Newsletters

Please click here to read Norm's SaveUTax 2024 Federal Budget Commentary

Please see the following

Norm's SaveUTax 2024 Federal Budget Commentary

Norms Tips and Traps for the 2024 Year

• Norm's Tips and Traps 2024 Q1

Norms Tips and Traps for the 2023 Year

Norms Tips and Traps for the 2022 Year

• Norm's Tips and Traps 2022 Q1

Norm's Tips and Traps for the 2021 Year

Some content may not be accurately translated

• Norm's Tips and Traps 2021 Q1
  • Chinese
  • Persian

Norm's Tips and Traps for the year of 2020

Some content may not be accurately translated

• Norm's Tips and Traps 2020 Q1
  • Chinese
  • Persian
• Norm's Tips and Traps 2020 Q2
  • Chinese
  • Persian
• Norm's Tips and Traps 2020 Q3
  • Chinese
  • Persian
• Norm's Tips and Traps 2020 Q4
  • Chinese
  • Persian

Two quarterly newsletters have been added – one dealing with personal issues, and one dealing with corporate issues.

Two quarterly newsletters have been added – one dealing with personal issues, and one dealing with corporate issues.

They can be accessed below.

Corporate:

Issue #69 Corporate

Personal:

Issue #69 Personal

While the current state of the Canadian health care system is far from perfect, Canadians are nonetheless fortunate to have a publicly funded health care system, in which most major medical expenses are covered by provincial health care plans. Notwithstanding, there is a large (and growing) number of medical and para-medical costs – including dental care, prescription drugs, physiotherapy, ambulance trips, and many others – which must be paid for on an out-of-pocket basis by the individual. In some cases, such costs are covered by private insurance, usually provided by an employer, but not everyone benefits from private health care coverage. Self-employed individuals, those working on contract, or those whose income comes from several part-time jobs do not usually have access to such private insurance coverage. Fortunately for those individuals, our tax system acts to help cushion the blow by providing a 15% federal non-refundable medical expense tax credit (METC) to help offset out-of-pocket medical and para-medical costs which must be incurred.

While the current state of the Canadian health care system is far from perfect, Canadians are nonetheless fortunate to have a publicly funded health care system, in which most major medical expenses are covered by provincial health care plans. Notwithstanding, there is a large (and growing) number of medical and para-medical costs – including dental care, prescription drugs, physiotherapy, ambulance trips, and many others – which must be paid for on an out-of-pocket basis by the individual. In some cases, such costs are covered by private insurance, usually provided by an employer, but not everyone benefits from private health care coverage. Self-employed individuals, those working on contract, or those whose income comes from several part-time jobs do not usually have access to such private insurance coverage. Fortunately for those individuals, our tax system acts to help cushion the blow by providing a 15% federal non-refundable medical expense tax credit (METC) to help offset out-of-pocket medical and para-medical costs which must be incurred.

The difficulty for such individuals is that while the tax credit claimable is simple in concept, it can be difficult to determine just what kinds of expenses are claimable for purposes of that credit (not all are, and others are claimable only if certain criteria are met), the extent to which expenses can be claimed (only expenses which exceed a certain amount can be claimed, and that amount changes with the income of the taxpayer), and who should claim the expenses (usually, but not always, it makes more sense for the lower-income spouse to claim medical expenses incurred by the entire family).

It's not hard to see why taxpayers can become confused and frustrated when trying to file a claim for medical expenses on the annual return. However, the process of determining the available claim really comes down to answering three questions, as follows.

1. Which of my expenses are claimable and are there additional criteria imposed?
2. Of my total medical expenses, how much can I claim?
3. Should I or my spouse should make the claim for the medical expense tax credit?

Which of my expenses are claimable, and are there additional criteria imposed?

The good news for taxpayers is that there are a great number of different kinds of medical expenses which qualify for the medical expense tax credit, and the Canada Revenue Agency provides a detailed alphabetical (and searchable) listing of those expenses on its website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/tax-return/completing-a-tax-return/deductions-credits-expenses/lines-33099-33199-eligible-medical-expenses-you-claim-on-your-tax-return.html.

While each of the medical expenses listed on the CRA website are eligible to be claimed for purposes of the medical expense tax credit, for each such expense it’s necessary to determine whether there are additional criteria which must be met in order to make that particular expense eligible for the credit.

Probably the most important criterion for most taxpayers is that, in some cases, a particular expense is only claimable if a prescription has been obtained from a medical doctor indicating a need on the part of the taxpayer to incur that expense. However, making a determination of when it’s necessary to obtain a prescription from a medical professional in order to ensure that the planned expenditure will qualify for the credit is far from intuitive. For instance, in order to claim the medical expense tax credit for the cost of a cane or a walker, it is necessary to obtain a prescription for that cane or walker. However, where costs are incurred to purchase a wheelchair, those costs are eligible for the medical expense credit, with no requirement that a prescription of any kind be obtained.

The listing of eligible medical expenses found on the CRA website does indicate the kinds of expenses for which a prescription is required; where the amount of a planned expenditure for a medical expense is significant, it’s well worth consulting the CRA website to ensure that the purchase is done in a way that will make it possible to claim the METC for the cost incurred.

Other types of medical expense costs can be claimed for purposes of the credit only where the person incurring that expenditure qualifies for the federal disability tax credit. Once again, the listing found on the CRA website indicates the types of expenditures to which this requirement applies.

Of my total medical expenses, how much can I claim?

Here again, the basic rule which determines how much a taxpayer can claim in a particular taxation year can be stated simply, but is more complex to apply. The basic rule is that for a taxation year a taxpayer can claim eligible medical expenses which exceed 3% of the taxpayer’s net income, or $2,759, whichever is less.

Put in more practical terms, the rule for 2024 is that any taxpayer whose net income for the year is $91,967 or less will be entitled to claim medical expenses that are greater than 3% of his or her net income for the year. Those having income of more than $91,967 will be limited to claiming qualifying expenses which exceed the $2,759 threshold.

Take, for example, a taxpayer who has $60,000 in net income for 2024 and incurs $3,400 in eligible medical expenses during the year. The computation of the available METC claim for 2024 is as follows. Based on the 3% of net income rule, the taxpayer will be entitled to claim medical expenses incurred which are more than $1,800 (3% of net income for the year). That taxpayer will therefore be able to claim $1,600 ($3,400 minus $1,800) in medical expenses for purposes of the METC.

The other aspect of determining the total expenses which can be claimed for purposes of the medical expense tax credit is that it’s possible to claim medical expenses which were incurred prior to the current tax year but weren’t claimed on the return for the year that the expenditure was made. The actual rule is that the taxpayer can claim qualifying medical expenses incurred during any 12-month period which ends in the current tax year, meaning that each taxpayer must determine which 12-month period ending in 2024 will produce the greatest amount eligible for the credit. That determination will obviously depend on when medical expenses were incurred so there is, unfortunately, no universal rule of thumb which can be used.

Which spouse should make the claim for the medical expense tax credit?

Medical expenses incurred by family members – the taxpayer, their spouse, and children who are under the age of 18 at the end of 2024, as well as certain other dependent relatives – can be added together and claimed by either spouse. In most cases, it’s best to make that claim on the tax return of the lower-income spouse, in order to maximize the amount of claimable expenses (remembering that only expenses greater than 3% of net income can be claimed).

That said, it’s also necessary to ensure that the spouse making the claim has tax payable for the year. The reason for this is that the METC is a non-refundable credit, meaning that it can be used to reduce tax otherwise payable, but cannot create or increase a refund. So, in order to maximize the use of the METC in a year, it should be claimed by the spouse whose tax payable for the year is at least as much as the amount of the METC to be claimed.

As the end of the calendar year approaches, it’s a good idea to add up the medical expenses which have been incurred during 2024, as well as those paid during 2023 and not claimed on the 2023 return. Once those totals are known, it will be easier to determine whether to make a claim for 2024 or to wait and claim 2024 expenses on the return for 2025. And if the decision is to make a claim for 2024, knowing what medical expenses were paid, and when, will enable the taxpayer to determine the optimal 12-month period for that claim.

Finally, it’s a good idea to look into the timing of medical expenses which will have to be paid early in 2025. Where those are significant expenses (for instance, a particularly costly medication which must be taken on an ongoing basis, or some expensive dental work) it may make sense, where possible, to accelerate the payment of those expenses to November or December 2024, where that means they can be included in 2024 totals and claimed on the return for this year.

The federal government provides a number of non-refundable tax credits and benefits to Canadians under the umbrella term “child and family benefits”, but likely the most widely available and most generous of those programs is the Canada Child Benefit (CCB).

The federal government provides a number of non-refundable tax credits and benefits to Canadians under the umbrella term “child and family benefits”, but likely the most widely available and most generous of those programs is the Canada Child Benefit (CCB).

The CCB is paid as a non-taxable monthly benefit to Canadian residents who have and live with one or more children under the age of 18 for whom they are primarily responsible. The CCB program, which was first introduced in 1993, replaced the former Family Allowance program, and has since gone through a number of iterations and name changes. What follows is a summary of what is available to Canadian families under the CCB program in 2024.

The CCB program has two types of benefits – the basic Canada Child Benefit (CCB) and a Child Disability Benefit (CDB). The first, the basic CCB, is provided to eligible residents of Canada who have one or more children who are under the age of 18 and who live with that child or children. The child disability benefit (CDB) is an additional monthly benefit intended to provide financial assistance to families who are caring for children who have a severe and prolonged impairment in physical or mental functions. Generally, where a child is eligible for the federal disability tax credit, parents who live with that child will be eligible to receive the CDB.

The current benefit year for both the CCB and the CDB runs from July 2024 to June 2025. During this benefit year, maximum benefits payable under the basic CCB are as follows:

• $7,787 per year ($648.91 per month) for each eligible child under the age of 6; and
• $6,570 per year ($547.50 per month) for each eligible child aged 6to 17.

Benefit eligibility under the CCB program is affected by family net income earned during the previous tax year. In other words, the amount of benefit which can be received during the 2024-25 benefit year is determined, in part, by the amount of family net income for 2023. For the 2024-25 benefit year, families having 2023 net income of $36,502 or less will receive the maximum CCB. Where that 2023 net income is greater than $36,502, the amount of benefit receivable is reduced by specified percentages and amounts, which are based on family net income and the number of children in the family. The actual benefit reduction percentages and amounts are as follows.

• For families with one eligible child, benefits are reduced by 7% of family net income between $36,502 and $79,087. Where family net income is more than $79,087, the benefit reduction is $2,981 plus 3.2% of family net income over $79,087.
• For families with twoeligible children, benefits are reduced by 13.5% of family net income between $36,502 and $79,087. Where family net income is more than $79,087, the benefit reduction is $5,749 plus 5.7% of family net income over $79,087.
• For families with three eligible children, benefits are reduced by 19.0% of family net income between $36,502 and $79,087. Where family net income is more than $79,087, the benefit reduction is $8,091 plus 8.0% of family net income over $79,087.

The Canada Disability Benefit provides eligible families with both an additional benefit amount and higher income thresholds which determine eligibility for that additional benefit amount. For the 2024-25 benefit year, the CDB provides up to $3,322 per year ($276.83 per month) for each child eligible for the disability tax credit (DTC). The CDB starts being reduced when family net income is more than $79,087, with the reduction calculated as follows: for families with one child eligible for the DTC, the reduction is 3.2% of the amount of 2023 family net income over $79,087, and for families with two or more children eligible for the DTC, the reduction is 5.7% of the amount of 2023 family net income over $79,087.

The number of variables – age of children, number of children and family net income – can make it difficult to easily calculate the amount of CCB or CDB for which a family is eligible during the current benefit year. To assist in that calculation, the federal government provides an online calculator which will determine that amount, based on information provided by the taxpayer. That online calculator can be found on the federal government website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/child-family-benefits/child-family-benefits-calculator.html.

There are two significant ways in which the CCB program differs from other federal tax credit and benefit programs. The first is that the CCB and CDB are paid once per month, throughout the benefit year (most other such credits are paid on a quarterly basis). CCB and CDB are paid around the 20^th of each month – a listing of actual payment dates during 2024 can be found on the federal government website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/child-family-benefits/canada-child-benefit-overview/canada-child-benefit-payment-dates.html.

The second difference between the CCB and other programs is more significant – unlike some other programs, CCB amounts are not paid automatically to eligible recipients. In order to receive the CCB and the CDB, it is necessary both to apply for the benefit(s) and to file an annual tax return in order to ensure that benefit payments continue. Information on how to apply is available at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/child-family-benefits/canada-child-benefit-overview/canada-child-benefit-apply.html.

The costs of raising children are many and varied, and the financial resources required have never been small. Over the past few years, increases in both interest rates and, especially, the rate of inflation have added to nearly every one of those costs to a significant degree. Receipt of a CCB payment each month can make a substantial contribution toward meeting those costs: a Canadian family which has two children, aged 5 and 7, and whose family net income for 2023 was $50,000 can receive just over $1,000 each month in tax-free benefits during the 2024-25 benefit year.

Finally, many (although not all) Canadian provinces and territories provide a benefit to families with children living in that province or territory, which is additional to any available federal CCB which a family can claim. Detailed information on both the federal and provincial/territorial child and family benefit programs can be found on the federal government website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/child-family-benefits/canada-child-benefit-overview.html.

Canada’s tax system is a self-assessing one, meaning that the onus rests on individual taxpayers to file their annual return each spring and to pay any amounts owed. The compliance rate in Canada is high – most Canadian taxpayers comply with those tax obligations, filing returns and making any required payments on a consistent basis. Where such tax obligations aren’t met, however, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) has the authority to impose both penalties and interest charges.

Canada’s tax system is a self-assessing one, meaning that the onus rests on individual taxpayers to file their annual return each spring and to pay any amounts owed. The compliance rate in Canada is high – most Canadian taxpayers comply with those tax obligations, filing returns and making any required payments on a consistent basis. Where such tax obligations aren’t met, however, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) has the authority to impose both penalties and interest charges.

The types and amounts of penalties which can be assessed vary widely, depending on the nature of the non-compliance and, frequently, whether the taxpayer is a “repeat offender”. However, interest charges levied are always the same where taxes aren’t paid in full and on time, and those interest charges can be very substantial.

By law, the CRA charges interest at a rate which is four percentage points higher than commercial interest rates. For the third quarter of 2024, the CRA charges interest on outstanding tax amounts owed at a rate of 9.0%. More significantly, all such interest charges are compounded daily, meaning that each day the taxpayer is charged interest on both the tax amount owed and on the previous day’s interest charges. In such circumstances, interest charges can accumulate very quickly.

Where a failure to meet one’s tax obligations is simply the result of carelessness or negligence on the part of the taxpayer, it’s really not possible to avoid such charges. Sometimes, however, taxpayers fail to meet their tax obligations for reasons that are entirely outside their control. When that happens, the CRA may be willing to extend relief by forgiving interest and penalty charges, in whole or in part, through the Agency’s Taxpayer Relief Provisions.

It's important to note, at the outset, that while the CRA has issued guidelines on the circumstances in which interest and penalty relief may be provided, the decision to provide such relief is entirely discretionary on the Agency’s part – there is no right to interest and penalty relief. Second, while interest and penalty relief may be available to the taxpayer, no relief is provided with respect to actual tax amounts owed. No matter the circumstances, tax amounts owed must always be paid.

The guidelines issued by the CRA on when interest and penalty relief may be available fall into two general categories. The first addresses taxpayers who are unable to meet their tax obligations as the result of extraordinary circumstances. The first such circumstance is natural or man-made disasters which are, of course, becoming more and more common as each year increasing numbers of Canadians are forced to evacuate due to wildfires and floods. At such times, meeting one’s tax obligations is understandably a very low priority and, in the worst case scenario, the natural disaster which forced the evacuation may also result in the destruction of the taxpayer’s financial and tax records and supporting documentation, making it difficult or impossible to file returns or determine or pay amounts owed.

The other extraordinary circumstances in which the CRA is prepared to provide relief from penalty and interest charges are those which are specific to the taxpayer involved. As outlined on the CRA website, such circumstances generally involve either serious illness or accident, or serious emotional or mental distress, such as would result from a death in the taxpayer’s family.

Finally, the CRA is prepared to consider providing interest relief where the taxpayer is experiencing significant financial hardship. The CRA’s guidelines, as outlined on the Agency’s website, indicate that it would consider providing relief where paying interest amounts owed would make it difficult to provide basic necessities, such as food, medical help, transportation, or shelter, or where interest charges make up the majority of the amount owed and the taxpayer is unable to make a reasonable payment arrangement with the CRA.

In order to receive relief in situations of financial hardship, a taxpayer must be able to provide the CRA with detailed information on their current financial situation. That financial situation is outlined on a prescribed CRA form, which is available at Form RC376, Taxpayer Relief Request – Statement of Income and Expenses and Assets and Liabilities for Individuals. In addition to the information submitted on that form, the taxpayer must also provide supporting documentation, such as current mortgage statement(s), property assessment(s), rental agreement(s), loans and recurring bills, bank and credit card statements for the most recent three months, and current investment statements

Regardless of the reasons or circumstances which have led the taxpayer to submit an application for relief, the process of filing that application is the same. Taxpayers who have registered for the CRA online service My Account can file their application using that service. Those who are not registered for My Account, or would prefer filing a paper application, can find the required form on the CRA website at Form RC4288, Request for Taxpayer Relief – Cancel or Waive Penalties and Interest. The address to which the completed form should be sent can be found on the last page of Form RC4288.

Whatever the method by which an application for relief is filed, the CRA will review the information submitted and make a determination of whether to cancel interest and/or penalty amounts owed, in whole or in part, in order to allow the taxpayer to pay off their tax debt. The factors considered by the Agency in determining whether to grant relief will, of course, depend in part on the circumstances giving rise to the application. In general, however, the Agency will consider the taxpayer’s tax return filing and payment history, whether the taxpayer knowingly let a balance owing exist (resulting in additional interest charges), whether reasonable care was taken in the management of the taxpayer’s tax affairs, and, finally, whether the taxpayer acted quickly to correct any delay or omission.

The CRA’s goal is to make a decision on straightforward applications made under its Taxpayer Relief Provisions within six months (180 days) after the application is received. However, not surprisingly, the Agency is currently receiving a higher-than-usual number of applications, meaning that the timeline for making decisions on those applications is now closer to eight months (or longer, for complex applications).

Where the taxpayer’s request is denied, they can make on online request to have the decision reviewed. If that decision is also negative, the only recourse is to ask a judge to review the CRA’s decision. In the great majority of cases, however, the cost of taking that step is likely to be greater than the amount of interest and penalties at issue.

In all cases, the best course of action for the taxpayer is to be proactive – to contact the CRA as soon as the taxpayer is aware that filing of a required return, or full payment of taxes owed, will not be possible. Taking the initiative and moving quickly to resolve the problem will both minimize the amount of interest which will accrue on unpaid taxes and will count in the taxpayer’s favour when the CRA considers whether to allow an application for waiver of those interest and penalty charges.

Detailed information on the Taxpayer Relief Provisions is available on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/complaints-disputes/taxpayer-relief-provisions.html.

The past five years have been a tough financial slog for most Canadian families, as they struggled to cope with the pandemic, followed by inflation which tripled from under 2% in mid-2020 to over 6% by the end of 2022, and, finally, interest rate increases which saw the Bank Rate go from less than 1% in April of 2020 to over 5% in April of 2024.

The past five years have been a tough financial slog for most Canadian families, as they struggled to cope with the pandemic, followed by inflation which tripled from under 2% in mid-2020 to over 6% by the end of 2022, and, finally, interest rate increases which saw the Bank Rate go from less than 1% in April of 2020 to over 5% in April of 2024.

While the relentless upward climb in both the rate of inflation and interest rates are finally showing signs of slowing, it’s nonetheless a fact that the cost of two truly non-discretionary components of a family budget – food and shelter – are still much more expensive than they were five years ago, and nearly all Canadian families are feeling the pinch.

While there’s plenty of financial pain to go around, one group of Canadians that is especially likely to be dealing with bad financial news in the near future is those who are renewing a mortgage. Home buyers who purchased a home five years ago and took out a five-year mortgage (as the majority do) likely got that mortgage at an interest rate of around 4% – or even less. Those seeking to renew that mortgage this year are likely facing renewal at a rate of at least 6%. That’s about a 50% increase in the mortgage interest rate, which can be enough to make the difference between a mortgage payment that is affordable, and one that is not.

To see why that’s the case, it helps to understand how mortgage payments are calculated. All mortgage payments are determined by three figures. The first is the size of the mortgage – the “principal amount”, which is the cost of the property purchased minus any downpayment made. The second is the interest rate which is charged on that principal amount. And the third is the length of time over which the principal amount of the mortgage is to be repaid – known as the “amortization period”.

Under Canadian law, anyone purchasing a home must make a down payment, and the amount of that downpayment depends on the purchase price of the property, as follows:

Where any home purchaser makes a down payment of less than 20% of the purchase price of the property, they must obtain mortgage default insurance through the Canada Housing and Mortgage Corporation (CHMC) and must, as well, repay that mortgage within 25 years. In other words, the maximum amortization period on a mortgage principal amount which represents more than 80% of the purchase of the property is 25 years. (Finance Canada recently announced that a 30-year amortization period would be allowed on some insured mortgages; however, that measure applies only as of August 1, 2024 and only to a relatively small group – first-time home buyers purchasing a newly-built property.)

Where the home purchaser makes a down payment of more than 20% (which would likely be the case for those who are already homeowners and are purchasing as part of a move up the “property ladder”), the length of the amortization period – the time frame in which the mortgage must be repaid – is not subject to that 25-year restriction. Rather, the length of that amortization period is something which is determined by agreement between the borrower and the financial institution which provides the mortgage financing.

The impact on monthly mortgage payments of a 2% change in a mortgage interest rate can be seen in the following example.

Assume that in 2019 a property owner sold their first home and, using the proceeds of that sale, is able to put down a $200,000 deposit on a home costing $650,000. The remainder of $450,000 of the purchase price is financed through a five-year mortgage at 4.0%, amortized over 25 years. The monthly mortgage payments are $2,367.

In 2024 that mortgage comes up for renewal, but the interest rate is now 6.0%, and the amortization period is now down to 20 years. Payments made over the previous five years have reduced the mortgage principal amount from $450,000 to $392,000, but the increased interest rate means that monthly payments will now be $2,800 – an increase of almost $450 per month, or $5,400 per year.

It's important to remember, as well, that mortgage payments are made out of after-tax income. In other words, in order to come up with the $5,400 per year needed to meet the increased mortgage payment obligations, a homeowner will either have to reallocate that $5,400 from the payment of other household expenditures, or will have to generate additional pre-tax income of almost $8,000 annually, which is $5,600 in after-tax income, assuming a marginal tax rate of 30%. Neither is a realistic scenario for most Canadian households right now.

Homeowners facing a mortgage renewal which will result in monthly mortgage payment obligations which cannot be met out of current household resources are between the proverbial rock and a hard place. Realistically, the only component of a mortgage over which a homeowner who is renewing that mortgage has any element of choice is the amortization period. The principal amount of the mortgage is the amount which was originally borrowed, less any principal repayments made, and can only be reduced by making additional payments. The interest rates in effect at the time of renewal are set by the lender and, while subject to negotiation, are not likely to be significantly less than the lender’s posted rates. Where a homeowner is facing an increase in monthly mortgage payments which simply aren’t manageable, the options are limited. The first is a sale of the home and the purchase of a smaller, less expensive property, but that’s rarely a situation which any homeowner wants to be forced into. The second option (with the agreement of the lender) is to extend the amortization period of the mortgage, in order to reduce monthly mortgage payments.

Extending the amortization period of a mortgage can have a dramatic effect on the amount of monthly mortgage payments, but it’s a choice that also comes with a cost, in the form of increased total interest payments over the life of the mortgage.

Continuing with the above example, assume that the homeowner who is renewing the mortgage at 6.0% for a five-year term chooses to extend the amortization period on that mortgage from the current 20 years to 30 years. (Although there is no legal limit on an amortization period for an uninsured mortgage, most major Canadian lending institutions do not provide amortizations of more than 30 years.)

The change in the amortization period from 20 years to 30 years will result in a monthly mortgage payment of $2,332 on a principal amount of $392,000 at 6% interest, meaning that the new mortgage payment amount will be slightly less than it was over the previous five years since the home was purchased, making it a manageable amount for the homeowner.

The cost of making this choice lies in the amount of interest which is paid on the mortgage over that amortization period, and that cost can be very substantial. If the homeowner had renewed their mortgage based on a 20-year amortization and a monthly mortgage payment of $2,800, the amount of interest which would be paid over that 20-year period would be $278,000. If the amortization period is changed to 30 years, reducing the monthly mortgage payment to $2,332, the amount of interest that would be paid over that 30-year period will be $447,000. Choosing to extend an amortization is a very consequential financial decision.

As is almost always the case in financial planning, there isn’t a “right” answer – the right course of action depends almost entirely on the individual circumstances involved. For homeowners who are faced with a choice between extending an amortization period or being forced into either defaulting on the mortgage or selling the house, the decision to extend an amortization period may well be justified in the circumstances. However, where the choice made is to extend an amortization period, it’s important to treat that decision as a short-term measure taken solely to gain some temporary financial relief. A homeowner who extends the amortization period on a mortgage for the upcoming mortgage term can (and should, if at all possible) plan to reduce that mortgage amortization period at the next mortgage renewal date. As well, if and when household finances improve over the next five years, any available funds should be used to make additional payments on the mortgage or, where such additional payments aren’t allowed, to set such funds aside to make a lump-sum payment at the time of the next renewal. Both measures will work to reduce the amount of interest which must be paid over the life of the mortgage.

Being unable to afford one’s mortgage payments and facing the prospect of going into default on the mortgage is a situation that most homeowners would do almost anything to avoid. Those are undeniably stressful circumstances, but in most cases solutions are possible. The federal government, through the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada, provides an extremely useful webpage (at https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/mortgages.html) which contains a wealth of information on mortgages and mortgage financing. That webpage includes a Mortgage Calculator (found at https://itools-ioutils.fcac-acfc.gc.ca/MC-CH/MC-CH-eng.aspx) which can be used to calculate the effect that different interest rates and amortization periods will have on both the amount of monthly mortgage payments and total interest costs which will be paid over the life of the mortgage. Taking the time to do so will enable a homeowner facing a mortgage renewal to make the most informed choice in their particular circumstances.

Members of the baby boom generation who were born between 1946 and 1965 are now between 59 and 78 years of age, and make up about a quarter of the Canadian population. Many, if not most, are now retired, and the older members of that generation are likely experiencing the changes to physical health, strength, and agility that come with age. The process of aging is an extremely variable one – some individuals are healthier and more active at age 80 than others are at 60, but the physical changes that accompany aging come, inevitably, to everyone. And when those changes take place, it’s necessary to make some hard decisions about a number of things.

Members of the baby boom generation who were born between 1946 and 1965 are now between 59 and 78 years of age, and make up about a quarter of the Canadian population. Many, if not most, are now retired, and the older members of that generation are likely experiencing the changes to physical health, strength, and agility that come with age. The process of aging is an extremely variable one – some individuals are healthier and more active at age 80 than others are at 60, but the physical changes that accompany aging come, inevitably, to everyone. And when those changes take place, it’s necessary to make some hard decisions about a number of things.

One of the most consequential decisions to be made when age-related physical changes become a factor in decision-making is whether one’s current living arrangements are still suitable. The overwhelming choice of older Canadians is to “age in place” – that is, to remain in the homes they already occupy, living independently in a familiar community and close to family and friends. While that’s the ideal, existing living arrangements can, in some cases, no longer meet the needs of the individual, or can even be unsafe.

Almost always, changes can be made to an existing home to make it both more convenient and safer to live in for an older resident. Those changes can range from something as small as the installation of a grab bar in a shower or bath to something as extensive as renovations which will allow for one-floor living. All such changes, however, come with a price tag. Fortunately, the federal government (and some provincial governments) offer programs to help mitigate that cost.

The federal program – the Home Accessibility Tax Credit (HATC) – allows individuals who own and live in their own homes to claim a non-refundable tax credit equal to 15% of the cost of making permanent changes to their home which will make it more accessible or safer for them to live in.

The HATC is in many ways an unusually flexible and generous tax credit. First, the criteria which determine whether a particular expenditure does or does not qualify for the credit are extremely broad, covering both safety and convenience. Specifically, changes made which meet either of the following criteria can qualify for the HATC. Changes made must:

• allow the individual to gain access to, or be mobile or functional within, the dwelling; or
• reduce the risk of harm to the individual within the dwelling or in gaining access to the dwelling.

Second, there is no requirement for any kind of assessment or certification by a medical professional that a particular kind of change to the home is needed, or is justified by the homeowner’s state of physical ability or disability – such determination is made solely by the owner/resident of the home. Where a homeowner decides that the installation of a railing along a hallway in their home, or a change to a non-slip floor in the bathroom, are necessary for their mobility or safety within the home, then the cost of making those changes can qualify for the credit.

Third, expenses incurred for purposes of the HATC can also be claimed as medical expenses for purposes of the medical expense tax credit. In other words, two different tax credits can be claimed for the same expenditure.

Finally, the credit can be claimed by all “qualifying individuals” meaning anyone who is age 65 or older by the end of the year in which the expenditure is made, or who is eligible for the disability tax credit. There are no income thresholds imposed – the full credit is claimable by any qualifying individual who incurs an eligible expenditure, regardless of their income.

While the eligibility criteria for expenditures under the HATC are very broad, the credit is intended to assist with the cost of changes which become a permanent part of the dwelling, and not those that represent regular maintenance costs or charges for household services. The following types of expenses are specifically not eligible for the HATC:

• amounts paid to acquire a property that can be used independently of the qualifying renovation;
• the cost of annual, recurring, or routine repairs or maintenance;
• amounts paid to buy household appliances;
• amounts paid to buy electronic home-entertainment devices;
• the cost of housekeeping, security monitoring, gardening, outdoor maintenance, or similar services;
• financing costs for the qualifying renovation; or
• the cost of renovation incurred mainly to increase or maintain the value of the dwelling.

In order to qualify for the credit, eligible expenditures must be made to a “housing unit” which is owned and occupied by the person making the claim. That housing unit could be a detached or semi-detached or row house, or a condominium or co-op unit.

Where a qualifying individual (that is, someone who is age 65 or older, or who is eligible for the disability tax credit) lives with and is dependent on another family member (generally, a parent, grandparent, child, grandchild, sibling, aunt, uncle, nephew, or niece) who owns the home in which they both live, that family member can also make a claim for the HATC for changes made to the home to assist their older or disabled relative. For this purpose, such family members are characterized as “eligible individuals”.

Finally, there is a limit on the amount of expenditures which can be claimed for purposes of the HATC, and that limit is $20,000 per year for a particular dwelling. The tax credit claimable is 15% of the eligible expenditure, such that the maximum tax credit which can be claimed is $3,000 per year. The HATC is a non-refundable tax credit, meaning that it can reduce or eliminate federal tax payable, but cannot create or increase a refund. Where the amount of the credit exceeds the tax payable by the qualifying individual and so cannot be fully utilized, the claim can be split between that qualifying individual and any family member who qualifies as an “eligible individual”, as outlined above.

The federal HATC can be claimed by qualifying individuals and eligible individuals who are resident in any province or territory in Canada. Several of those provinces and territories provide similar programs to help offset the cost of incurring such home accessibility changes, but there is unfortunately no uniformity among those programs. Both eligibility criteria (age, income, etc.) and the type of assistance provided (loan, forgiveable loan, refundable or non-refundable tax credits) are different in each province or territory which offers such assistance. However, information on those programs is available on the particular provincial government website, and can usually be found by searching "seniors' home renovations” on those websites.

Detailed information on the federal HATC is available on the federal government website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/tax-return/completing-a-tax-return/deductions-credits-expenses/line-31285-home-accessibility-expenses.html.

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

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

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

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

In some situations, an employee or former employee seeks legal help in order to collect or to establish a right to collect a retiring allowance or pension benefits. In such situations, the legal fees incurred can be deducted, up to the total amount of the retiring allowance or pension income actually received for that year (but not including any amounts received which were transferred to the individual’s registered pension plan or registered retirement savings plan). Where the amount of legal fees incurred is greater than the total retiring allowance or pension amount received in the year, the excess can be carried forward and claimed in any of the subsequent seven tax years.

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

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

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

• to collect overdue support payments owing;
• to establish the amount of support payments from a current or former spouse or common-law partner;
• to establish the amount of support payments from the legal parent of one’s child (who is not a current or former spouse or common-law partner), but only where that support is payable under the terms of a court order; or
• to try to get an increase in support payments.

As well, the recipient of support payments can deduct legal fees incurred to try to make child support payments non-taxable.

On the payment side of the support payment/receipt equation, the situation is not nearly so favourable, as a deduction for legal fees incurred will not generally not be allowed to a person paying support. More specifically, as outlined on the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) website, a payer of support cannot claim legal fees incurred to establish, negotiate, or contest the amount of support payments.

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

Detailed information on the rules which govern the deduction of legal fees incurred is available on the Canada Revenue Agency website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/tax-return/completing-a-tax-return/deductions-credits-expenses/line-23200-other-deductions.html#toc2. The specific rules which govern the deductibility of legal fees relating to support obligations are outlined in the CRA publication P102 Support Payments, which can be found on the Agency’s website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/publications/p102.html.

By the middle of August, most students who are beginning post-secondary education this fall have hopefully received an offer of admission from their college or university of choice and are in the final stages of planning the move away from the family home for the first time. While deciding where to live and choosing courses for the upcoming fall semester is undoubtedly exciting, the hard reality is that all such choices come with a price tag – sometimes a very steep one. Regardless of geographic location, housing arrangements, or program choices, post-secondary learning is expensive. There will be tuition bills, of course, but also the need to find housing and pay rent in what is, in most college or university locations, a very tight and very expensive rental market. Those who choose to live in a university residence and are able to secure a place will also face bills for accommodation and, usually, a meal plan.

By the middle of August, most students who are beginning post-secondary education this fall have hopefully received an offer of admission from their college or university of choice and are in the final stages of planning the move away from the family home for the first time. While deciding where to live and choosing courses for the upcoming fall semester is undoubtedly exciting, the hard reality is that all such choices come with a price tag – sometimes a very steep one. Regardless of geographic location, housing arrangements, or program choices, post-secondary learning is expensive. There will be tuition bills, of course, but also the need to find housing and pay rent in what is, in most college or university locations, a very tight and very expensive rental market. Those who choose to live in a university residence and are able to secure a place will also face bills for accommodation and, usually, a meal plan.

Fortunately for students (and the parents who are likely footing much of the bill), there are tax credits and benefits which can be claimed to offset such costs: the credits and benefits which can be claimed by post-secondary students (or their spouses, parents, or grandparents) in relation to the upcoming 2024-25 academic year are summarized below.

Tuition fees

A federal 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 claim a non-refundable federal tax credit equal to 15% of such tuition costs. Many of the provinces and territories (excepting Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan) 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 a myriad of costs which may differ, depending on the particular program or institution, 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 the tuition tax credit:

• Admission fees;
• Charges for use of library or laboratory facilities;
• Exemption fees;
• Examination fees (including re-reading charges);
• 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, however, do not 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;
• 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); 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 credit is a non-refundable one, meaning that it can reduce or eliminate tax otherwise payable, but cannot create or increase a tax refund. Where, as is often the case, a student doesn’t have tax payable for the year because their income isn’t high enough, 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.

Rent, food, and other personal and living expenses

Unfortunately, although housing and food costs will take up a very big chunk of each student’s budget, there is not (and never has been) a tax deduction or credit which is claimable for such costs. In all cases, 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 15% federal tax credit can be claimed for the amount of interest being paid on such debt, in some circumstances. And, while other types of credits related to post-secondary education (like the tuition tax credit) can be transferred to and claimed by other family members, the student loan interest tax credit can be claimed only by the student – no transfer of the credit is allowed.

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 interest paid on a qualifying student loan is eligible for the credit, only some types of student borrowing will qualify for that credit. 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 for students (especially 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, financial institutions sometimes offer, once a student has graduated and begun to repay a government-sponsored student loan, 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 which is used to finance education costs) will never be eligible for the student loan interest tax credit.

As explained in the Canada Revenue Agency 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 government 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.

Finally, the federal government announced, in 2023, that interest would no longer be charged on Canada Student Loans, effective as of April 1, 2023 (although graduates are still responsible for any interest which was levied and accumulated prior to that date). Provincial and territorial student loan programs are not affected by the federal announcement and such loans may still be subject to interest charges, depending on the province. Where interest is levied on a loan provided under a government (federal or provincial) student loan program, that interest will be eligible for the student loan interest tax credit, as outlined above.

Other credits and deductions

While the available student-specific deductions and credits are more limited than they were in previous taxation years, there are nonetheless a number of credits and deductions which, while not specifically education-related, are frequently claimed by post-secondary student (for instance, deductions for moving costs). The Canada Revenue Agency 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 (which was last updated in May 2024), 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.

During the 2024 calendar year, hundreds of thousands of Canadians will reach their 71^st birthday, and a significant percentage of that group are likely to have saved money for retirement through a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP). Every one of those individuals, whether they are retired, partly retired, or still in the work force, and regardless of the amount of savings accumulated in their RRSPs, will be required, by the end of the calendar year, to make a decision on how to structure and invest their retirement income for the remainder of their lives.

During the 2024 calendar year, hundreds of thousands of Canadians will reach their 71^st birthday, and a significant percentage of that group are likely to have saved money for retirement through a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP). Every one of those individuals, whether they are retired, partly retired, or still in the work force, and regardless of the amount of savings accumulated in their RRSPs, will be required, by the end of the calendar year, to make a decision on how to structure and invest their retirement income for the remainder of their lives.

The need to make that decision arises from the rule that all taxpayers who hold funds within an RRSP are required to collapse that RRSP by the end of the calendar year in which they turn 71 years of age – no exceptions and no extensions. It’s a very significant decision, as the course of action chosen will affect the individual’s income for the remainder of their life and, in some cases, actions taken cannot be undone.

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 exact. They are as follows:

1. Collapse the RRSP and include all of the proceeds in income for that year;
2. Collapse the RRSP and transfer all proceeds to a registered retirement income fund (RRIF); and/or
3. 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 using that amount to purchase an annuity means that every dollar in the RRSP will be treated as taxable income for that year. In some cases, where a substantial six figure amount has been saved in the RRSP, that can mean losing nearly half of the RRSP proceeds to income tax.  And, while any balance of proceeds left can then be invested, tax will be payable on all investment income subsequently earned.

As a practical matter, then, the choices come down to two: an 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 such living costs.

The annuity route has the great advantages of simplicity and reliability. In exchange for a lump-sum amount paid by the taxpayer, the issuer of the annuity agrees to pay the taxpayer a specific sum of money, usually once a month, for the remainder of their life. Annuities can also provide a guarantee period, in which the annuity payments continue for a specified time period (five years, 10 years), even if the taxpayer dies during that time. Finally, annuities can be set up as joint annuities, in which annuity payments will continue until the death of the last annuitant – such joint annuities are most often purchased by spouses. Regardless of how the annuity is structured, the amount of monthly income which can be received is determined by the amount used to purchase the annuity, and also by the gender and, especially, the age of the annuity purchaser(s).

The other factor influencing the amount of income which can be received from an annuity is the interest rates which prevail at the time the annuity is purchased. Between 2009 and 2022, interest rates were so low that an annuity purchase had very little to recommend it. Beginning in early 2022, however, the Bank of Canada increased its benchmark rate several times, and annuity payment rates increased as a result. Currently (as of July 2, 2024) annuity rates for each $100,000 paid to the annuity issuer by a taxpayer who is 70 years of age range from $630 to $662 per month for a male taxpayer and from $574 to $613 for a female taxpayer (the actual rate is set by the company which issues the annuity, and will differ slightly from company to company). Those rates do not include any guarantee period.

For taxpayers whose primary objective is to obtain a guaranteed life-long income stream without the responsibility of making any investment decisions or the need to take any investment risk, an annuity can be an attractive option. There are, however, some potential downsides to be considered. First, an annuity can never be reversed. Once the taxpayer has signed the annuity contract and transferred the funds, they are locked into that annuity arrangement for the remainder of their 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 or is structured as a joint annuity, there is no way of knowing how many payments the taxpayer will receive. If they die within a short period of time after the annuity is put in place, there is usually 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. An RRIF operates in much the same way as an RRSP, with two major differences. First, it’s not possible to contribute funds to an RRIF. Second, the taxpayer is required to withdraw an amount from their 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 (and pay tax on that withdrawal), they cannot withdraw less than the minimum required withdrawal for their age group.

Where a taxpayer holds savings in an RRIF, they can invest those funds in the same investment vehicles that were used while the funds were held in an RRSP. And, as with an RRSP, investment income earned by funds held inside an RRIF are not taxed as they are earned. While the ability to continue holding investments that can grow on a tax-sheltered basis provides the taxpayer with a lot of flexibility, that flexibility has a price in the form of investment risk. As is the case with all investments, investments held within an 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 that result is never guaranteed.

On the death of an RRIF annuitant, any funds remaining in the RRIF can pass to the RRSP or RRIF of the annuitant’s spouse on a tax-free basis. Where there is no spouse, the balance of funds in the RRIF will be treated, for tax purposes, as income to the RRIF annuitant in the year of death, and must be reported as income on the tax return for the year of death.

While the above discussion of RRIFs versus annuities focuses on the benefits and downsides of each, it’s 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 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, whether in retirement or not, 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 for growth and to provide the income for non-discretionary spending.

Such a secure income stream to cover non-discretionary expenses can, of course, be created by purchasing an annuity. As well, although most taxpayers don’t think of them in that way, the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and Old Age Security (OAS) 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 July 2024, the maximum OAS benefit for most Canadians (specifically, those who have lived in Canada for 40 years after the age of 18) is about $718 ($790 for those aged 75 and older) per month. The amount of CPP benefits receivable by the taxpayer will vary, depending on their work history, but the maximum current benefit which can be received at age 65 is about $1,365. As a result, a single taxpayer who receives the maximum CPP and OAS benefits at age 65 will have $25,000 in annual income ($2,083 per month). And, for a married couple, of course, the total annual income received from CPP and OAS can be about $50,000 annually, or $4,166 per month. While $25,000 a year isn’t usually 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 needed annuity purchase can then be set to cover off any shortfall.

While the options available to a taxpayer at age 71 with respect to the structuring of future retirement income are relatively straightforward, the number of factors to be considered in assessing those factors and making that decision are not. All of that makes for a situation in which consulting with an independent financial advisor on the right mix of choices and investments isn’t just a good idea, it’s a necessary one.

Most Canadians contemplate retirement with a mixture of anticipation and trepidation. While the benefits of an end to the day-to-day grind of work and commuting (while also having more free time to spend with family and friends) are undeniable, giving up a regular paycheque also means experiencing a degree of financial anxiety. For the majority of Canadians who are not members of a defined benefit pension plan, the overriding concern is how to manage retirement savings in a way that will generate sufficient income to provide a comfortable retirement, while still ensuring that accrued savings will last the remainder of one’s life. How, in other words, to avoid the dismal prospect of outliving one’s savings, or spending too much early in retirement and being left with insufficient income to meet one’s expenses late in life? And, of course, it’s impossible to find a definitive answer to that question, since none of us knows what the future holds, in terms of either health or longevity.

Most Canadians contemplate retirement with a mixture of anticipation and trepidation. While the benefits of an end to the day-to-day grind of work and commuting (while also having more free time to spend with family and friends) are undeniable, giving up a regular paycheque also means experiencing a degree of financial anxiety. For the majority of Canadians who are not members of a defined benefit pension plan, the overriding concern is how to manage retirement savings in a way that will generate sufficient income to provide a comfortable retirement, while still ensuring that accrued savings will last the remainder of one’s life. How, in other words, to avoid the dismal prospect of outliving one’s savings, or spending too much early in retirement and being left with insufficient income to meet one’s expenses late in life? And, of course, it’s impossible to find a definitive answer to that question, since none of us knows what the future holds, in terms of either health or longevity.

Typically, expenses are higher early in retirement, when retirees are likely to be healthier and more active, and retirement plans may include travel and the pursuit of hobbies and interests. However, while such activities and their associated costs likely dwindle as retirees age, other types of expenses come into play – especially expenses related to the need to pay for medical costs, household and personal services, and, ultimately, the prospect of paying for personal and/or medical care in an assisted living facility. The prospect of such future costs can make retirees reluctant to spend accrued savings (or annuity income), out of concern that such funds will be needed in the future to pay for care.

The worry about reaching an age where some degree of care is required (and must be paid for) is an entirely realistic one for retirees. According to Statistics Canada’s figures, the average Canadian who has reached the age of 75 has a life expectancy of another 12 years. And, since that figure represents an average, a significant number of 75-year-olds can expect to live longer than that. Again, according to StatsCan figures, in 2023 there were over 896,000 Canadians aged 85 or older.

With all of these demographic and financial realities in mind, a new kind of annuity – the advanced life deferred annuity, or ALDA – was created in 2019 and is now available to Canadians in the annuities marketplace. As is the case with all annuities, the issuer of an ALDA agrees, in exchange for receiving a specified lump sum amount, to provide an annual income of a specified amount to the annuitant. The difference, however, is while an ALDA can be taken out at any time, payments under the ALDA can be deferred to as late as the end of the year in which the annuitant turns 85.

For example, a retiree who turns 71 in 2024 and who has accumulated $500,000 in retirement savings could transfer $400,000 from his or her RRSP to an RRIF, and use the remaining $100,000 to purchase an ALDA, under which payments would begin at age 85. The retiree now has the security of knowing that the $400,000 held in the RRIF (plus any additional amounts earned from investment returns) doesn’t need to last for the unknown number of years remaining in their life, but instead for a specified period of time (in this case, 14 years), at which time the income stream from the ALDA will begin, to augment or replace the income from the RRIF.

There is a limit on the amount which can be used to purchase an ALDA. That limit is 25% of the amount held in an individual’s RRSP or RRIF, to a lifetime maximum. That lifetime maximum is indexed to inflation and stands at $170,000 for 2024. Taking the example outlined above, the retiree who has accumulated $500,000 in RRSP savings would be using 20% of that amount (or $100,000) to purchase the ALDA, and would be safely under the $170,000 lifetime limit.

While the security provided by such a retirement income structure would certainly be welcome to most retirees, the obvious concern where payments under an annuity are deferred is the possibility that the annuitant won’t live long enough to collect those payments, and that the funds expended to purchase the ALDA will effectively be wasted. There are two options to address that (legitimate) concern. First, an ALDA can be structured as a “joint-life” contract, under which payments will be made to the surviving annuitant (most often the spouse of the ALDA purchaser) for the remainder of their life. It’s also possible to structure the ALDA to provide for a lump sum death benefit to be paid to a beneficiary or beneficiaries (for example, the annuitant’s children) on the death of the annuitant. That death benefit can be any amount up to the amount of the original ALDA purchase, minus any amounts already paid out to the original annuitant. So if the original ALDA purchase was for $100,000 and $25,000 in benefits under the ALDA were paid out prior to the death of the original annuitant, the maximum death benefit amount would be $75,000.

Being able to have certainty of income for one’s very old age is a major benefit of purchasing an ALDA. There is, however, another benefit to be obtained, and that is income and tax deferral.

All Canadians who hold savings in an RRSP must collapse that RRSP by the end of the year in which they turn 71 and, in most instances, such individuals open an RRIF and transfer funds held in the RRSP to that RRIF. Once funds are held in an RRIF, a specified percentage of those funds must be paid out in each year to the RRIF holder. All such withdrawals constitute taxable income to the holder of the RRIF, and that taxable income can affect the RRIF holder’s eligibility for certain tax credits and benefits, like the age credit, Old Age Security benefits, and the GST/HST tax credit. Even if the RRIF holder does not actually need the total amount which must be withdrawn, there is no option to withdraw a lesser amount, and all funds withdrawn are treated as taxable income which can affect eligibility for tax credits and benefit – with no exceptions.

Where an RRIF holder purchases an ALDA, the amount used for that purchase is no longer included in the total balance on which the calculation of required RRIF withdrawals is based. Continuing the above example, if the RRIF holder used $100,000 of their retirement savings to purchase the ALDA, the amount which they would subsequently be required to withdraw from the RRIF each year would be calculated as a percentage of the remaining $400,000 – not the $500,000 which was held in the RRIF prior to the purchase of the ALDA.  Both the RRIF holder’s required income and their tax payable for the year will therefore be lower, and the loss of partial or full eligibility for tax credits and benefits will be less likely.

As is the case with most annuities, the terms of an ALDA (purchase amount, single vs. joint annuity, existence of a death benefit, age at which the income stream begins) are up to the ALDA purchaser and the issuer, as long as the basic tax rules governing such plans are adhered to. Everyone’s financial, health, and tax circumstances are different and, as is the case with any retirement income plan, those particular circumstances will drive the decisions made on the best retirement income structure for that individual. Purchasing an ALDA may be the right approach for some retirees, but not for others – but for everyone, having that option adds another element of flexibility to retirement income planning.

More information on ALDAs can be found on the federal government website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/rrsps-related-plans/alda.html.

By the time summer arrives, nearly all Canadians have filed their income tax returns for the previous year, have received a Notice of Assessment from the tax authorities with respect to that return, and have either received their tax refund or, more grudgingly, paid any balance of tax owing.

By the time summer arrives, nearly all Canadians have filed their income tax returns for the previous year, have received a Notice of Assessment from the tax authorities with respect to that return, and have either received their tax refund or, more grudgingly, paid any balance of tax owing.

It’s a surprise, therefore, when unexpected mail arrives from the Canada Revenue Agency (usually in mid- to late July), and the information in that mail will likely be both unfamiliar and unwelcome. Specifically, the enclosed Instalment Reminder form will advise the recipient that, in the view of the CRA, they should make instalment payments of income tax on September 15 and December 15 of 2024 – and will helpfully identify the amounts which should be paid on each date.

No one particularly likes receiving unexpected mail from the tax authorities, and correspondence which suggests that the recipient should be making payments of income tax for 2024 to the CRA during the year (instead of when they file the return for 2024 in April 2025) is likely to be both perplexing and somewhat alarming. It’s fair to say that most Canadians aren’t familiar with the payment of income tax by instalments, and are therefore at a loss to know how to proceed the first time they receive an Instalment Reminder.

The reason that the instalment payment system is unfamiliar to most Canadians is that most of us pay income taxes during our working lives through a different system. Every Canadian employee has tax automatically deducted from their paycheque (“at source”), before that paycheque is issued, and that tax is remitted by the employer to the CRA on the employee’s behalf. Such deductions and remittances accrue to the employee’s benefit, and they are credited with those remittances when filing the annual tax return for that year. It’s an efficient system, but it’s also one which is largely invisible to the employee, and certainly one which operates without the need for the employee to take any steps on their own.

Where an individual is no longer an employee – for instance, they start a business and become self-employed, or retire and begin to receive retirement income from various government and non-government sources – such deductions and remittances are no longer automatically made. However, Canadian tax rules provide that, where the amount of tax owed when a return is filed by the taxpayer is more than $3,000 ($1,800 for Québec residents) in the current (2024) year and either of the two previous (2022 and 2023) years, that taxpayer may be subject to the requirement to pay income tax by instalments.

The reason that first instalment reminders are issued in August has to do with the schedule on which Canadians file their tax returns. The amount of tax payable on filing for the immediately preceding year can’t be known until the tax return for that year has been filed and assessed, and the tax return filing deadline for individuals is April 30 (or June 15 for self-employed taxpayers and their spouses). Consequently, by the middle of July, the CRA will have the information needed to determine whether a particular taxpayer should receive a first instalment reminder for the current year.

Taxpayers who receive that first Instalment Reminder in July may also be puzzled by the fact that it is a “Reminder” and not a “Requirement” to pay. The reason for that is that those who receive it are not actually required by law to make instalment payments of tax. There are, in fact, three options open to the taxpayer who receives an Instalment Reminder.

First, the taxpayer can pay the amounts specified on the Reminder, by the respective due dates of September 15 and December 15. A taxpayer who does so can be certain that they will not have to pay any interest or penalty charges even if they have to pay an additional amount on filing in the spring of 2024. If the instalments paid turn out to be more than the taxpayer’s tax liability for 2024, they will of course receive a refund on filing.

Second, the taxpayer can make instalment payments based on the total amount of tax which was owed and paid for the 2023 tax year (including any balance that was owed on filing). If a taxpayer’s income has not changed between 2023 and 2024 and their available deductions and credits remain the same, the likelihood is that total tax liability for 2024 will be slightly less than it was in 2023, owing to the indexation of tax brackets and tax credit amounts.

Third, the taxpayer can estimate the amount of tax which they will actually owe for 2024 and can pay instalments based on that estimate. Where a taxpayer’s income has dropped from 2023 to 2024 and there will consequently be a reduction in tax payable, this option may be worth considering. Taxpayers who wish to pursue this approach can obtain the information needed to estimate current year taxes (federal and provincial tax brackets and rates) 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#federal.

All of this may seem like a lot of research and calculation effort, especially when one considers that many Canadians don’t even prepare their own tax returns. And those who don’t want to be bothered with the intricacies of tax calculations can pay the amounts set out in the Instalment Reminder, secure in the knowledge that they will not incur any penalty or interest charges and that, should those amounts ultimately represent an overpayment of taxes, that overpayment will be recovered and refunded when the return for 2024 is filed next spring.

Once they have resigned themselves to the realities of the tax instalment system, the next question that most taxpayers have is how such payments can be made. The options open to taxpayers in that regard, as well as general information on the tax instalment system, are outlined on the Canada Revenue Agency website at Required tax instalments for individuals - Payments for individuals - Canada.ca.

By this time of the year, virtually all Canadian residents have filed their income tax return for 2023 and have received the Notice of Assessment issued by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) with respect to that tax filing. Most taxpayers, therefore, would consider that their annual filing and payment obligations are done and behind them for another year.

By this time of the year, virtually all Canadian residents have filed their income tax return for 2023 and have received the Notice of Assessment issued by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) with respect to that tax filing. Most taxpayers, therefore, would consider that their annual filing and payment obligations are done and behind them for another year.

It can, therefore, be a little surprising to receive a communication from the CRA in mid-summer and more than a little unsettling to find out that the Agency has some further questions about the tax return that the taxpayer thought was already completed. Notwithstanding, that’s an experience that millions of taxpayers will have over the next few weeks and months.

Between February 5 and June 24 of this year, the Canada Revenue Agency received and processed more than 30 million individual income tax returns filed for the 2023 tax year, and issued a Notice of Assessment in respect of each one of those returns. The sheer volume of returns and the processing turnaround timelines mean that the CRA does not (and could not possibly) do a manual review of the information provided in a return prior to issuing the Notice of Assessment. Rather, 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 successful in encouraging taxpayers to fulfill their filing obligations online, through one of the Agency’s electronic filing services. This year, just under 29 million (or 93%) of individual returns for 2023 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 93% 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 conduct a wide range of review programs, some of them carried out before a Notice of Assessment is issued for the taxpayer’s return, and others after that Notice of Assessment has been issued and sent to the taxpayer. Regardless of the timing, in all cases the purpose of the review is to obtain from the taxpayer the information or documentation needed to support claims for deductions or credits made by the taxpayer on the return. The CRA also administers a Matching Program, in which information reported on the taxpayer’s return (both income and deductions) is compared to 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, or a telephone call, from the CRA. Receiving such correspondence or such a call from the tax authorities is almost guaranteed to unsettle the recipient taxpayer, who may immediately conclude that he or she has done something very wrong and is facing a big tax bill. However, in the vast majority of cases, the contact is just a routine part of the Agency’s processing review mandate.

Where the initial contact from the CRA to the taxpayer is done by telephone, it’s important that the taxpayer verify the identity of the person claiming to be a representative of the Agency. As virtually everyone knows by now, fraudulent or “scam” calls purporting to be from the CRA have become commonplace. To assist taxpayers in confirming that any telephone contact received is a legitimate one, the CRA has provided information on how to respond to such a call; that information can be found on the CRA website at Verify it's the CRA calling - Scams and fraud - CRA - Canada.ca.

A taxpayer whose return is selected as part of a 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 similar documentation. Or, where figures which appear on an information slip – for instance, the amount of interest income earned – don’t match up with the amount of such interest income reported by the taxpayer, they will be contacted to provide an explanation of the discrepancy.

Of course, most taxpayers are not concerned so much with the kind of program or programs under which they are contacted as they are with why their return was singled out for review or follow-up. Many taxpayers assume that it’s because there is something wrong on their return, or that the letter is the start of a tax audit process, but that’s not necessarily the case. Returns are selected by the CRA for pre- or post-assessment review for a number of reasons. 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 dependant tax credit claims, or claims for medical expenses, moving expenses, or tuition tax credits) 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 could flag the return for review. 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 the processing review programs simply on the basis of 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’s 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 or does not provide such proof, the Agency will proceed on the basis that the requested verification or proof does not exist and will assess or reassess accordingly.

Taxpayers who have registered for the CRA’s online tax program My Account (or whose representative is similarly registered for the Agency’s Represent a Client online service) can usually submit required documentation electronically. More information on how to do so can be found on the CRA website at Submitting documents online – Pre-assessment Review, Processing Review and Request Verification Programs - Canada.ca.

Whatever the reason a particular return was selected for review by the CRA, one thing is certain: a prompt response to the CRA’s enquiry, providing the Agency 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 Agency 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.

Most Canadians, understandably, think of our income tax system as a government “program” that takes money out of their paycheques and out of their pockets. And, while it’s certainly true that virtually every Canadian who earns an income must allocate a portion of that income to paying federal and provincial personal income taxes, that’s not the whole picture. Our tax system does, in fact, provide Canadians with a number of direct benefits, through a variety of tax credit and benefit programs which actually put money into the hands of Canadians. And when that money can be obtained with minimal effort (and be received tax-free) it’s a win-win for the recipient.

Most Canadians, understandably, think of our income tax system as a government “program” that takes money out of their paycheques and out of their pockets. And, while it’s certainly true that virtually every Canadian who earns an income must allocate a portion of that income to paying federal and provincial personal income taxes, that’s not the whole picture. Our tax system does, in fact, provide Canadians with a number of direct benefits, through a variety of tax credit and benefit programs which actually put money into the hands of Canadians. And when that money can be obtained with minimal effort (and be received tax-free) it’s a win-win for the recipient.

Those attributes describe the basic child and family benefits paid by the federal government to eligible Canadians every month of the year. However, a substantial number of eligible recipients don’t receive benefits to which they are entitled, simply because they haven’t claimed them, leaving potentially hundreds or thousands of dollars in tax-free income “on the table” each year. As well, many Canadians who do receive such benefits but who then fail to claim them annually can see their benefit payments stop, even though they remain eligible to receive those benefits.

While there are quite a number of such benefits, the process of “claiming” each of them is the same – simply filing a tax return each year. Eligibility for some (but not all) of the obtainable benefits and/or the amount of benefit obtainable is based, in part, on the income of the recipient. When each Canadian files a tax return, the Canada Revenue Agency determines, based on the information provided in that return, the benefits to which the taxpayer is entitled and in what amounts. Where the amount of a taxpayer’s income is relevant to the determination of eligibility, the income figure used is that from the previous year. In other words, a taxpayer’s eligibility for benefits during the 2024-25 benefit year is based on their income for 2023. And that information was provided to the Canada Revenue Agency on the tax returns for 2023 which were filed by taxpayers earlier this year.

Once the CRA receives the needed income information (usually by April 30, 2024) and determines a taxpayer’s benefit eligibility, those benefits are paid to eligible recipients throughout the 2024-25 benefit year, which starts on July 1, 2024 and ends on June 30, 2025.

It should be noted, as well, that while the federal government refers to these benefits under the umbrella term “child and family benefits”, it’s wrong to conclude that benefits are only available to parents and/or married individuals. Of the four benefit programs outlined below which will be in place during the upcoming benefit year, only the Canada Child Benefit program requires that a taxpayer be a parent, and none of the benefit programs require that a taxpayer be married or in a common-law relationship.

GST/HST Credit

The GST/HST credit is a non-taxable amount paid four times a year (on the 5^th of July, October, January, and April) to lower and middle-income individuals and families, to help offset the goods and services tax/harmonized sales tax (GST/HST) that they pay. Generally, the credit is available to Canadian residents who meet any one of the following criteria:

• aged 19 yearsof age or older;
• have or had a spouse or common law partner; or
• are or were a parent and live (or lived) with their child.

The amount of benefit which may be received is determined by both family size and income level. For the upcoming (July 2024 to June 2025) benefit year, the maximum annual GST/HST benefit is as follows:

• $519 if you are single;
• $680 if you are married or have a common-law partner; and
• $179 for each child under the age of 19.

The CRA website includes a chart showing the amount of GST/HST benefit which is provided at different income levels, to individuals and to families of different sizes and compositions. That chart can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/child-family-benefits/goods-services-tax-harmonized-sales-tax-gst-hst-credit/goods-services-tax-harmonised-sales-tax-credit-payments-chart.html.

Eligibility for the GST/HST credit for the 2024-25 benefit year is determined automatically by the CRA for each taxpayer who filed a return for 2023. There is, therefore, no need to indicate on the return that the taxpayer is applying for the GST/HST credit.

Canada Carbon Rebate

Unlike the other three credits which are based, at least in part, on household income, the Canada Carbon Rebate, or CCR (formerly known as the Climate Action Incentive Payment), is a flat rate, non-taxable credit paid to eligible residents living in Alberta, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, or Saskatchewan. The purpose of the CCR is to help offset the financial impact of the federal carbon tax, with the amount of the annual benefit determined by the taxpayer’s province of residence and family composition. An online tool allowing taxpayers to estimate the amount of CCR they may receive can be found on the CRA website at How much you can get - Canada Carbon Rebate (CCR) for individuals - Canada.ca.

In addition to living in one of these provinces, recipients must also satisfy the same eligibility criteria as for the GST/HST credit, in that they must be Canadian residents who are at least 19 years of age, or have or had a spouse or common-law partner, or are or were a parent and lives or lived with their child.

The CCR (for all provinces) includes a rural supplement of the base amount for residents of small and rural communities. That supplement, which was set at 10% of the base amount in previous years, has been increased to 20% for the 2024-25 benefit year. While there is no need to apply for the CCR when filing a tax return, individuals who believe they are eligible for the rural supplement need to ensure that they tick the applicable box on page 2 of the return to indicate their eligibility. That requirement does not apply to residents of Prince Edward Island, where all CCR recipients are eligible for the rural supplement.

The CCR is paid in quarterly instalments, meaning that during the 2024-25 benefit year, payments will be made to eligible Canadians on the 15^th day of April, July, October, and January.

More information on the CCR can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/child-family-benefits/cai-payment.html.

Canada Workers Benefit

The Canada Workers Benefit (CWB) is a refundable tax credit paid to lower-income Canadian residents who are aged 19 or older or are married or have a common-law spouse or a child with whom they live, and who have “working income” earned from employment or self-employment.

The amount of CWB which an individual or family can receive depends on marital status and net income. The basic amounts payable, and the net income levels at which eligibility for that basic benefit is eroded, are as follows.

• $1,518 for single individuals
  The single individual benefit is reduced if adjusted net income is more than $24,975. No basic amount is payable if the applicant’s adjusted net income is more than $35,095.
• $2,616 for families 
  The family benefit amount is reduced if adjusted family net income is more than $28,494. No basic amount is payable where adjusted family net income is more than $45,934.

In order to apply for the CWB, a recipient must file their tax return electronically and follow the software instructions for applying or, if filing a paper return, must complete and file a Schedule 6 with that tax return.

More detailed information on the CWB can be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/child-family-benefits/canada-workers-benefit.html.

Canada Child Benefit

The Canada child benefit (CCB) is a tax-free monthly payment made to eligible families to help with the cost of raising children under 18 years of age. The CCB is paid to the parent who is primarily responsible for the care and upbringing of the child or children, and the amount varies with the age and number of children.

The CCB is also a means-tested benefit, with the benefit amount being reduced as family net income increases. CCB amounts paid during the 2024-25 benefit year are based on family net income for 2023.

The maximum amounts payable for the benefit year running from July 2024 to June 2025 are as follows.

For each child:

• under 6 years of age: $7,787 per year ($648.91 per month)
• 6 to 17 years of age: $6,570 per year ($547.50 per month)

Where family net income for 2023 is less than $36,502, recipients will receive the maximum amount outlined above for 2024-25, with no reductions.

Individuals and families who may be eligible for the CCB will have their eligibility automatically assessed when they file their tax return for 2023: there is no requirement to file a particular schedule or other application. More information on the CCB is available on the federal government website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/child-family-benefits/canada-child-benefit-overview.html.

While the number and variety of federal child and family benefits and the varying eligibility criteria for each can be confusing, the necessary determinations and calculations are done by the federal government. The only step which need be taken by an individual is the filing of an annual tax return. Taxpayers who wish to find information on the benefits for which they may be eligible can refer to the Canada Revenue Agency website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/child-family-benefits.html, where detailed information on each such benefit, the eligibility criteria, and amounts which may be received are summarized.

Two quarterly newsletters have been added – one dealing with personal issues, and one dealing with corporate issues.

Two quarterly newsletters have been added – one dealing with personal issues, and one dealing with corporate issues.

They can be accessed below.

Corporate:

Issue #68 Corporate

Personal:

Issue #68 Personal

The Canadian tax system is a “self-assessing” one, in which taxpayers are expected (and, in most cases, required) to file an individual income tax return each spring. On that return the taxpayer provides a summary of income earned during the previous calendar year and claims available deductions and credits. Those calculations determine the amount of tax owed for the year and any amount owed must then, of course, be paid on or before April 30.

The Canadian tax system is a “self-assessing” one, in which taxpayers are expected (and, in most cases, required) to file an individual income tax return each spring. On that return the taxpayer provides a summary of income earned during the previous calendar year and claims available deductions and credits. Those calculations determine the amount of tax owed for the year and any amount owed must then, of course, be paid on or before April 30.

Although the percentage of taxpayers who are required to file a return but do not do so is relatively small, a percentage as low as 1% of non-filers in a population of 40 million can still amount to nearly 400,000 required returns not filed. There are a number of reasons why taxpayers don’t file a return – sometimes it’s just procrastination, or a lack of knowledge of how and when to get the return filed. In other cases, taxpayers don’t believe that they are required to file a return – for instance, where they have little or no income for the year.

However, in the majority of instances in which taxpayers don’t file a return, it’s likely because taxes are owed and they are unable to pay those taxes on time or in full – or at all. In such situations, it’s tempting to conclude that it’s better not to file in the hope, perhaps, that the CRA will overlook or somehow not notice the delinquency. That’s not, however, a realistic conclusion. Where a Canadian resident earns income, the payor of that income must file an income slip (T4 for employment income, T5 for interest income, etc.) with the Canada Revenue Agency, on which the recipient of that income is identified by name, address, and social insurance number. Where those slips don’t match up with income reported on a return for the year by the taxpayer, the omission will probably come to light.

Although each such instance of non-compliance represents lost revenue to the Canadian government, the resources needed to track down each and every instance of non-compliance simply aren’t available, especially since in many cases the amount recovered may be less than the costs which must be incurred to recover that amount.

With all of that in mind, the Canada Revenue Agency instituted a program – the Voluntary Disclosures Program (VDP) – intended to encourage non-compliant taxpayers to come forward and put their tax affairs in order. The incentive to do so arises from the fact that in most cases, while taxpayers who participate in the VDP program have to pay outstanding tax amounts owed, plus some interest, they can avoid both other interest charges, some penalties which would normally be imposed, and the risk of criminal prosecution.

To qualify for such relief under the VDP, an application made with respect to non-compliance with income tax filing and payment obligations must:

• be voluntary (meaning that it is done before the CRA initiates any enforcement action related to the information to be disclosed);
• be complete (that is, includes all relevant information and documentation);
• involve the application or potential application of a penalty;
• include information that is at least one year or one reporting period past due; and
• include payment of the estimated tax owing (taxpayers who are unable to do so can request a payment arrangement).

The VDP program includes two separate “tracks” for income tax disclosures – the Limited Program and the General Program – and the kind and extent of relief available depends on the track to which a particular application is assigned.

While the Canada Revenue Agency will ultimately make the determination of whether an application should proceed under the Limited or the General Program on a case-by-case basis, there are guidelines in place. The CRA’s intention is to restrict the Limited Program to instances in which taxpayers intentionally avoided their tax obligations (as distinct from inadvertence), or there is conduct on the part of the taxpayer which amounts to gross negligence. In making its determination of the appropriate track for a disclosure, the factors which the CRA will consider include the following:

• the dollar amounts involved;
• the number of years of non-compliance;
• the sophistication of the taxpayer;
• how quickly the taxpayer acted to correct their non-compliance after becoming aware of it;
• whether the disclosure was made after the taxpayer became aware of the CRA’s intended specific focus on that particular area of taxpayer compliance; and
• whether efforts were made to avoid detection through the use of offshore vehicles or other means.

Those whose applications are accepted under the Limited Program will be required to pay outstanding tax balances owed, plus interest, and will be subject to penalties. They will not, however, be subject to criminal prosecution and will be exempted from the more stringent penalties which usually apply in cases of gross negligence on the part of the taxpayer.

Taxpayers whose conduct does not consign them to the Limited Program will instead be considered under the General Program. Under that Program, no penalties will be charged and no criminal prosecutions will take place. As well, the CRA will provide partial interest relief, specifically for the years preceding the three most recent years of non-compliance. For example, a taxpayer who makes an application to the VDP and who has failed to file returns for the 2017 through 2022 taxation years may be provided with interest relief with respect to tax arrears owed for the 2017, 2018, and 2019 taxation years. Such relief is generally equal to 50% of interest normally owed – in other words, the taxpayer will be required to pay only half of the interest charges which would otherwise be levied for those years. No interest relief will, however, be provided on tax amounts owed for the three most recent (2020, 2021, and 2022) taxation years. Since interest charges levied by the CRA are, by law, higher than current commercial rates (for instance, the rate levied for July, August, and September of 2024 is 9%) and interest charged is compounded daily, having interest amounts forgiven, even in part, can make a significant difference to the overall tax bill faced by the taxpayer.

In order to benefit from the VDP, taxpayers must first make an application to the Program. That application must include payment of the estimated taxes owing, as a condition of participation in the VDP. Where a taxpayer is financially unable to make that tax payment, he or she can request that the CRA consider a payment arrangement.

The decision to apply to the VDP and to “come clean” about all previous tax transgressions is something that most taxpayers will likely consider with considerable trepidation. Those who are unsure about whether they want to move forward with a VDP application have the option of using the CRA’s “pre-disclosure discussion service”. As the name implies, that service allows taxpayers to participate in preliminary discussions with a CRA official, on an anonymous basis, to gain some knowledge about the VDP program, the process involved, and the potential relief available.

Taxpayers who decide to move forward with an application to the VDP can complete and file Form RC199 Voluntary Disclosures Program Application, which is available on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms/rc199.html. Once the application is received, the CRA will check to make certain that the applicant meets all the criteria required for a valid application, and that all of the required information, documentation, and payment have been sent. The next step is for the CRA to determine the program (Limited or General) to which the application should be assigned, and the taxation year(s) for which relief is being considered. At each step the taxpayer will be provided with written notice of the CRA’s decisions.

If the decision made is that the application is not eligible for the VDP, the taxpayer will also be advised in writing, with reasons, of the CRA’s decision to deny the application.

Where the decision made by the Agency is one with which the taxpayer does not agree, they are entitled to ask for a second review of the application. It is also possible for a taxpayer to ask the Federal Court to review the decision and to direct the CRA to re-consider the VDP application. However, a taxpayer who wishes to pursue their application to the extent of filing such a Federal Court application is well advised to obtain legal advice before doing so.

Finally, taxpayers should recognize that the VDP Program can’t be used as a kind of “get out of jail free card” with respect to repeated failures to meet tax filing and payment obligations. The CRA’s expectations are that taxpayers who have benefitted from the VDP will thereafter meet their tax obligations, and a second review will be provided for the same taxpayer only in situations where the second application relates to a different matter than the first, and where the circumstances giving rise to the second application were beyond the taxpayer’s control.

Detailed information on the VDP can be found on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/programs/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/voluntary-disclosures-program-overview.html. Additional details with respect to the  Program are also outlined in the CRA’s Information Circular IC00-1R6 – Voluntary Disclosures Program, which is available on the same website at IC00-1R6 - Voluntary Disclosures Program - Canada.ca.

As the school year draws to a close, the thoughts of millions of Canadian parents turn to the question of how to find – and pay for – child care throughout the summer months. While many Canadians are still able to work from home for some portion of the work week, few (if any) have the kind of work arrangement which allows them to dispense entirely with child care arrangements during the summer months.

As the school year draws to a close, the thoughts of millions of Canadian parents turn to the question of how to find – and pay for – child care throughout the summer months. While many Canadians are still able to work from home for some portion of the work week, few (if any) have the kind of work arrangement which allows them to dispense entirely with child care arrangements during the summer months.

Parents needing to arrange such care don’t lack for options. There is an almost limitless number of choices, but what each of those choices has in common is a price tag – sometimes a steep one. Some options, like playground supervisors or day camps provided by the local recreation authority or municipality, can be relatively inexpensive, while the cost of others, like residential camps that provide room, board, and a range of sports and arts activities can run to thousands of dollars per week.

The good news for families which incur such expenditures is that in many cases a deduction for part or all of the costs incurred can be claimed on the tax return for the year. And, since eligible expenditures can be deducted from income on a dollar-for-dollar basis, that means that income used to pay eligible child care expenses is income which is not taxed. That tax savings is obtained by claiming the Child Care Expense Deduction, which is not specific to summer child care or summer camp costs, but is available for qualifying child care expenses incurred at any time during the year. As well, the rule determining whether child care costs incurred are deductible is fairly straightforward – parents who incur eligible child care costs in order to work (whether in employment or self-employment), or in some cases to attend school, can deduct those costs from income, within specified limits.

The amount of any available child care deduction is calculated on Form T778, and that calculation can seem forbiddingly complex. However, at the end of the day, the amount of child care expenses which can be deducted is simply the least of three figures, and only one of those figures requires a calculation. The steps involved in determining the amount of available child care expense deduction are as follows.

First, the amount of any deduction for child care expenses is limited to two-thirds of the taxpayer’s net income for the year. The income figure used to calculate the two-thirds figure is, generally, the amount shown on Line 23600 of the annual tax return. Where the family incurring child care expenses is a two-income family, it is the spouse with the lower net income who must make the claim and consequently it is their net income which is used to provide that two-thirds of income figure.

The second figure to be determined is the amount actually paid for eligible child care costs during the year. While virtually any licenced child care arrangement will qualify for purposes of the deduction, some more informal arrangements may not. Specifically, no deduction is available for amounts paid to most family members to provide child care. Consequently, it’s not possible for a working spouse to pay the stay-at-home parent to provide child care, nor is it possible to pay an older sibling who is under the age of 18 to provide such services, and to claim a deduction for those expenses incurred. As well, where a claim is made for a deduction for child care expenses on the annual return, the claimant must obtain (and be prepared to provide to the tax authorities) the social insurance number of the individual providing the care as well as a receipt showing the amounts paid, whether to an individual or an organization.

The third figure to be determined is the one which requires some calculation. Basically, the rules governing the deduction of child care expense impose a maximum deduction per child per year (referred to as the “basic limit”), with that basic limit dependent on the age and health of the particular child. As well, where expenses are incurred for overnight camps or boarding schools, the amount deductible for such costs is similarly capped.

For 2024, the following overall limits apply:

• $5,000 in costs per year for a child who was born in 2008 to 2017;
• $8,000 in costs per year for a child who was born after 2017;
• $11,000 in costs per year for a child who was born in 2024 or earlier, but for whom the disability amount can be claimed.

Similar restrictions are placed on the amount of costs which can be deducted for overnight camp or boarding school fees, and those are as follows:

• $125 per week for a child who was born in 2008 to 2017;
• $200 per week for a child who was born after 2017; and
• $275 per week for a child who was born in 2024 or earlier, but for whom the disability amount can be claimed.

Taking all of these figures into account, the computation of a deduction for summer day camp expenses for a typical Canadian family would look like this.

A two-income family has two children and both parents are employed. One spouse earns $70,000 per year, while the other earns $55,000. In 2023, one child is age 9 and the other is age 5. Neither child is disabled. During July and August, both of the children attend a local full-day summer camp, for which the cost is $400 per week per child.

• The first step is to determine the two-thirds of income figure. Since it is the lower-income spouse who must make the deduction claim, that figure is two-thirds of $55,000, or $36,663. Consequently, any deduction for child care expenses for the year cannot exceed $36,663.
• The second calculation is the total amount of child care expenses paid for each child:
  $400 per week for eight weeks of summer camp, or $3,200.
  Total child care expenses for each child are therefore $3,200.
• The last step is to determine the basic limit for child care expenses for each child, as follows:
  • the basic limit for the 5-year-old (who was born after 2017) is $8,000, and so the entire $3,200 in summer day camp costs incurred can be deducted.
  • the basic limit for the 9-year-old (who was born between 2008 and 2017) is $5,000, and so once again the entire $3,200 incurred for summer day camp costs can be deducted.

As well, since the camp is a day camp, the dollar amount cost limitations which apply with respect to overnight camps do not apply to limit the amount of expenses claimed by the family.

The total deduction available for child care expenses incurred for the 2024 tax year will therefore be $6,400. That deduction is claimed on Line 21400 of the tax return filed by the lower-income spouse for the year, reducing their taxable income from $55,000 to $48,600, and resulting in a federal tax savings of about $960. A similar tax deduction is claimed as well for provincial tax purposes; the amount of provincial tax saved will depend on the tax rates imposed by the province in which the family lives.

When parents are choosing summer activities/care for their children, that decision involves a number of factors, including the child’s interests and abilities, the availability of programs which match those interests and abilities, the work schedules of one or both parents, and, of course, the cost of the program or activity. While the availability of a “subsidy” through the tax system should never be the sole determinant of what activity or camp is the best choice, there’s no denying that being able to claim a deduction for the costs involved can tip the balance toward one or choice or another, or can bring a formerly unavailable option within a family’s financial reach.

Parents wishing to find out more about the child care expense deduction, and perhaps to calculate the maximum deduction which will be available to them for the 2024 tax year, should consult Form T778 E (23). The form which is currently on the CRA website at https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/forms-publications/forms/t778.html is from the 2023 tax year, and consequently the age limits must be adjusted by one year for child care expense claims for 2024. (The actual form for 2024 will be posted on the CRA website early in 2025). The currently available form does, however, provide a detailed explanation of the rules governing the child care expense deduction, and those rules (as well as the applicable dollar limits, which are not indexed to inflation) will continue to apply for the 2024 tax year.

Each spring and summer, tens of thousands of Canadian families sell their homes and move – sometimes to a bigger and better property in the same town or city, and sometimes to a new city or even another province. At the same time, university students make the annual move from their university residences or apartments back to the family home for the summer. And, whatever the reason for the move or the distance to the new location, all moves have two things in common – stress and cost. Even where the move is a desired one, moving inevitably means upheaval of one’s life and the costs involved can be very significant. There is not much that can diminish the stress of moving, but the associated costs can be offset somewhat by a tax deduction which may be claimed for many of those costs.

Each spring and summer, tens of thousands of Canadian families sell their homes and move – sometimes to a bigger and better property in the same town or city, and sometimes to a new city or even another province. At the same time, university students make the annual move from their university residences or apartments back to the family home for the summer. And, whatever the reason for the move or the distance to the new location, all moves have two things in common – stress and cost. Even where the move is a desired one, moving inevitably means upheaval of one’s life and the costs involved can be very significant. There is not much that can diminish the stress of moving, but the associated costs can be offset somewhat by a tax deduction which may be claimed for many of those costs.

While it’s common to the refer to the “moving expense deduction” as though it were available to all taxpayers in all circumstances, the fact is that there is actually no universally available deduction claimable for moving costs – in order to be tax deductible, such moving costs must meet specific criteria. Our tax system allows taxpayers to claim a deduction only where the move is made to get the taxpayer closer to their new place of work, whether that work is a transfer within the same company, a change in employers, or moving to run a business at a new location. Specifically, moving expenses can be deducted where the move is made to bring the taxpayer at least 40 kilometres closer to their new place of work. That requirement is satisfied where, for instance, a taxpayer moves from Toronto to Calgary to take that new job. It’s also met where a taxpayer is transferred by their employer to another job in a different location and the taxpayer’s move will bring them at least 40 kilometres closer to the new work location. It’s not met where an individual or family move up the property ladder by selling and purchasing a new home in the same town or city.

As well, it’s not actually necessary to be a homeowner in order to claim moving expenses. The list of moving related expenses which may be deducted is basically the same for everyone – homeowner or tenant – who meets the 40 kilometre requirement. Students who move to take a summer job (even if that move is back to the family home) can also make a claim for moving expenses incurred where the overriding 40-kilometre requirement is met.

It's important to remember, however, that even where the 40-kilometre requirement is met, moving costs can be deducted only from income earned from employment or self-employment (business) – such costs cannot be deducted from other types of income, like investment income or employment insurance benefits.

The general rule is that a taxpayer can claim reasonable amounts that were paid for moving themself, family members, and household effects. In all cases, the moving expenses can only be deducted from employment or self-employment income earned at the new location. Where the move takes place later in the year, and moving costs are significant, it’s possible that the amount of income earned at the new location in the year of the move will be less than deductible moving expenses incurred. In such instances, those expenses can be carried over and deducted from income earned at the new location in any future year.

Within the general rule, there are a number of specific inclusions, exclusions, and limitations. The following is a list of expenses which can be claimed by the taxpayer without specific dollar figure restrictions (but subject, as always, to the overriding requirement of “reasonableness”).

• Travel expenses, including vehicle expenses, meals, and accommodation, to move the taxpayer and members of their household to their new residence (note that not all members of the household have to travel together or at the same time);
• Transportation and storage costs (such as packing, hauling, movers, in-transit storage, and insurance) for household effects, including such items as boats and trailers;
• Costs for up to 15 days for meals and temporary accommodation near the old and the new residences for the taxpayer and members of their household;
• Lease cancellation charges (but not rent) on the old residence;
• Legal or notary fees incurred for the purchase of the new residence, together with any taxes paid for the transfer or registration of title to the new residence (excluding GST or HST); 
• The cost of selling the old residence, including advertising, notary or legal fees, real estate commissions, and any mortgage penalties paid when a mortgage is paid off before maturity; and
• The cost of changing an address on legal documents, replacing driving licences and non-commercial vehicle permits (not including insurance), and costs related to utility hook-ups and disconnections.

At some times and in some places, houses sell almost as soon as they are put on the market, while at other times or in other places it can take weeks or even months to find a buyer. When the latter is the case, the homeowner might have to move to start that new job before the “old” house has sold. In those circumstances, the taxpayer is entitled to deduct up to $5,000 in costs incurred for the maintenance of the old residence while it is vacant and on the market. Specifically, costs including interest, property taxes, insurance premiums, and heat and utilities expenses paid to maintain the old residence while it is vacant and efforts are being made to sell it may be deducted. If any family members are still living at the old residence, or it is being rented, no such deduction is available.

It may seem from the forgoing that virtually all moving-related costs will be deductible – however, there are some costs for which the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) will not permit a deduction to be claimed, as follows:

• Expenses for work done to make the old residence more saleable;
• Any loss incurred on the sale of the old residence;
• Expenses for job-hunting or house-hunting trips to another city (for example, costs to travel to job interviews or meet with real estate agents);
• Expenses incurred to clean or repair a rental residence to meet the landlord’s standards;
• Costs to replace such personal-use items as drapery and carpets;
• Mail forwarding costs; and
• Mortgage default insurance.

To claim a deduction for any eligible costs incurred, supporting receipts must be obtained. While the receipts do not have to be filed with the return on which the related deduction is claimed, they must be kept in case the CRA wants to review them.

Anyone who has ever moved knows that there are a seemingly endless number of details to be dealt with. For some types of costs, the administrative burden of keeping track of (and retaining receipts for) such moving-related expenses can be minimized by choosing instead to claim a standardized amount. Specifically, the CRA allows taxpayers to claim a fixed amount, without the need for detailed receipts, for travel and meal expenses related to a move. Using that standardized, or flat-rate method, taxpayers may claim up to $23 per meal, to a maximum of $69 per day, for each person in the household. Similarly, the taxpayer can claim a set per-kilometre amount for kilometres driven in connection with the move; that per kilometre amount ranges from 53.0 cents for Alberta to 70.5 cents for the Yukon. In all cases, it is the province or territory in which the travel begins which determines the applicable rate.

These standardized travel and meal expense rates are those which were in effect for the 2023 taxation year – the CRA will be posting the rates for 2024 on its website early in 2025, in time for the tax filing season.

Once eligibility for the moving expense deduction is established, the rules which govern the calculation of the available deduction are not complex, but they are very detailed. The best summary of those rules is found on the form used to claim such expenses – the T1-M. The current version of that form can be found on the CRA’s website at T1-M Moving Expenses Deduction - Canada.ca, and more information (including a link to rates for standardized meal and travel cost claims) is available at Line 21900 – Moving expenses - Canada.ca.

Many (if not most) taxpayers think of tax planning as a year-end exercise, one to be carried out in the last few weeks of the year, in order to take the steps needed to minimize the tax bill for that year. And it’s true that almost all strategies needed to both minimize the tax hit for the current year and to ensure that there won’t be a big tax bill come next April must be put in place by December 31 (the making of registered retirement savings plan (RRSP) contributions being the notable exception). Nonetheless, there’s a lot to recommend carrying out a mid-year review of one’s tax situation for the current year. Doing that review mid-year, instead of waiting until December, gives the taxpayer the chance to make sure that everything is on track and, especially, to put into place any adjustments needed to help ensure that there are no unpleasant tax surprises when the return for 2024 is filed next spring. And, while the deadline for implementing most tax saving strategies may be December 31, it’s also the case that opportunities to make a significant difference to one’s current-year tax situation diminish as the calendar year progresses.

Many (if not most) taxpayers think of tax planning as a year-end exercise, one to be carried out in the last few weeks of the year, in order to take the steps needed to minimize the tax bill for that year. And it’s true that almost all strategies needed to both minimize the tax hit for the current year and to ensure that there won’t be a big tax bill come next April must be put in place by December 31 (the making of registered retirement savings plan (RRSP) contributions being the notable exception). Nonetheless, there’s a lot to recommend carrying out a mid-year review of one’s tax situation for the current year. Doing that review mid-year, instead of waiting until December, gives the taxpayer the chance to make sure that everything is on track and, especially, to put into place any adjustments needed to help ensure that there are no unpleasant tax surprises when the return for 2024 is filed next spring. And, while the deadline for implementing most tax saving strategies may be December 31, it’s also the case that opportunities to make a significant difference to one’s current-year tax situation diminish as the calendar year progresses.

Mid-year is also a good time to check up on current year taxes because nearly all of the information needed to do so is readily available to the taxpayer. By the beginning of June, most Canadians have filed their individual income tax return for the 2023 tax year and received a Notice of Assessment outlining their tax position for that year. Those who receive a refund will celebrate that fact or, less happily, those who receive a tax bill will pay up the amount owed. And, although the taxpayer’s reaction to one or the other of these outcomes will be very different, the fact is that a large tax bill owing or a large tax refund arise from the same cause – and that is that the amount of tax paid throughout the year was incorrect. While most taxpayers are delighted to receive a tax refund (often viewing it, incorrectly, as “free” money from the government), the fact is that a large refund means that the taxpayer has overpaid their taxes for the previous year and has essentially provided the Canada Revenue Agency with an interest-free loan of funds that could have been put to better use in the taxpayer’s hands. The other outcome – a large bill – means that taxes have been underpaid for the previous year and that could mean paying interest charges to the CRA. Either way, it’s in the taxpayer’s best interests to ensure that tax paid throughout the year is sufficient to cover their taxes, without overpaying or underpaying. The best-case scenario, from a tax and personal finance perspective, is to file a tax return and receive a Notice of Assessment which indicates that there is neither a substantial refund payable nor any significant amount owing.

For most Canadians, income and available deductions and credits don’t vary significantly from one year to the next. Where that’s the case, the amount of tax owed by the taxpayer for 2023 (a figure that can be found on Line 43500 of the Notice of Assessment) is likely to be very close to one’s tax liability for 2024.

After finding out how much tax was paid for 2023, the next step in doing a review is to get a sense of how much income tax has already been paid for the 2024 tax year. There are two ways of paying income taxes throughout the year. The majority of Canadians (including all employees) have income taxes deducted from their paycheques and remitted to the federal government on their behalf – a process known as source deductions. Taxpayers who do not have income tax deducted at source – which would include self-employed individuals and, frequently, retired taxpayers – make tax payments directly to the federal government (four times a year, in March, June, September, and December) through the tax instalment system.

Using the tax payable figure for 2023 as a guide, it’s necessary to figure out whether income tax payments made to date, either through deductions made from the taxpayer’s paycheque, or through instalment payments of tax, match up with that tax liability figure, recognizing that by this point in the year, approximately one-half of taxes for 2024 should already have been paid. If they haven’t, and particularly if there is a significant shortfall which would mean a large balance owing when the tax return for 2024 is filed next spring, the taxpayer will need to take steps to remedy that.

Where the individual involved pays tax by instalments, the solution is simple. They can simply increase or decrease the amount of remaining instalment payments made in 2024 so that the total instalment payments made over the course of this year accurately reflect the total tax payable for the year. The only caveat in that situation is that the individual should err on the side of caution to ensure that there isn’t a shortfall in instalment payments, which could result in interest charges being levied by the CRA.

The situation is a little more complex for employees, or anyone who has tax deducted at source. Often when such individuals discover that they are overpaying taxes through source deductions, it’s because deductions which they claim on their return for the year – for expenditures like deductible support payments, child care expenses, or contributions to a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP) or first home savings account (FHSA) – aren’t taken into account in calculating the amount of tax to deduct at source. The solution for employees who find themselves in that situation is to file a FormT1213 – Request to Reduce Tax Deductions at Source with the CRA. That form is available on the CRA website at T1213 Request to Reduce Tax Deductions at Source - Canada.ca. On the T1213, the taxpayer identifies the amounts which will be deducted on the return for the year and, once the CRA verifies that those deductible expenditures (like child care expense costs or RRSP contributions) are being made, it will authorize the taxpayer’s employer to reduce the amount of tax which is being withheld at source to take account of that deduction.

Where it’s the opposite situation and a taxpayer finds that source deductions being made will not be sufficient to cover their tax liability for the year (meaning a tax bill to be paid next spring), the solution is to have those source deductions increased. No one likes paying more taxes, but where taxes are owed, the only choice involved is to pay them now or pay them later. Spreading out that payment over the rest of the tax year is much less painful than being hit with a large tax bill (as well as interest charges when that tax bill can’t be paid in full and on time) when the return for the year is filed next spring.

Take, for example, an employee who found out, after filing the return for 2023, that an additional $2,000 in taxes was owed. Assuming that their income and the amount of tax deducted from their paycheque doesn’t change, it’s likely that a similar amount will be owed when the return for 2024 is filed. If that taxpayer is paid biweekly, there will be about 13 paycheques between the end of June and the end of the year. Increasing the amount of tax deducted from those paycheques by about $75 per paycheque will mean that the $2,000 in taxes owing is paid to the Canada Revenue Agency by the end of the year – thereby avoiding a larg