Newsletters

When the Canada Pension Plan was introduced in 1965, it was a relatively simple retirement savings model. Working Canadians started making contributions to the CPP when they turned 18 years of age and continued making those contributions throughout their working life. Those who had contributed could start receiving the CPP retirement benefit at any time between the ages of 60 and 65. Once an individual was receiving retirement benefits, he or she was not required (or allowed) to make further contributions to the CPP, even if that individual continued to work. The CPP retirement benefit for which that individual was eligible therefore could not increase (except for inflationary increases) after that point.

When the Canada Pension Plan was introduced in 1965, it was a relatively simple retirement savings model. Working Canadians started making contributions to the CPP when they turned 18 years of age and continued making those contributions throughout their working life. Those who had contributed could start receiving the CPP retirement benefit at any time between the ages of 60 and 65. Once an individual was receiving retirement benefits, he or she was not required (or allowed) to make further contributions to the CPP, even if that individual continued to work. The CPP retirement benefit for which that individual was eligible therefore could not increase (except for inflationary increases) after that point.

Retirement looks a lot different now than it did it 1965, and the Canada Pension Plan has evolved and changed to recognize those differences. What that means for the average Canadian is much more flexibility in determining how to structure both their contributions to the CPP and the receipt of CPP retirement benefits.

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

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

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

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

A decision to stop contributing can be changed, and contributions resumed, but only one change can be made per calendar year. To make that change, the individual must complete section D of CPT30 (found at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms/cpt30.html), give one copy of the form to his or her employer, and send the original to the CRA.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Between mid-February and mid-August of this year, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) received and processed just over 29 million individual income tax returns filed for the 2019 tax year. The sheer volume of returns and the processing turnaround timelines mean that the CRA does not (and cannot possibly) do a manual review of the information provided in a return prior to issuing the Notice of Assessment. Rather, all returns are scanned by the Agency’s computer system and a Notice of Assessment is then issued.

Between mid-February and mid-August of this year, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) received and processed just over 29 million individual income tax returns filed for the 2019 tax year. The sheer volume of returns and the processing turnaround timelines mean that the CRA does not (and cannot possibly) do a manual review of the information provided in a return prior to issuing the Notice of Assessment. Rather, all returns are scanned by the Agency’s computer system and a Notice of Assessment is then issued.

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

The CRA’s response to that risk is to carry out a number of review programs, in which they seek to verify claims made by taxpayers on their returns. While the CRA conducts a variety of such review programs, the ones most likely to affect individual taxpayers are the Processing Review Program and the Matching Program, both of which are carried out in the fall of each year. The Processing Review Program, as the name implies, is a review of various deductions or credits claimed on returns, while the Matching Program compares information reported on the taxpayer’s return with information provided to the CRA by third-party sources (like T4s filed by employers or T5s filed by banks or other financial institutions).

Being selected for review under either program means, for the individual taxpayer, the possibility of receiving unexpected correspondence from the CRA. Receiving such correspondence from the tax authorities is almost guaranteed to unsettle the recipient taxpayer, even where there’s no reason to believe that anything is wrong. It is an experience which is shared by each of about 3 million Canadian taxpayers.

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

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

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

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

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

When the state of emergency was declared in March of this year, the federal government extended the usual deadlines for both the filing of individual tax returns and payment of taxes owed, for both 2019 and 2020. Sometimes those deadlines (like the deadline for filing of individual income tax returns for 2019) were put off until June, but most such deadlines were deferred until September 30. A summary of the federal individual income tax deadlines which will fall this year on September 30 is set out below.

When the state of emergency was declared in March of this year, the federal government extended the usual deadlines for both the filing of individual tax returns and payment of taxes owed, for both 2019 and 2020. Sometimes those deadlines (like the deadline for filing of individual income tax returns for 2019) were put off until June, but most such deadlines were deferred until September 30. A summary of the federal individual income tax deadlines which will fall this year on September 30 is set out below.

Final payment of income taxes due for 2019

While the return for 2019 had to have been filed by June 1 (or June 15 for self-employed individuals and their spouses), payment of any income tax balance owed for 2019 is due on or before September 30. Where that payment deadline is not met, interest and penalty charges will be imposed.

As well, although the filing deadline for returns was in June, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) has indicated that late-filing penalties will not be imposed, as long as the required individual income tax return for 2019 is filed on or before September 30.

The payment deadline extension also applies to amounts owed with respect to final returns filed for individuals who died between January 1 and October 31, 2019. Where an individual died after October 2019 and before June 16, 2020, final payment is due by September 30, 2020, or six months after the date of death, whichever is later.

Finally, income tax balances and instalments due by trusts or corporations on or after March 18, 2020 and before September 30, 2020 are due on or before September 30.

Payment of income tax instalments for 2020

Canadian taxpayers who pay tax by quarterly instalments usually make those payments by the 15^th day of March, June, September, and December.

Earlier this year, the CRA announced that the June 15 and September 15 instalment due dates would be postponed, and that both such instalment payments would be due and payable by September 30. Interest charges will not be levied where that September 30 payment deadline is met.

End of interest-free period

As part of its pandemic response, the CRA also announced that it was suspending the accumulation of interest charges on existing income tax debts effective as of April 1, 2020. That interest-free grace period ends on September 30 and the usual interest charges will once again be imposed (and begin to accumulate) as of October 1, 2020.

It is worth noting that interest on debts owed to the CRA is levied at higher than commercial rates, and that such interest charges are compounded daily, meaning that each day interest is levied on interest charges imposed on the previous day.

A full listing of the filing and payment deadlines for 2020 is provided on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/campaigns/covid-19-update/covid-19-filing-payment-dates.html#extend.

Of all the many financial relief programs introduced by the federal government to address the economic impact of the pandemic, probably none has had a bigger impact than the Canada Emergency Relief Benefit (CERB). As of August 16, nearly 9 million Canadians had applied for and received payments under the CERB program, and the program had paid out just over $70 billion.

Of all the many financial relief programs introduced by the federal government to address the economic impact of the pandemic, probably none has had a bigger impact than the Canada Emergency Relief Benefit (CERB). As of August 16, nearly 9 million Canadians had applied for and received payments under the CERB program, and the program had paid out just over $70 billion.

As the country emerges from the near complete economic lockdown which was in effect in the spring, the current financial situation of those who received CERB benefits will vary widely. Some may be back at work and earning the same income as they did pre-pandemic. Others may be back at work with reduced hours and, consequently, reduced income. Still others may still be waiting for their employer to call them back to work and some, unfortunately, may have worked for businesses which will never re-open.

Given the sheer number of CERB recipients, the economic impact of the termination of the CERB program on October 3, 2020 will be significant. In recognition of that fact, the federal government has announced three new programs intended to allow Canadians to transition from CERB. In addition, changes will be made to the Employment Insurance (EI) program which will make it easier for individuals to receive EI benefits.

The three new programs will allow Canadians whose income loss resulting from the pandemic continues to claim benefits, within prescribed limits, up until September 27, 2021. The particular program under which an individual may qualify depends on his or her particular circumstances — the programs and the qualifying criteria, as outlined on the federal government website, are summarized below.

Canada Recovery Benefit (CRB)

The CRB will provide $400 per week for up to 26 weeks to individuals who are self-employed or who are otherwise not eligible for EI and who still require income support, if they are available for and looking for work.

The CRB benefit would be available to Canadian residents who:

• are at least 15 years old and have a valid Social Insurance Number (SIN);
• have stopped working due to the pandemic and are available and looking for work, or are working but have had a reduction in their employment or self-employment income for pandemic-related reasons;
• are not eligible for Employment Insurance;
• had employment and/or self-employment income of at least $5,000 in 2019 or in 2020; and,
• have not quit their job voluntarily.

There is provision for a clawback of CRB benefits received where the income of a recipient (excluding CRB payments) is greater than $38,000. In such circumstances, the recipient will be required to repay 50 cents of the benefit for each dollar of their annual net income above $38,000 in the calendar year, to a maximum of the amount of benefit they received.

The CRB would be payable (subject to the weekly maximum claim period of 26 weeks) until September 27, 2021.

Canada Recovery Sickness Benefit (CRSB)

As the name implies, the CRSB will be paid to individuals who must quarantine or self-isolate for two weeks for pandemic-related reasons. The benefit will be $500 per week for that two-week period.

To qualify for the benefit, an individual must:

• be a Canadian resident who is at least 15 years of age and has a valid SIN;
• be employed or self-employed at the time of the application; and
• have earned at least $5,000 in 2019 or in 2020.

Like the CRB, the CRSB will be paid (for a maximum two-week period) anytime before September 27, 2021.

Canada Recovery Caregiving Benefit (CRCB)

Once again, the name is self-explanatory. The CRCB will provide $500 per week, for up to 26 weeks, per household to eligible Canadians whose work availability has been reduced by at least 60% resulting from the need to provide caregiving services to their children or to disabled family members. The CRCB recognizes that the upcoming school year will look very different and that grade school children who would normally attend school on a full day, every day basis may well have a different schedule for pandemic-related reasons.

In order to be eligible for the CRCB, an individual must:

• reside in Canada;
• be at least 15 years of age on the first day of the benefit period for which they are applying;
• have a valid Social Insurance Number;
• be employed or self-employed on the day before the start of the benefit period;
• have earned at least $5,000 in 2019 or in 2020;
• have been unable to work for at least 60% of their normally scheduled work within a given week because they must take care of a child who is under 12 years of age on the first day of the benefit period because that child’s school or daycare is closed or operates under an alternative schedule for reasons related to the pandemic, or where that child cannot attend school or day care due to medical risks, or because the child’s usual caregiver is not available for pandemic related reasons;
• have been unable to work for at least 60% of their normally scheduled work within a given week because they are providing care to a family member with a disability or dependent because the dependent’s day program or care facility is closed or operates under an alternative schedule for reasons related to COVID-19, or the dependent cannot attend their day program or care facility due to medical risks, or because the dependant’s usual caregiver is not available for pandemic-related reasons;
• not be in receipt of paid leave from an employer in respect of the same week; and
• not be in receipt of the CERB, the EI Emergency Response Benefit, the CRB, the CRSB, short-term disability benefits, workers’ compensation benefits, or any EI benefits or Quebec Parental Insurance Plan benefits in respect of the same week.

In some cases, individuals who have lost jobs or had their income reduced as the result of the pandemic can qualify for Employment Insurance benefits. However, the EI system has very specific requirements and those requirements have the potential to exclude large numbers of workers, including those who were working part-time or on a short-term contract, or who live in areas of low unemployment. The changes which will be made to the EI system will provide greater flexibility and consequently allow more individuals to qualify for EI benefits.

Generally speaking, in order to qualify for EI benefits, an individual must have worked for a specified number of hours within a prescribed time frame (the qualifying period). The number of hours required depends on the unemployment rate in the location where the individual lives and, where the local unemployment rate is lower, the number of work hours required to qualify for EI increases. Finally, the amount of EI benefit which may be received is calculated as a percentage of weekly earnings received during the qualifying period. In order to ensure that EI benefits can be claimed by more Canadians, and that greater benefits can be received, the following changes will be made.

• The minimum unemployment rate for purposes of the EI program will be set at 13.1% in all locations, effective as of August 9, 2020; and
• Canadians who have at least 120 hours of insurable work will be able to qualify for EI benefits, as they will be provided with a temporary, one-time credit of:
  • 300 insurable hours for those claiming EI regular benefits
  • 480 insurable hours for those claiming EI special benefits (maternity, parental, sickness, compassionate care, and family).

Under the new rules, individuals who qualify for EI benefits will receive a minimum benefit of $400 per week in regular benefits and $240 per week for extended parental benefits.

The federal government’s intention is that individuals who need financial support as the result of a pandemic-related loss of income should turn first to the Employment Insurance program. Where EI benefits are not available to them, they may be eligible for one of the three new programs — the CRB, the CRSB, and the CCRB — which can provide a comparable level of financial support. It is important as well for recipients of any of these benefits, or of EI, to recognize that all such income received is taxable income, which must be reported as income on the tax return filed for the year in which it is received.

More detailed information on each of these programs, and the changes to the EI system is available on the federal government website at https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/economic-response-plan.html#individuals.

Most Canadians who participate in the paid work force do so as employees. Consequently, they receive a regular paycheque from their employer and they pay income taxes by means of amounts deducted from that paycheque and remitted to the federal government on their behalf.

Most Canadians who participate in the paid work force do so as employees. Consequently, they receive a regular paycheque from their employer and they pay income taxes by means of amounts deducted from that paycheque and remitted to the federal government on their behalf.

There are, however, a significant number of Canadians who fall outside that group — like retirees, or the self-employed — who must pay their taxes by some other method. That method is the payment of income tax through the instalment payment system.

The rule is that an individual is subject to the instalment payment requirement where his or her tax owed on filing for the current year and either of the two previous years is more than $3,000. In other words, the amount of tax collected from that individual throughout the year was at least $3,000 less than the actual tax owed for that year.

Canadian taxpayers who thus fall into the tax instalment payment system remit an amount to the federal government four times a year, by the 15^th of March, June, September, and December. Where the amount remitted ends up being more than their actual tax liability for the year, the excess is returned to them in the form of a tax refund when they file their income tax return for the year. Where instalment amounts remitted are less than the taxpayer’s tax liability for the year, the balance owing must be paid when the return is filed.

Where a taxpayer is subject to the instalment requirement, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) sends them two “Instalment Reminders” each year (one in February, the second in August), setting out the amounts to be paid on each upcoming due date. Regardless of the type or amount of his or her income for the year, or the amount of any instalment payments, the options available to the recipient of an Instalment Reminder are the same. On its website, the CRA describes the three different payment options open to taxpayers, and outlines the benefits and risks of each option in different circumstances, as follows:

No-calculation option

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

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

Prior-year option

This option is best for you if your 2020 income, deductions, and credits will be similar to your 2019 amount but significantly different from those in 2018.

You determine the amount of your instalment payments based on the information from your tax return for the 2019 tax year. Use the calculation chart found at https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/cra-arc/migration/cra-arc/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/pymnts/nstlmnts/Instalment-chart-fill-20e.pdf to help you calculate your total instalment amount due.

If you use the prior-year option and make the payments in full by their 2020 due dates, we will not charge instalment interest or a penalty unless the total instalment amount due you have calculated is too low. For more information, see Instalment interest and penalty charges.

Current-year option

This option is best for you if your 2020 income, deductions, and credits will be significantly different from those in 2019 and 2018.

You determine the amount of your instalment payments based on your estimated current-year (2020) net tax owing, any CPP contributions payable, and any voluntary EI premiums. Use the calculation chart (https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/cra-arc/migration/cra-arc/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/pymnts/nstlmnts/Instalment-chart-fill-20e.pdf) to help you calculate your total instalment amount due.

If you use the current-year option and make the payments in full by their 2020 due dates, we will not charge instalment interest or a penalty unless the amounts you estimated when calculating your total instalment amount due were too low. For more information, see Instalment interest and penalty charges.”

The first option — paying the amounts identified on the Instalment Reminder by the identified deadlines — is the easiest and simplest choice. If the total instalment amounts paid during the year represent an overpayment of taxes for 2020, the taxpayer will receive a refund of that overpayment on filing in the spring of 2021. If the amounts identified turn out be an underpayment of tax (in that they are insufficient to cover total tax owed for the year), the taxpayer will have a balance owing on filing. In no case, however, will the taxpayer be charged any interest on insufficient instalment payments.

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

While the instalment payment system works well in most instances, this year it has been altered by the circumstances of the pandemic. In many ways those changes have been beneficial for the taxpayer, since they push payment deadlines off to a later date. However, the changes can make it difficult to determine just what amount needs to be remitted, and when.

Initially, the usual June 15 due date for the June instalment remittance was deferred until September 1. More recently, the CRA announced that that deadline would be pushed back again, to September 30, 2020 and that the instalment remittance normally due on September 15 would also not be due until September 30.

Owing to the postponement of payment dates, the instalment payment amount for June 15 (found on the instalment reminder sent out in February) and the amount for September 15 (found on the second instalment reminder sent in August) are both due and payable by September 30, 2020.

The CRA recently posted a notice on its website alerting taxpayers to the fact that some second instalment reminder notices for 2020 (that is, those sent out in August) identify the September payment due date as September 15. That is now incorrect, and the actual deadline for payment is September 30.

While all of this can seem somewhat confusing, the steps to be taken by a taxpayer who receives an Instalment Reminder haven’t really changed. He or she must first determine whether to make an instalment payment, and in what amount, based on the considerations outlined above in the three available options. Second, he or she must pay the June and September instalment amounts on or before Wednesday, September 30. Barring any further announcements, the December instalment will be due on the usual instalment due date of December 15, 2020.

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

It’s an acknowledged reality that times of crisis bring out both the best and the worst in people. While most Canadians would never consider using the current pandemic as a means of defrauding others, this is not, unfortunately, true of everyone.

This is a time when Canadians are particularly vulnerable to scammers and fraud artists, for a number of reasons. First, of course, is the financial dislocation which has resulted from the pandemic — many Canadians have lost income and may be in real financial difficulty, making them especially vulnerable to fraudulent communications indicating that there is money available to them. Second, the federal government has instituted a great number of programs to provide financial assistance to those hit hard by the pandemic. The sheer number of those programs, however, and the fact that they have had to be revised frequently to take account of changing conditions has resulted in an inevitable degree of confusion about just what is available, who is eligible for the different benefits, and how to claim them. That confusion makes it easier for fraud artists to convince their victims of the validity of what they are “offering”. It also makes taxpayers vulnerable to phone calls or voice mails in which they are, in effect, accused of receiving benefits to which they were not entitled and demanding that they send funds in repayment.

It’s an acknowledged reality that times of crisis bring out both the best and the worst in people. While most Canadians would never consider using the current pandemic as a means of defrauding others, this is not, unfortunately, true of everyone.

This is a time when Canadians are particularly vulnerable to scammers and fraud artists, for a number of reasons. First, of course, is the financial dislocation which has resulted from the pandemic — many Canadians have lost income and may be in real financial difficulty, making them especially vulnerable to fraudulent communications indicating that there is money available to them. Second, the federal government has instituted a great number of programs to provide financial assistance to those hit hard by the pandemic. The sheer number of those programs, however, and the fact that they have had to be revised frequently to take account of changing conditions has resulted in an inevitable degree of confusion about just what is available, who is eligible for the different benefits, and how to claim them. That confusion makes it easier for fraud artists to convince their victims of the validity of what they are “offering”. It also makes taxpayers vulnerable to phone calls or voice mails in which they are, in effect, accused of receiving benefits to which they were not entitled and demanding that they send funds in repayment.

In addition, the pandemic has made it necessary for Canadians to manage just about everything online or by phone, opening up opportunities for fraudsters to misrepresent themselves as government officials through e-mail or telephone, or to create fake “government” websites. Individuals who are not accustomed to managing their financial affairs in the online world are especially vulnerable right now to these approaches. Finally, since the filing deadlines for income tax return for the 2019 tax returns have passed, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) will, as happens each year, be contacting some taxpayers seeking clarification of income amounts reported or documentation of deductions or credits claimed on the annual return. Consequently, it wouldn’t necessarily strike taxpayers as unusual to receive, at this time of the year, a communication purporting to be from the CRA, with a message regarding that person’s taxes. All in all, 2020 represents a “perfect storm” of opportunity for scammers and fraudsters.

The federal government has already identified at least one specific scam which has arisen in relation to pandemic benefits. Canadians have received a text message indicating that a deposit has been made to their bank account, representing benefits under the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) program. The message is invariably fraudulent, as the federal government does not, under any circumstances, contact taxpayers by text. Recipients should not click on the link provided and should delete the text entirely.

When receiving a communication of any kind from someone purporting to be from the federal government, a taxpayer should ask themselves the following questions.

Is the federal government likely to be contacting me in this way?  In most cases, the federal government communicates with taxpayers by regular mail or, if the taxpayer has signed up for online communication, through the taxpayer’s online account with Service Canada (for pandemic-related benefits, Canada Pension Plan, Old Age Security, or Employment Insurance) or the CRA (for all income tax related matters). The federal government does not and has never communicated with taxpayers by text. While the CRA and Service Canada will communicate with taxpayers by telephone, there are ways in which a taxpayer can ensure that the call, and the caller, are legitimate.

Anyone calling from a government department or agency should be able to identify themselves, if not by name, then by employee or agent number. Second, they should be able to provide a telephone number at which they can be called back.(It’s important to note that call display cannot be relied on to accurately identify the source of the call, as scammers have been able to manipulate call display to show actual government phone numbers.) Finally, if the caller really is from the federal government, then they should already have certain information about the taxpayer they are calling — at a minimum the taxpayer’s social insurance number. If they don’t, and they request that information from the taxpayer, it’s a sure sign that caller is not who they claim to be. If the taxpayer has any doubt about the legitimacy of the call or the caller, and especially if a demand for money is made, the best course of action is to hang up and place a call to the particular government department or agency to verify the legitimacy of the initial call. For that purpose, the CRA’s individual income tax help line number is 1-800-959-8281. If the suspect call received was about the Canada Emergency Response Benefit, and the taxpayer has questions about his or her current or past eligibility for the benefit, he or she should call the CERB at 1-833-966-2099. If the call or e-mail was clearly fraudulent, it should be reported to the Canada Anti-Fraud Centre at 1-888-495 8501.

The Service Canada numbers (both of which are toll-free) to call are as follows:

• Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security: 1-800-277 9914
• Employment Insurance: 1-833-966-2099

Generally, there are two ways in which financial fraud artists prey on Canadians. In the first, the taxpayer is contacted, by phone, text, or e-mail and advised that he or she is owed money by the federal government. In order to receive the money owed, the taxpayer must click on a link in the e-mail or text, or to provide financial information (like a bank account number) over the phone. The e-mail or text link leads to a “dummy” site closely resembling the actual CRA or Service Canada website. The taxpayer must then, in order to have his or her “refund” processed, provide personal and financial information which can then be used by the scammer to gain access to their bank accounts.

The second approach, and one which has been used with great success over the past few years, is to falsely inform the taxpayer (this time, usually by telephone) that he or she has received benefits or a tax refund to which they are not entitled and that the money must be repaid immediately to the federal government. Since literally millions of Canadians have received pandemic-related benefits over the past four months, Canadians are particularly vulnerable to a scam like this right now. A failure to pay, the taxpayer is told, will mean seizure of his or her assets, cancellation of his or her passport and/or social insurance card or other government-issued identification, deportation or imprisonment. Further, such payment must be made only by wire transfer or pre-paid credit card. This type of fraud has become so ubiquitous, in fact, that many businesses which provide money transfer services post warnings on their premises to would-be users of the need to be aware of the fraud risk.

There are, in fact, several things about such a phone call that should alert the recipient to the fact that it’s not legitimate. First of all, if a taxpayer does owe money to any department or agency of the federal government, he or she will be first advised of that fact by mail and never by telephone. Second, there is no agency or department of the federal government that would suggest or require that a taxpayer send funds to that agency by wire transfer or by using a prepaid credit card. Any payment of money owed to the federal government is made online, through a legitimate government website, through the taxpayer’s financial institution (in person or online), or by mailing a cheque. Finally, any suggestion that the federal government would (or could) cancel a taxpayer’s passport or other government issued ID for failure to make payment is simply ludicrous.

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

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

The CRA and Service Canada will never:

• ask for personal information of any kind by email or text message;
• send an e-mail or text with a link to be used;
• request payment by prepaid credit cards;
• ask for a taxpayer’s credit card information;
• give taxpayer information to another person, unless formal authorization is provided by the taxpayer; or
• leave personal information on an answering machine.

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

• Did I sign up to receive online mail through My Account or My Service Canada Account?
• Did I provide my email address on my income tax and benefit return to receive mail online?
• Am I expecting more money from the CRA or Service Canada?
• Does this sound too good to be true?
• Is the requester asking for information I would not be asked for in my tax return (like a credit card number)?
• Is the requester asking for information I know the CRA or Service Canada already has on file for me (e.g., my social Insurance number)?

As ever, the best defence against becoming a victim of such fraud artists is by refusing to provide personal or financial information, and especially never to make any kind of payment, whether by phone, e-mail, or online, without first contacting the particular government department to verify the legitimacy of the request.

When states of emergency were being declared across the country in March of this year, thousands of businesses were forced to close their doors and, as a result, were faced with the necessity of laying off some or all of their employees.

The question of when, or even whether, those employees could and would be recalled to work was essentially unknown at that time. To address that reality the federal government established the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) program. As the name implies, the program involved the payment of a subsidy to the employer, who would use those funds to keep employees on the payroll pending the re-opening of the business and the return to work.

When states of emergency were being declared across the country in March of this year, thousands of businesses were forced to close their doors and, as a result, were faced with the necessity of laying off some or all of their employees.

The question of when, or even whether, those employees could and would be recalled to work was essentially unknown at that time. To address that reality the federal government established the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) program. As the name implies, the program involved the payment of a subsidy to the employer, who would use those funds to keep employees on the payroll pending the re-opening of the business and the return to work.

The initial launch of the CEWS is probably best described as a partial success. While some employers did avail themselves of the subsidy, there were criticisms that the eligibility criteria were too rigid or too narrow and that the time frame for providing support was too short. As well, employees whose income had been curtailed for pandemic-related reasons could often claim benefits under the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) program, which in some cases provided them with a better financial result.

Following consultations with interested groups, the federal government addressed the identified deficiencies of the CEWS and, on July 17, announced both that changes would be made to the program’s eligibility criteria to improve flexibility and that the program would be extended to provide support until December 19, 2020 (the original program end date had been August 29, 2020).

Inevitably, greater flexibility means greater complexity, but the basic structure of the CEWS program beginning July 5, 2020 is that the amount of subsidy payable will be calculated based on the percentage of revenue loss experienced by the employer over a specified time period, with different amounts payable depending on whether the employee in respect of whom the subsidy is paid has returned to work, or is still “furloughed”.

For “active” employees (those who have returned to work) the CEWS would consist of two parts;

• abase subsidy available to all eligible employers that are experiencing a decline in revenues, with the subsidy amount varying depending on the scale of revenue decline and the time period involved; and

• a “top-up” subsidy of up to an additional 25% for those employers that have been most adversely affected by the pandemic crisis.

For purposes of the base subsidy, employers will be assigned to one of two groups, depending on whether their revenue loss is more or less than 50% over a particular period. The calculation of the available subsidy will then differ for each group, in each time period, as shown on the Finance Canada website at https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/news/2020/07/adapting-the-canada-emergency-wage-subsidy-to-protect-jobs-and-promote-growth.html.

The amount of the top-up subsidy benefit, for employers who have been particularly hard-hit, will be based on the employer’s three-month average revenue drop, as measured on a year-over-year basis, where that drop exceeds 50%.

For employees who are still furloughed, a subsidy benefit will still be provided, with the amount of such benefit dependent on the time period for which the subsidy is paid. Generally, for the July 5 to August 29 period, the available subsidy for a furloughed employee would be the greater of the following two amounts:

• for arm’s-length (generally meaning non-related) employees, 75% of the amount of remuneration paid, up to a maximum benefit of $847 per week; and
• 75% of the employee’s pre-crisis weekly remuneration up to a maximum benefit of $847 per week or the amount of remuneration paid, whichever is less.

After August 29th, the CEWS subsidy for furloughed employees would be adjusted to align with the benefits provided through the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) and/or Employment Insurance (EI).

The changes to the CEWS program, while addressing many of the concerns expressed by stakeholders, have undoubtedly increased the complexity of the program. However, Finance Canada has prepared and posted on its website a backgrounder and guide showing how the subsidy amount is actually calculated for each category of business and employee, over several different time periods. That guide can be found on the Finance Canada website at https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/news/2020/07/adapting-the-canada-emergency-wage-subsidy-to-protect-jobs-and-promote-growth.html.

For post-secondary students the upcoming academic year is going to be unlike anything they have previously experienced. Post-secondary institutions across the country are now determining whether, and to what extent, students should return to in-class learning or whether, at least for the fall semester of the 2020-21 academic year, programs should be delivered entirely through online or remote learning. While some institutions have already indicated that they will be only providing online learning, and a smaller group intends to continue entirely with the traditional in-class model, most universities and colleges have taken a “wait and see” approach, choosing to employ a “hybrid” model which combines in-class learning with online courses.

For post-secondary students the upcoming academic year is going to be unlike anything they have previously experienced. Post-secondary institutions across the country are now determining whether, and to what extent, students should return to in-class learning or whether, at least for the fall semester of the 2020-21 academic year, programs should be delivered entirely through online or remote learning. While some institutions have already indicated that they will be only providing online learning, and a smaller group intends to continue entirely with the traditional in-class model, most universities and colleges have taken a “wait and see” approach, choosing to employ a “hybrid” model which combines in-class learning with online courses.

While the current situation leaves post-secondary students in something of a quandry when it comes to planning their living arrangements in September, there are some aspects of post-secondary education which haven’t changed. Regardless of where and how classes are held, students will have to pay tuition. As well, many will be taking out or extending government student loans to finance their studies. And, fortunately for those students, the tax breaks and credits which were available to them in previous years to help offset the costs of their education will also be claimable for the upcoming academic year, regardless of the form that education takes.

Those tax credits, deductions and benefits which can be claimed by post-secondary students (or their spouses, parents, or grandparents) in relation to the 2020-21 academic year are summarized below.

Tuition fees

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

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

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

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

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

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

At both the federal and provincial levels, the tuition tax credit is a non-refundable credit, which means it reduces income tax which would otherwise be payable by the student for the tax year in which the tuition fees are paid. Where, as is often the case, a student doesn’t have tax payable for the year (or insufficient tax to use up the full tuition tax credit), credits earned can be carried forward and claimed by the student in any future tax year, or transferred (within limits) in the current year to be claimed by a spouse, parent, or grandparent.

Personal and living expenses

This year, it’s possible that students will not have to move to the city in which their post-secondary institution is located, where that institution chooses to deliver courses using an online learning model only. However, the fact that residence fees or rent for an off-campus apartment won’t have to be paid won’t change anything with respect to the student’s tax position. As has always been the case, living costs incurred by a post-secondary student (whether on campus or off) are characterized as personal and living expenses, for which no tax deduction or credit is allowed.

Student debt

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

Students who are still in school and arranging for loans to finance their education should be mindful of the rules which govern that student loan interest tax credit, since decisions made while still in school with respect to how post-secondary education will be financed can have tax repercussions down the road, after graduation. That’s because while all interest paid on a qualifying student loan is eligible, without limit, for that tax credit, only some types of student borrowing will qualify. Specifically, only interest paid on government-sponsored (federal or provincial) student loans will be eligible for the credit. Interest paid on loans of any kind from any financial institution will not.

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

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

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

Credits withdrawn but available for carryforward

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

Other credits and deductions

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

Finally, most post-secondary students count on summer earnings to help offset the cost of their education, or to minimize the amount of debt they must take on to complete that education. This year, of course, it has been nearly impossible for such students to earn summer earnings as they did in previous years. There is, however, a federal government grant, provided as part of the pandemic response plan, which students can claim to help make up that shortfall. That grant program is the Canada Emergency Student Benefit (CESB), which will, generally, provide students who are unable to find work due to the pandemic with $1,250 in taxable income for each four-week period between May and August 2020. There are, of course, eligibility requirements for the CESB and those requirements, along with other program details, can be found on the federal government website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/benefits/emergency-student-benefit.html.

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

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

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

While greater flexibility in retirement income planning is always a good thing, having that flexibility comes at a price of greater complexity when it comes to determining which choices are the right ones in one’s particular circumstances. And one of the decisions which must be made, when it comes to CPP, is whether and when it might made sense to stop making CPP contributions.

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

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

• Individuals who are 60 to 65 years of age and continue to work are required to continue making CPP contributions.
• Individuals who are 65 to 70 years of age and continue to work can choose not to make CPP contributions. To stop contributing, such an individual must fill out Form CPT30, Election to Stop Contributing to the Canada Pension Plan, or Revocation of a Prior Election, which can be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms/cpt30.html.
• A copy of that form must be given to the individual’s employer and the original sent to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). An individual who has more than one employer must make the same choice (to continue to contribute or to cease contributions) for all employers and must provide a copy of Form CPT30 to each.
• A decision to stop contributing can be changed, and contributions resumed. To make that change, the individual must complete section D of Form CPT30, give one copy of the form to his or her employer, and send the original to the CRA
• Individuals who are over the age of 70 and are still working cannot contribute to the CPP.

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

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

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

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

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

Just over a decade ago, it was possible to buy a home in Canada with no down payment — financing 100% of the purchase price — and extending the repayment period for that borrowing over a 40-year period.

Just over a decade ago, it was possible to buy a home in Canada with no down payment — financing 100% of the purchase price — and extending the repayment period for that borrowing over a 40-year period.

A lot has changed since then and one of those changes has been a steady tightening of the rules governing mortgage financing in Canada, especially for mortgages guaranteed by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). The latest such set of changes will take effect on July 1, 2020.

To understand those changes, a bit of background is required. When Canadians buy a home, they must provide a percentage of the purchase price as a down payment. Where the purchase price of the home is $500,000 or less, the minimum down payment is 5%. However, where the down payment made on such a home is less than 20% of the purchase price, there is a requirement to obtain mortgage default insurance. While there are private companies which provide such insurance, in many cases the insurer is CMHC.

Although the borrower/home purchaser pays the premiums on the mortgage default insurance issued by CMHC, it’s actually the lender (usually a bank or other financial institution) who is protected. Essentially, CMHC guarantees that if the homebuyer defaults on his or her mortgage obligations, the Agency will step in to limit any losses incurred by the lender.

Like all insurance providers, CMHC imposes requirements on those who apply for mortgage default insurance and it is those requirements which will change on July 1 (effective for any new applications made on or after that date).

As of July 1, the following new requirements will apply.

New limits on the amount of non-mortgage debt which prospective homeowners can carry

Most Canadians carry debt in some form besides their mortgage debt (car loans, credit cards, lines of credit, etc.), and that non-mortgage debt is factored into the determination of the credit-worthiness of the mortgage insurance applicant. There are two measurements used — Gross Debt Service (GDS) and Total Debt Service (TDS). The first (the GDS) is a measure of housing costs, and includes mortgage payments, property taxes, heating and, where applicable, condominium fees. The second measurement (the TDS) includes housing costs plus all other debt-related payments. In each case, the total amount of debt-servicing obligations is measured as a percentage of gross household income.

The changes which take effect on July 1 will place more stringent limits on the amount of both housing and non-housing debt costs which applicants can have. Prior to July 1, CMHC requirements were that GDS and TDS for an applicant should be no more than 39% and 44% respectively — that is, GDS of no more than 39% of gross household income and TDS of no more than 44% of gross household income. For new applications made after June 30, those numbers will tighten, and applicants will be required to have GDS and TDS ratios of no more than 35% and 42%, respectively. In other words, housing costs which make up the GDS must be no more than 35% of gross household income and total debt servicing obligations which make up the TDS must be no more than 42% of gross household income.

A requirement that at least one of the prospective homeowners have a credit score of at least 680

Most Canadians are familiar with credit scores, which are widely used in assessing the credit-worthiness of an individual. Briefly, a credit score is a measure of both the amount of debt currently held by an individual and the individual’s past history in managing credit. A credit score can range from 300 to 900.

Previously, CMHC had required that applicants for mortgage default insurance have a credit score of at least 600. After June 30, that requirement will increase, as at least one member of the household will need to have a credit score of at least 680 to meet the CMHC’s requirements.

Changes to the rules around borrowing to obtain a down payment

While mortgage insurance applicants have been required to have a down payment of at least 5% (where the purchase price of the home is $500,000 or less) there have, to date, been no restrictions on how that down payment can be obtained. On July 1, for those seeking CMHC mortgage insurance, that will change.

Optimally, a down payment comes from the savings of the prospective home purchasers. However, it is not uncommon for that down payment to be obtained from other sources, including private borrowings (often from parents) or borrowings from other sources like lines of credit or even credit cards. Regardless of the source of the funds, CMHC was prepared to treat the borrowed down payment funds as an asset of the prospective home buyers. However, that policy will change and the new rule will be that where the down payment arises from borrowed funds (whatever their source) CMHC will no longer consider those funds to be an asset of the applicant — or, as set out in the CMHC announcement of the changes “[n]on-traditional sources of down payment that increase indebtedness will no longer be treated as equity for insurance purposes.”

While Canadians had an extended time this year to file their income tax returns for the 2019 tax year, the extended filing deadlines (June 1 for the majority of Canadians, and June 15 for self-employed individuals and their spouses) have passed and returns should be filed.

While Canadians had an extended time this year to file their income tax returns for the 2019 tax year, the extended filing deadlines (June 1 for the majority of Canadians, and June 15 for self-employed individuals and their spouses) have passed and returns should be filed.

In most cases, the taxpayer files a return and then waits for a Notice of Assessment from the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) letting them know whether the tax authorities are in agreement with the taxpayer’s information on his or her tax situation. And, in most of those cases the CRA will issue a Notice of Assessment indicating that the return is “assessed as filed”, meaning that the CRA does agree with the information filed and tax result obtained by the taxpayer. While that’s the outcome everyone is hoping for, it’s a result which can go “off the rails” in any number of ways.

By the third week of June 2020, over 27 million individual income tax returns for the 2019 tax year had been filed with the CRA. And, inevitably, some of those returns contain errors or omissions that must be corrected — in 2019 the CRA received about 2 million requests for adjustment(s) to an already filed return.

Just over 90% of the returns which have already been filed for the 2019 tax year were filed through online filing methods, meaning that they were prepared using tax return preparation software. The use of such software significantly reduces the chance of making a clerical or arithmetic error, like entering an amount on the wrong line or adding a column of figures incorrectly. However, no matter how good the software, it can work only with the information that is provided to it. Sometimes taxpayers prepare and file a return, only to later receive a tax information slip that should have been included on that return. It’s also easy to make an inputting error when transposing figures from an information slip (a T4 from one’s employer, for instance) into the software, such that $49,505 in income becomes $45,905. Whatever the cause, where the figures input are incorrect or information is missing, those errors or omissions will be reflected in the final (incorrect) result produced by the software.

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

A few years ago the CRA introduced a new service called ReFILE, which allows taxpayers who filed their returns online (whether through NETFILE or EFILE) to advise the CRA electronically of an error or omission made in an already-filed return. The ReFILE service, which can be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/e-services/e-services-businesses/refile-online-t1-adjustments-efile-service-providers.html, allows taxpayers to make such corrections online, on the CRA website.

Essentially, a taxpayer is able to file a correction to an already-filed return, using the same tax return preparation software that was used to prepare the return. Whether the return was filed using NETFILE or EFILE, adjustments for returns can be filed used ReFILE for any of the 2016, 2017, 2018, or 2019 taxation years.

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

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

Taxpayers who wish to make changes or corrections which cannot be made through ReFILE or My Account (or those who just don’t wish to use the online option) can paper-file an adjustment to their return. The paper form to be used is Form T1-ADJ E, which can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/cra-arc/formspubs/pbg/t1-adj/t1-adj-08-18e.pdf. Those who are unable to print the form off the website can order a copy to be sent to them by mail by calling the CRA’s individual income tax enquiries line at 1-800-959-8281. There is no limit to the number of changes or corrections which can be made using Form T1-ADJ E.

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

Hard copy of a T1-ADJ E (or a letter) is filed by sending the completed document to the appropriate Tax Center, which is the one with which the tax return was originally filed. A listing of Tax Centres, and their addresses, can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/corporate/contact-information/tax-centres.html. A taxpayer who isn’t sure any more which Tax Centre his or her return was filed with can go to https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/corporate/contact-information/tax-services-offices-tax-centres.html on the CRA website and select his or her location from the listing found there. The address for the correct Tax Centre will then be provided. Similar information is also provided on page 2 of the T1ADJ form.

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

Once the Notice of Assessment is received, and an adjustment request is made, it will take at least a few weeks, usually longer, before the CRA responds. The Agency’s usual estimate is that such requests which are submitted online have a turnaround time of about two weeks, while those which come in by mail take about eight weeks. However, the CRA has indicated, in a notice posted on its website, that it is experiencing “significant” delays this year in the processing of both paper-filed T1 tax returns and paper-filed T1 ADJ E requests. The notice did not indicate how long this delay might last.

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

While the standard (and accurate) advice is that tax and financial planning are best approached as activities to be carried on throughout the year, it’s also the case that a mid-year tax and financial checkup makes good sense, and that’s especially the case this year.

While the standard (and accurate) advice is that tax and financial planning are best approached as activities to be carried on throughout the year, it’s also the case that a mid-year tax and financial checkup makes good sense, and that’s especially the case this year.

For most Canadians, 2020 has been a year of financial uncertainty and, in many cases, significant financial stress. Millions of Canadians became suddenly unemployed when pandemic-related states of emergency were declared in mid-March and businesses closed. Many others lost income when schools closed and they needed to stay home to care for their children. By June 21, 2020, the federal government had processed over 18 million applications for the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB), the $500 per week benefit which was paid (and in some cases continues to be paid) to those who suffered a pandemic-related loss of income. Of those who received CERB benefits, some may be returning to work in the near future, while others may have no idea when (or whether) their former positions will become available to them again.

All of this makes for significant financial uncertainly. And while much of the near financial future for most Canadians may still be uncertain, it’s nonetheless both possible and advisable to take stock of one’s financial and tax position to date, especially in relation to the financial and tax changes resulting from the pandemic. The first step this year should be an assessment of how the financial consequences of the pandemic have affected one’s tax position for 2020.

Tax considerations for CERB recipients

Most of the millions of Canadians who received CERB benefits are likely unaware that such benefits represent taxable income for 2020 and that no income tax was deducted from benefits paid. That tax will have to be paid when the return for 2020 is filed in the spring of 2021.

The standard CERB benefit is $500 per week and such benefits may be received for a maximum of 24 weeks. Canadians who collect CERB for the maximum allowable 24-week period will therefore be paid $12,000. For those with incomes up to about $50,000 the federal tax rate levied on CERB amounts received will be 15%. Where a taxpayer’s income for this year is between $50,000 and $100,000 the applicable federal tax rate is 20.5%. Each province will also impose tax on CERB amounts, with the rate varying by province. A listing of federal, provincial, and territorial tax rates for 2020 can be found on the Canada Revenue Agency website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/frequently-asked-questions-individuals/canadian-income-tax-rates-individuals-current-previous-years.html#provincial.

While no one likes to find out that a tax amount is owed when the annual tax return is filed, that will be especially unwelcome news to those who are already dealing with income loss from unemployment. The best course of action to avoid that scenario is to start now to make provision for the taxes which will be owed on CERB amounts received.

The simplest way to do so, of course, is to begin to set aside funds which will be needed to pay the tax bill next spring. However, as with most savings goals, it’s easier to make such a commitment than to fulfill it.

Taxpayers who have returned to work and are once again receiving a paycheque have another option — they can have the amount of tax withheld from that paycheque increased to cover the tax which will be payable on CERB amounts received. Usually, the employee can simply request that his or her employer increase the amount of tax withheld from each paycheque and remitted to the federal government on the employee’s behalf.

In some cases, taxpayers won’t be able to fulfill their tax obligations from current income sources and will have to dip into savings. Generally speaking, where there is a choice, it is best to use funds that are held in non-registered savings plans, like a savings account. Where such funds aren’t available, a withdrawal from a Tax-Free Savings Account is the next best option. Amounts withdrawn from a TFSA will not be included in taxable income and, where the withdrawal is made before the end of 2020, the amount withdrawn can be replaced, where finances allow, in 2021. Taking funds out of a registered retirement savings plan should be a last resort, as any amount withdrawn will be added to income and will itself increase the tax bill for the year and, unlike a TFSA, amounts withdrawn from an RRSP cannot be replaced. Borrowing to pay taxes owed is an option, but taxpayers should be aware that interest paid on money borrowed for that purpose is not deductible.

Considerations for retirees

For those who are already retired, or those close to retirement, watching the value of their retirement savings take a sharp drop during the month of March was more than a little stressful. Recognizing the disproportionate effect that the market downturn had on such taxpayers, the federal government made some changes, for this year only, to help cushion the blow.

The changes announced affect those taxpayers over the age of 71 who have a Registered Retirement Income Fund (RRIF). The usual rules governing such RRIFs require that holders withdraw a specified percentage of the balance in the RRIF each year, with the required percentage based on the taxpayer’s age.

The difficulty which arose was that the rules require that the RRIF balance used to calculate the required withdrawal is the balance as of the beginning of the calendar year. For nearly every RRIF holder in Canada, that balance was much higher at the beginning of 2020 than it is now, so that the required withdrawal would represent a disproportionate share of RRIF. As well, where it was necessary to sell investments in order to make the withdrawal, those investments would have to be sold at a diminished, post-downturn value.

In recognition of all of these circumstances, the federal government announced that the required RRIF withdrawal would be reduced, for 2020 only, to 75% of the usual amount. For example, where a taxpayer would normally be required to withdraw $2,000 from his or her RRIF in 2020, the required withdrawal will now be $1,500.

There is no particular rule for when a taxpayer must make the required annual withdrawal from his or her RRIF. While some RRIF holders make that withdrawal at the beginning of the calendar year, others opt for monthly withdrawals throughout the year and still others wait until the last minute and make the required withdrawal at year end.

The rule change will have different impacts depending on how a particular taxpayer’s withdrawal is structured for this year. Perhaps most important, for those who made their full required 2020 withdrawal before the rule change was announced in March, it’s not possible to recontribute the “excess” 25%. Those who withdraw in equal monthly amounts throughout the year and who wish to reduce their 2020 withdrawal by the allowable 25% can take steps to adjust that monthly withdrawal to reflect the reduced amount and, of course, those who withdraw at the end of year can similarly change their planned withdrawal.

It’s important to remember two points: first, there is no requirement that RRIF holders alter their withdrawal amounts for 2020. The option to reduce the usual required withdrawal by 25% is just that — an option. Those whose cash flow requirements can accommodate a reduced withdrawal can take advantage of the available option while others who may need the funds to meet living expenses can make the full withdrawal as originally planned. Second, in all cases any withdrawals made from a RRIF are taxable income to the RRIF holder. Examples of how the change will apply can be found on the federal government website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/registered-plans-administrators/registered-retirement-savings-plans-registered-retirement-income-funds-rrsps-rrifs/economic-statement-measure-annuitants-rrsp-rrif.html.

Finally, there is another bit of good tax news for retirees this year. In July, all Canadians who currently receive Old Age Security benefits will receive an additional one-time payment of $300 to help offset additional costs they may have incurred as the result of the pandemic. Those OAS recipients who also qualify for the Guaranteed Income Supplement will receive a one-time payment of $500. While OAS amounts received are usually included in taxable income, this one-time supplement of $300 or $500 will be tax-free.

Although we’re just halfway through the calendar year, 2020 has already been a very stressful year for many Canadians from a financial perspective. Planning now to take account of changed financial and tax circumstances arising from the current situation will help ensure that those stresses don’t included an unexpected tax headache.

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.