canadian aged 18 and over can make an annual contribution to a TFSA – the maximum contribution for 2019 is $6,000. 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 on or before December 31^st, 2019 will have the amount withdrawn added to his or her TFSA contribution limit for 2020, which means it can be re-contributed as early as January 1, 2020. If the same taxpayer waits until January of 2020 to make the withdrawal, he or she won’t be eligible to replace the funds withdrawn until 2021.

During the month of December, it is 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 is certainly the case that employers who provide such extras don’t intend to create a tax headache for their employees. Unfortunately, a failure to properly structure such gifts or other extras can result in unintended and unwelcome tax consequences to those employees.

During the month of December, it is 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 is certainly the case that employers who provide such extras don’t intend to create a tax headache for their employees. Unfortunately, a failure to properly structure such gifts or other extras can result in unintended and unwelcome tax consequences to those employees.

Trying to formulate and administer the tax rules around holiday gifts is something of a no-win situation for the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). On an individual or even a company level, the amounts involved are usually small, or even nominal, and the range of situations which must be addressed by the applicable 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 consequences 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 tax authorities to ensure that such strategies 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 non-cash gifts (within a specified dollar limit) to be received tax-free by employees, as long as such gifts are given on religious holidays such as Christmas or Hanukkah, or on the occasion of a significant life event, like a birthday, a marriage, or the birth of a child.

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 (including goods and services tax or harmonized sales tax) to that employee is $500 or less annually. The total value over $500 annually 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 amount. For this purpose, the CRA considers anything which could be easily 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, in the CRA’s words, it “functions 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. It’s not hard to see that drawing a firm line between cash and non-cash gifts can be difficult. The CRA provides the following information and examples to help clarify that difference.

You give your employee tickets to an event on a specific date and time. This may not be a taxable benefit for the employee since there is no element of choice, if the other rules for gifts and awards are met.

You give your employee a voucher (which may be a ticket or a certificate) that entitles the employee to receive an item for a set value at a store. For example, you may give your employees a voucher for a turkey valued up to $30 as a Christmas gift, and for convenience, you arrange for your employees to go to a particular grocery store and exchange the voucher for a turkey. The employees can only use the voucher to receive a turkey valued up to $30 (no substitutes). Such vouchers are generally considered non-cash gifts.

A gift card or gift certificate to a movie theatre, however, is considered a near cash gift or award. With a gift card or gift certificate to a movie theatre, your employee can choose which move to see and when to see it, or they can use the card or certificate at an arcade or concession stand.

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 $150 or less (which represents an increase from the $100 ceiling for previous years). The $150 cost is meant to cover the party itself, not including any ancillary costs, such as transportation costs or overnight accommodation. Where the total cost of the event itself exceeds the $150 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 $150.)

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 and administrative policies 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 must 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 #50 Corporate

Personal:

Issue #50 Personal

Planning for – or even thinking about – 2020 taxes when it’s not even December 2019 may seem more than a little premature. However, most Canadians will start paying their taxes for 2020 with the first paycheque they receive in January, and it’s worth taking a bit of time to make sure that things start off – and stay – on the right foot.

Planning for – or even thinking about – 2020 taxes when it’s not even December 2019 may seem more than a little premature. However, most Canadians will start paying their taxes for 2020 with the first paycheque they receive in January, and it’s worth taking a bit of time to make sure that things start off – and stay – on the right foot.

For most Canadians, (certainly for the vast majority who earn their income from employment), income tax, along with other statutory deductions like Canada Pension Plan contributions and Employment Insurance premiums, are paid periodically throughout the year by means of deductions taken from each paycheque received, with those deductions then remitted to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) on the taxpayer’s behalf by his or her employer.

Of course, each taxpayer’s situation is unique and so the employer has to have some guidance as to how much to deduct and remit on behalf of each employee. That guidance is provided by the employee/taxpayer in the form of TD1 forms which are completed and signed by each employee, sometimes at the start of each year, but certainly at the time employment commences. Each employee must, in fact, complete two TD1 forms – one for federal tax purposes and the other for provincial tax imposed by the province in which the taxpayer lives. Federal and provincial TD1 forms for 2020 (which have not yet been released by the CRA but, once published, will be available on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms.html) list the most common statutory credits claimed by taxpayers, including the basic personal credit, the spousal credit amount, and the age amount. Adding amounts claimed on each form gives the Total Claim Amounts (one federal, one provincial) which the employer then uses to determine, based on tables issued by the CRA, the amount of income tax which should be deducted (or withheld) from each of the employee’s paycheques and remitted on his or her behalf to the federal government.

While the TD1 completed by the employee at the time his or her employment commenced will have accurately reflected the credits claimable by the employee at that time, everyone’s life circumstances change. Where a baby is born, or a son or daughter starts post-secondary education, a taxpayer turns 65 years of age, or an elderly parent comes to live with his or her children, the affected taxpayer will be become eligible to claim tax credits not previously available. And, since the employer can only calculate source deductions based on information provided to it by the employee, those new credit claims won’t be reflected in the amounts deducted at source from the employee’s paycheque.

Consequently, it’s a good idea for all employees to review the TD1 form prior to the start of each taxation year and to make any changes needed to ensure that a claim is made for any and all credit amounts currently available to him or her. Doing so will ensure that the correct amount of tax is deducted at source throughout the year.

It’s often the case that a taxpayer will have available deductions which cannot be recorded on the TD1, like RRSP contributions, deductible support payments, or child care expenses. While such claims make things a little more complicated, it’s still possible to have source deductions adjusted to accurately reflect those claims, and the employee’s resulting reduced tax liability for 2020. The way to do so is to file Form T1213, Request to Reduce Tax Deductions at Source (available on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms/t1213.html), with the Agency. Once that form is filed with the CRA, they will, after verifying that the claims made are accurate, provide the employer with a Letter of Authority authorizing that employer to reduce the amount of tax being withheld at source.

Of course, as with all things bureaucratic, having one’s source deductions reduced by filing a T1213 takes time. Consequently, the sooner a T1213 for 2020 is filed with the CRA, the sooner source deductions can be adjusted, effective for all subsequent paycheques. Providing an employer with an updated TD1 for 2020 at the same time will ensure that source deductions made during 2020 will accurately reflect all of the employee’s current circumstances, and consequently his or her actual tax liability for the year.

It is also possible for some taxpayers to adjust the amount of remaining tax they will pay during 2019. While the majority of Canadians pay their taxes through source deductions, there are still millions of taxpayers who 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 16, 2019. By that time, almost everyone will have a reasonably good idea of what his or her income and deductions will be for 2019 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 on or before February 29, 2020. While the tax return forms to be used for the 2019 year haven’t yet been released by the CRA, it’s possible to arrive at an estimate by using the 2018 form. Increases in tax credit amounts and tax brackets from 2018 to 2019 will mean that using the 2018 form will likely result in a slight over-estimate of tax liability for 2019.

Once an estimate of one’s tax bill for 2019 has been calculated, that figure should be compared to the total of tax instalments already made during this calendar year (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 start of fall marks a lot of things, among them a number of runs, walks and other similar events held to raise money for a broad range of Canadian charities. And, within the next month, as the holiday season approaches, charities will launch their year-end marketing campaigns.

The start of fall marks a lot of things, among them a number of runs, walks and other similar events held to raise money for a broad range of Canadian charities. And, within the next month, as the holiday season approaches, charities will launch their year-end marketing campaigns.

Canadians have a well-deserved reputation for supporting charitable causes, through donations of both money and goods. Our tax system supports that generosity by providing a tax credit for qualifying donations made. Federally, taxpayers can claim a credit of 15% of the first $200 in donations plus 29% of donations over the $200 threshold.

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 – without exception.

There is, however, another reason to ensure donations are made by December 31. The credit provided by the federal government 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 2019) over $210,371, 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 2019 will received a federal credit of $88 ($200 × 15% + $200 × 29%). If the same amount is donated, but the donation is split equally between December 2019 and January 2020, the total credit claimable is only $60 ($200 × 15% + $200 × 15%), and the 2020 donation can’t be claimed until the 2020 return is filed in April 2021. 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 2019 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 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, or 2018 tax years can be carried forward and added to the total donations made in 2019, and the aggregate then claimed on the 2019 tax return.

When claiming charitable donations, it’s 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.

Since the charitable donations tax credit is a two-level credit, in which the credit percentage increases once donations made in a year exceed $200, it always makes sense to aggregate donations in a single year, so as to maximize the amount of credit claimable.

Any charity seeking or receiving a donation should be able to provide a registered charitable number, and a searchable current listing of registered charities can be found on the Canada Revenue Agency website at https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/dsplyBscSrch?request_locale=en. Information on the charitable donations tax credit is available on the same website at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/ddctns/lns300-350/349/menu-eng.html.

Most Canadians expend a considerable amount of time and effort in order to put money aside for retirement. Especially in an era in which the majority of workers can’t look forward to receiving an employer-sponsored pension plan, Canadians are well aware that the bulk of their income during retirement will have to come from government sources and from their own savings efforts.

Most Canadians expend a considerable amount of time and effort in order to put money aside for retirement. Especially in an era in which the majority of workers can’t look forward to receiving an employer-sponsored pension plan, Canadians are well aware that the bulk of their income during retirement will have to come from government sources and from their own savings efforts.

One of the difficulties in saving for retirement is the near impossibility of knowing how to set a savings goal which meets the twin goals of sufficiency and attainability. As well, while many savers focus on identifying the “magic number” which will ensure a comfortable retirement, the fact is that the total amount saved is only one component of retirement financial planning. The reality is that most Canadians will receive income in retirement from at least three sources – private savings accumulated in a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP) or tax-free savings accounts (TFSAs), a Canada Pension Plan retirement pension, and Old Age Security benefits. The real question for most Canadians is how to determine the amount of annual income which all those sources of income will generate during their retirement years, and that is not a simple calculation.

Money can be withdrawn from an RRSP or TFSA at any age, a CPP retirement pension can start any time from age 60 to age 70, and Old Age Security benefits can be received as early as age 65 or as late as age 70. For both CPP and OAS, benefits will rise with each month that receipt of such benefits is deferred. Many Canadians continue to work, on a full or part-time basis, while receiving CPP and OAS benefits. As well, income from the different types of retirement income may be subject to different tax treatment, meaning that the after-tax amount received on $100 of income may vary widely, depending on the nature and source of that income.

The number of factors to consider and, especially, the complexity which results from the interaction of those factors could reasonably lead the average Canadian to conclude that it’s just not possible to make an accurate determination of the best way to structure their income in retirement, in order to ensure a reasonable income throughout their retirement years. But, help is at hand – and it’s free! That help is in the form of a Retirement Income Calculator which is available on the Government of Canada website at https://www.canada.ca/en/services/benefits/publicpensions/cpp/retirement-income-calculator.html.

Using that calculator, individual Canadian taxpayers can enter their personal data, including their date of birth, gender, and planned age of retirement, without the need to provide any personal identifying information. The user is then asked to provide information on income amounts which will be received from various sources, including any employer pension and Canada Pension Plan amounts and the age at which the user plans to begin receiving such income. Information is requested on the user’s period of residency in Canada, in order to determine whether he or she will be eligible to receive Old Age Security benefits and the amount of OAS benefits which will be provided at different ages. The calculator also allows the user to input the total amount of savings accumulated to date. Finally, information is requested on any other sources of income which will be available (e.g., income arising from part-time employment during retirement).

Using that data, the calculator estimates the amount of income which will be available to the individual from each source during each year of his or her retirement and generates a bar graph and a table showing those income amounts.

The real benefit of the calculator, however, lies in the user’s ability to vary the inputs – to create “what-if” scenarios in order to determine the effect any changes made will have on retirement income at various ages. Users can change the age at which they choose to receive government-sponsored retirement benefits like CPP and OAS, or can specify a different rate of return (pre or post retirement) earned on retirement savings. They can also change the period of time (i.e., life expectancy) over which retirement income will be spread. That way, the user can obtain answers to frequently asked questions like the following:

How much more will I receive if I delay receipt of Canada Pension Plan or Old Age Security benefits, or both, for one, two, or more years?

What if I work an additional year or two after age 65 before starting RRSP withdrawals?

What if I earn income from part-time employment during retirement?

What if I choose to begin receiving CPP and OAS as soon as I am eligible, but defer making RRSP withdrawals?

What if I live longer than the average life expectancy?

For each of these what-if fact scenarios, the calculator will determine the effect that particular change will have on the amount of income receivable from each different retirement income source, and will provide a summary of income for each year of retirement from all such sources under each fact scenario created by the user.

There are, of course, some factors which can’t be incorporated into any calculator because they cannot be predicted or planned for. No one can predict how long their retirement will last (although the calculator does project retirement income based on average life expectancy for individuals of the age and gender of the user). Similarly, it’s never possible to know what investment returns will be earned on retirement savings during retirement, or what the rate of inflation will be. The calculator’s ability to estimate future income data based on a number of different fact patterns does, however, allow users to create retirement income projections under both best-case and worst-case retirement income scenarios – and to plan for both.

To win elections, politicians need votes. And to run the election campaigns needed to garner those votes, those politicians need an organization, volunteers, and money — a lot of money. To wage the most recent federal election, the major political parties raised and spent millions of dollars, and their task of raising that money was undoubtedly made somewhat easier by the fact that Canadian taxpayers who donated money to political parties or candidate can obtain some tax relief from doing so.

To win elections, politicians need votes. And to run the election campaigns needed to garner those votes, those politicians need an organization, volunteers, and money — a lot of money. To wage the most recent federal election, the major political parties raised and spent millions of dollars, and their task of raising that money was undoubtedly made somewhat easier by the fact that Canadian taxpayers who donated money to political parties or candidate can obtain some tax relief from doing so.

Individuals who donated 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 2019 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 were in fact 21 political parties registered and in good standing with Elections Canada for purposes of the 2019 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
• Green Party of Canada
• Liberal Party of Canada
• Libertarian Party of Canada
• Marijuana Party
• Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada
• National Citizens Alliance of Canada
• New Democratic Party
• Parti pour l'Indépendance du Québec
• Parti Rhinocéros Party
• People’s Party of Canada
• Progressive Canadian Party
• Stop Climate Change
• The United 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 ran in this year’s federal election, and that list can be found at https://www.elections.ca/content2.aspx?section=can&document=index&lang=e.

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 math 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. During an election campaign, the official agent of a candidate issues that receipt, and it must be issued between the time the candidate is officially nominated and election day. Outside an election period, any receipts are issued by the registered agent of a political party or association. 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 410 of Schedule 1 of the federal tax return. By the time the 2019 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. 

Tax-free savings accounts (TFSAs) have been around for a full decade now, having been introduced in 2009, and for most Canadians, a TFSA (along with a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP)) is now a regular part of their financial and tax planning.

Tax-free savings accounts (TFSAs) have been around for a full decade now, having been introduced in 2009, and for most Canadians, a TFSA (along with a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP)) is now a regular part of their financial and tax planning.

TFSAs are, in many ways, the inverse of RRSPs. 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 ($6,000 for 2019). 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 year 2016, 2017, and 2018 was $5,500.
• The annual TFSA dollar limit for the year 2019 is $6,000.

It’s readily apparent that, especially where there are carryforward amounts and/or the taxpayer has made withdrawals from a TFSA, that 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 is 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 the taxpayer knows figures out his or her total contribution limit for 2019, it’s 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 or tax benefit amount or a bonus from their employer, into their TFSA. Either way, after finding out one’s current year contribution limit, it’s necessary to calculate how much has already been contributed in 2019. 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 2019, 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 — in other words, as explained in the Canada Revenue Agency 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 2020, perhaps in order to make an RRSP contribution, or to pay for a winter vacation, should make that withdrawal before the end of 2019. 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 2020. If the withdrawal is not made until 2020, re-contribution will not be possible (without incurring a penalty) until 2021.

TFSAs are valuable savings and planning vehicles for Canadians — perhaps the most flexible such vehicle 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 Canada Revenue Agency 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.

In most cases, the need to seek out and obtain legal services (and to pay for them) is associated with life’s more unwelcome occurrences and experiences — a divorce, a dispute over a family estate, or a job loss. About the only thing that mitigates the pain of paying legal fees (apart, hopefully, from a successful resolution of the problem that created the need for legal advice) would be being able to claim a tax credit or deduction for the fees paid.

In most cases, the need to seek out and obtain legal services (and to pay for them) is associated with life’s more unwelcome occurrences and experiences — a divorce, a dispute over a family estate, or a job loss. About the only thing that mitigates the pain of paying legal fees (apart, hopefully, from a successful resolution of the problem that created the need for legal advice) would be being able to claim a tax credit or deduction for the fees paid.

Unfortunately, while there are some circumstances in which such a deduction can be claimed, those circumstances don’t usually include the routine reasons — purchasing a home, getting a divorce, establishing custody rights or seeking legal advice about making a will or managing a family estate — for which most Canadians incur legal fees. Generally, personal (as distinct from business-related) legal fees become deductible for most Canadian taxpayers only where they are incurred to recover amounts which they believe are owed to them, and where those amounts involve employment or employment-related income or, in some cases, family support obligations.

The first situation in which legal fees paid may be deductible is that of an employee seeking to collect (or to establish a right to collect) salary or wages. In all Canadian provinces and territories, employment standards laws provide that an employee who is about to lose his or her job (for reasons not involving fault on the part of the employee) is entitled to receive a specified amount of notice, or salary or wages equivalent to such notice. In many cases, however, the employee can establish a right to a period of notice (or payment in lieu) greater than the statutory minimum. The amount of notice or payment in lieu of notice which is payable can then become a matter of negotiation between the employer and its former employee, and such negotiations usually involve legal representation and consequently, legal fees. In that situation, legal fees incurred by the employee to establish a right to amounts allegedly owed by the employer are deductible by that former employee. If a court action is necessary and the Court requires the employer to reimburse its former employee for some or all of the legal fees incurred, the amount of that reimbursement must be subtracted from any deduction claimed. In other words, the former employee can claim a deduction only for legal fees which he or she was personally required to pay in order to collect wages or salary owed and for which he or she was not reimbursed.

In some situations, an employee or former employee seeks legal help in order to collect or to establish a right to collect a retiring allowance or pension benefits. In such situations, the legal fees incurred can be deducted, up to the total amount of the retiring allowance or pension income actually received for that year. Where part of the retiring allowance or pension benefits received in a particular year is contributed to an RRSP or registered pension plan, the amount contributed must be subtracted from the total amount received when calculating the maximum allowable deduction for legal fees. However, where all legal fees incurred can’t be claimed in the current year, they can be carried forward and claimed on the return for any of the seven subsequent tax years.

The rules covering the deduction of legal fees incurred where an employee claims amounts from an employer or former employer are relatively straightforward. The same, unfortunately, cannot be said for the rules governing the deductibility of legal fees paid in connection with family support obligations. Those rules have evolved over the past number of years in a somewhat piecemeal fashion. The current rules are as follows.

Legal fees incurred by either party in the course of negotiating a separation agreement or obtaining a divorce are not deductible. Such fees paid to establish child custody or visitation rights are similarly not deductible by either parent.

Where, however, one former spouse has the right to receive support payments from the other, there are circumstances in which legal fees paid in connection with that right are deductible. Specifically, legal fees paid for the following purposes will be deductible by the person receiving those support payments:

• collecting late support payments;
• establishing the amount of support payments from a current or former spouse or common-law partner;
• establishing the amount of support payments from the legal parent of that person’s child (who is not a current or former spouse or common-law partner). However, in these circumstances the deduction is allowed only where the support is payable under a court order, not simply under the terms of an agreement between the parties;
• seeking an increase in support payments; or
• seeking an order making child support amounts received non-taxable.

On the payment side of the support payment/receipt equation, the situation is not nearly so favourable, as a deduction for legal fees incurred will not generally not be allowed to a person paying support. More specifically, as stated in the CRA guide, a person paying support cannot claim legal fees incurred in order to “establish, negotiate or contest the amount of support payments”.

Finally, where the Canada Revenue Agency reviews or challenges income amounts, deductions or credits reported or claimed by a taxpayer for a tax year, any fees (which in this case includes accounting fees) paid for advice or assistance in dealing with the CRA’s review, assessment or reassessment, or in objecting to that assessment or reassessment, can be deducted by the taxpayer. A deduction can similarly be claimed where the taxpayer incurs such fees in relation to a dispute involving employment insurance, the Canada Pension Plan or the Quebec Pension Plan.

As the baby boom generation ages, members of that generation must switch their focus from the accumulation of retirement savings to creating a structure which will ensure a steady flow of income throughout that retirement. Those individuals face a particular deadline when their 71^st birthday arrives, as they must, by December 31^st of that year, collapse their RRSP and convert it into a source of retirement income.

As the baby boom generation ages, members of that generation must switch their focus from the accumulation of retirement savings to creating a structure which will ensure a steady flow of income throughout that retirement. Those individuals face a particular deadline when their 71^st birthday arrives, as they must, by December 31^st of that year, collapse their RRSP and convert it into a source of retirement income.

The decision to be made is an important one which, once made, can’t be undone. In addition, such decision involves a number of factors which are either unknown, or beyond the control of the individual, or both. And, to add to the pressure, the choice made will affect the individual’s finances for the remainder of his or her life

While the actual decision is a complex one, the options available to a taxpayer who must convert 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 many 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 on a periodic basis (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, etc.), 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, the annuity rate for each $100,000 paid to the annuity issuer by a taxpayer who is 71 years of age is about $586 per month for a male taxpayer and about $533 per month for a female taxpayer (the actual rate is set by the company which issues the annuity and will vary somewhat from company to company). 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 generally 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 her heirs.

The second option open to taxpayers is to collapse the RRSP and transfer the entire balance to a RRIF. A RRIF operates in much the same way as an RRSP, with two major differences. First, it is 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, 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 pay 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 September 2019, the maximum OAS benefit for most Canadians (specifically, those who have lived in Canada for 40 years after the age of 18) is about $614 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 $1,155. (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 over $21,000 in annual income (or about $1,770 per month). And, for a married couple, of course, the combined total annual income received from CPP and OAS is just over $42,000 annually, or $3,500 per month. While $21,000 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 advisor on the right mix of choices and investments isn’t just a good idea, it’s a necessary one.

When parents separate and divorce, it is frequently the case that they are able to agree on an arrangement to share custody of their children. Such a shared-custody arrangement is often to the benefit of all concerned, especially the children of the marriage.

When parents separate and divorce, it is frequently the case that they are able to agree on an arrangement to share custody of their children. Such a shared-custody arrangement is often to the benefit of all concerned, especially the children of the marriage.

While a shared-custody arrangement usually makes the most sense from a human perspective, it can cause legal, financial, and tax complications. In particular, parents who share custody of their children must usually share, or divide, the tax deductions and benefits which can be received in respect of those children.

One of those benefits is the Canada Child Benefit (CCB) which is, in general terms, a non-taxable monthly benefit paid to parents of children who are under the age of 18.

The tax rules allow parents who share custody to also share CCB amounts. In such situations, payments made are equivalent to each eligible individual receiving one-half of the annual entitlement that they would receive if they were the only eligible parent (i.e., if the child lived with them all of the time), paid in monthly installments over the year. That has been the case since 2011, with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) determining who qualifies, based on an interpretation of shared parenting as meaning that a child generally lives with the parent between 40% and 60% of the time. However, recent Court decisions have altered and narrowed that policy, finding that a shared parenting arrangement requires that a child reside with a parent between 45% and 55% of the time.

In the CRA’s view, the narrower interpretation put forward into those Court decisions could result in a number of parents who share parenting time not being able to share in the benefits to which they are entitled. Consequently, new rules have been published to clarify the payment of CCB to shared-custody parents.

Those new rules provide that a shared-custody parent would be defined as one of two parents who:

• are not at that time cohabitating spouses or common-law partners of each other;
• reside with the child either at least 40% of the time in a month or on an equal or approximately equal basis; and
• primarily fulfill the responsibility for the care and upbringing of the child when residing with the child.

The proposed changes will provide more flexibility when it comes to shared-custody parents and the receipt of tax benefits for their children and will allow the CRA to continue with its existing administrative practices with respect to such parents. While the legislation to make the announced changes has not, owing to the election call, been passed by Parliament, officials of the Department of Finance have indicated that the CRA will nonetheless be administering the CCB based on those proposed rules, which are retroactive to June 2011.

More information on the new rules can be found on the Finance Canada website at https://www.fin.gc.ca/n19/data/19-095_01-eng.asp.

Canadians are fortunate to benefit from a publicly funded health care system, in which most costs of care ranging from routine visits to a family doctor to intensive care in a hospital setting are paid for by government-sponsored health insurance.

Canadians are fortunate to benefit from a publicly funded health care system, in which most costs of care ranging from routine visits to a family doctor to intensive care in a hospital setting are paid for by government-sponsored health insurance.

While there is no doubt that most medical costs are not the financial responsibility of the individual, it is nonetheless a fact that a significant (and growing) number of medical and para-medical costs must be paid for on an out-of-pocket basis by the person incurring those costs. And those costs can, in some instances, run to thousands of dollars per year.

The costs which first come to mind are, of course, those which must be incurred for prescription medicine. While some Canadians have full or partial coverage for such costs through an employer-sponsored benefits plan, the majority of Canadians (especially those working on a part-time or contract basis) don’t. Similarly, visits to a dentist must be paid for by those who don’t have private medical insurance on an out-of-pocket basis. The same goes for services provided by any number of medical and, especially, para-medical practitioners, including physiotherapists, psychologists, and registered massage therapists.

It’s a virtual certainty that nearly all Canadians will incur one or more of those uninsured costs over the course of a year. The good news for those individuals and families is that in many instances a federal and provincial tax credit can be claimed to help offset those costs. The bad news is that the rules on determining just what expenses qualify for the credit and how and when to claim it can be complex.

First, the basics. The technical rule is that, for 2019, taxpayers can claim a tax credit for qualifying medical expenses which exceed 3% of their net income for the year or $2,352, whichever is less. That’s a confusing calculation to many Canadians, and it’s perhaps easier to think of it in these terms:

• For 2019, taxpayers who have income of $78,400 or less can claim all qualifying medical expenses which exceed 3% of their income for the year. As an example, someone who has $50,000 in income for 2019 can claim qualifying medical expenses over $1,500 ($50,000 × 3% = $1,500).

• For 2019, taxpayers who have income over $78,400 can claim their qualifying medical expenses which are greater than $2,352.

There is also some degree of flexibility in the timing of a claim made for the medical expense tax credit. Specifically, a claim made on the return for 2019 can include any qualifying medical expense incurred in any 12-month period which ends in 2019. Consequently, taxpayers can, in order to maximize the expenses claimed for the year (and so exceed the statutory thresholds outlined above) can pick any 12-month period ending during 2019.

For example, an individual might have incurred significant medical expenses in the last half of 2018 and the first half of 2019. That taxpayer would likely benefit from choosing the period July 1, 2018 to June 30, 2019, and claiming all medical expenses incurred during that period on his or her return for 2019.

There is, unfortunately, no formula or rule-of-thumb which allows a taxpayer to easily or quickly pick the time period which will provide the greatest credit amount, since that determination depends on when qualifying medical expenses were incurred. To determine the optimal period for a medical expenses tax credit claim, it’s really a matter of trial and error, or doing the computation for different time periods and choosing the one that gives the best result.

In aggregating those medical expenses, it’s also possible for families to include all qualifying expenses incurred by both spouses and by any children who were born in 2002 or later. The claim for the credit (using the total family medical expenses) can then be made by either spouse. Since the amount of the allowable expense claim increases as income decreases, it makes sense for the claim for total family medical expenses to be made by the lower-income spouse on his or her return for the year, as long as that spouse’s tax payable for the year is greater than the amount of the credit to be claimed.

Of course, the first determination which must be made when calculating a medical expense tax credit claim for the year is which expenses do or do not qualify for the credit. The number and kind of expenses which can be incurred for medical care are almost limitless in their scope and variety, and the list of qualifying and non-qualifying expenses for purposes of the credit reflects that reality.

The Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) helpfully provides a chart of the types of expenses which can qualify for the medical expense tax credit, and that chart includes other requirements which must be met in order for a particular expense to qualify. It’s well worth reviewing that chart (which is available 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/lines-330-331-eligible-medical-expenses-you-claim-on-your-tax-return.html#mdcl_xpns) as the requirements imposed in order to qualify can be very specific and are not necessarily intuitive. For instance, to claim the cost of a walker as a medical expense, it is necessary to have a doctor’s prescription for that equipment. However, the cost of a wheelchair can be claimed with no requirement for a prescription. Finally, although the chart listing eligible medical expenses is 14 pages long, the CRA notes that such listing is “not exhaustive”. A full listing can be found in CRA Income Tax Folio S1-F1-C1, Medical Expense Tax Credit, which is available at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/technical-information/income-tax/income-tax-folios-index/series-1-individuals/folio-1-health-medical/income-tax-folio-s1-f1-c1-medical-expense-tax-credit.html.

The exercise of determining eligible medical expenses for all family members, calculating the optimal time period for making a medical expense tax credit claim, and determining the actual credit claimable can be a time-consuming process. However, given that such expenses are usually unavoidable, the dollar figure costs are often significant, and the effort has to be made only once a year, it is an annual effort worth making.

The Canadian tax system is a “self-assessing system” which relies heavily on the 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.

The Canadian tax system is a “self-assessing system” which relies heavily on the 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.

While it’s doubtful that many Canadians approach the task with any degree of enthusiasm, the fact is that millions of Canadians do sit down each spring to complete their annual tax return for the previous calendar year (or more often, they pay someone else to do it for them). Although the rate of compliance among Canadian taxpayers is very high — for the last filing season, just under 30 million individual income tax returns were filed with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) — there are, inevitably, those who do not file or pay on time.

There are a lot of reasons why individual 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.

Some taxpayers don’t file because they believe that there’s no requirement to do so if they don’t owe anything and aren’t expecting a refund. While that can be true, it is also necessary to file in order to receive a number of income-tested tax credits and benefits, including the harmonized sales tax (HST) credit, the Canada Child Benefit, and a range of provincial tax credits. Those who don’t file cannot have their eligibility for such credits determined and, therefore, 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 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 that amount.

With all of that in mind, several years ago the CRA instituted a program 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, while such taxpayers would have to pay outstanding tax amounts owed, plus interest, they would not be subject to penalties which would normally be imposed and would, in addition, avoid the risk of criminal prosecution.

That program, the Voluntary Disclosure Program (VDP), generally fulfilled its objectives but was criticized as being a means by which those who engage in deliberate tax avoidance could escape the consequences of their actions. As a result, changes were made to the VDP in March of 2018, with the effect of narrowing the eligibility criteria for the program and imposing additional conditions on participants.

The changes made in 2018 did not alter the basic requirements for participation in the VDP, which are still as follows. To qualify for relief, 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.

Under the current VDP structure, there are two separate programs 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 make a 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; and
• the sophistication of the taxpayer; and
• whether efforts were made to avoid detection through the use of offshore vehicles or other means.

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 — that is, 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 2010 through 2017 taxation years may be provided with interest relief with respect to taxes owed for the 2010-2014 taxation years. Such relief is generally equal to 50% of interest owed (i.e., 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 (2015-2017) taxation years. Since interest charges levied by the CRA are, by law, greater than current commercial rates 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 one which many taxpayers may well view with trepidation. Those who are unsure about whether they want to move forward with a VDP application can take advantage of the CRA’s “pre-disclosure discussion service”. As the name implies, that service allows taxpayers to participate in preliminary discussions, on an anonymous basis”, to gain some knowledge about the VDP program, the process involved and the potential relief available.

Taxpayers who decide 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. While use of this form is not mandatory — a letter will suffice — there’s really no downside to using the prescribed form, and doing so will ensure that all of the needed information is provided to the tax authorities. 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 CRA will then let the taxpayer know of his or her acceptance into the VDP and the effective date of that acceptance. The next step is for the CRA to evaluate the application to ensure that the five criteria for participation in the VDP (as listed above) are satisfied and 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. The taxpayer will be provided with that information in writing. 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 they have not heard from the CRA within four or five weeks of submitting an application.

If the decision made is that the application is not eligible for the VDP, that the necessary information, documentation, or payment was not received, that the five conditions of a valid application are not met, or that the circumstances are such that relief is not typically considered 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 direct the CRA to re-consider the VDP application. However, taxpayers should be aware that the circumstances in which courts can do so are very limited and such applications to court are more often than not unsuccessful. In any case, a taxpayer who is considering a court application with respect to a decision made under the VDP should 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 their tax filing and payment obligations. The CRA website makes it clear that the Agency expects 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.

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.

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.