Taxes

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Taxes

Post by LawnBoy77777 on Thu 18 Aug 2016, 18:01

I used to work at CRA, 16 years, 13 yrs as Cl A Res F Log O. Starting this thread to see if I can help save some taxes for you.

Here is a FB group I started

https://www.facebook.com/groups/758032680995931/

For those not on Facebook here's some copy an paste from page

Canadian Veteran's Tax Guide Index:
CVTG 1: Medical Expense Tax Credit
CVTG 2: Claiming LTD premiums
CVTG 3: Appealing SISIP taxes
CVTG 4: Disability Tax Credit
CVTG 5: 10 Year Tax Adjustment period
CVTG 6: CPPD Tax
CVTG 7: Double Tax
CVTG 7B: Double tax Part 2
CVTG 8: RDSP (bonus from CRA's DTC)
CVTG 9: SISIP as WCB for Reservists
CVTG 10: Tax Free CF Pension (applies to PS & RCMP pension too)
CVTG 11: Fairness (cancel Penalty & Interest on tax)
CVTG 12: Pension Transfer Value & Tax Implications
CVTG 13: Instalment Interest (Time Value of Money)
CVTG 14: Pension buyback tax implications, like an RRSP purchase. It comes off the gross pay.
CVTG 15: Tax concepts FYI
CVTG 16: claim LTD premiums while serving instead of later
CVTG 17: Deemed Med Exp
CVTG 18: Tax Credits overview
Noteworthy topics
Pensions are assets, not income.
Bradburn Principle is that you paid for the product, you obtain the unqualified Right to it.

Posting a bit to CSAT forum when I had a brainstorm:
Canada's insurers invented a new form of BS insurance called "partial indemnity."
Indemnity is tax free as it is Capital (Tort damages).
If they claim that SISIP LTD is partial indemnity, it has to be at least partially TAX free!


LawnBoy77777
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 196
Location : St. John's
Registration date : 2015-05-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Taxes

Post by LawnBoy77777 on Sun 21 Aug 2016, 08:50

Someone in CSAT forum asked about SISIP LTD tax so I posted this simple appeal from last year. I'll add a bit (Brine & Landry + QR&O 208.53):

August 21, 2015

21 Silverton St.
St. John’s, NL
A1G 1V8

CRA
Appeals

Dear Sir or Madam,

Please consider this an appeal of my taxes based on the very simple premise of Horizontal Equity. People in the same position must be treated the same.

Long Term Disability Insurance proceeds were tax free until 1971 when Income Tax Act s. 6(1)(f) was introduced for the first time, after Canada implemented only a small part of the 1966 Carter Commission report. I think that the 1973 Boarelli v Flannigan Ontario Court of appeal case got missed by CRA as thta case said that it was safe to assume that the total agreed upon wage package would include all benefits. This obviously includes the part of the SISIP LTD premium paid by Canada "on our behalf." Bring this to the attention of the Minister to have that section of the Income Tax Act repealed.

Private LTD is still tax free. Group insurance or LTD is taxable if the employer pays any part of the premium. Canadian Force member’s SISIP LTD currently has 85% paid by the employer “on behalf of the employee” & the employee has 15% withheld at source. Viewed in this light, 100% is paid by the CF member; after all it is LTD & not vehicle insurance or building insurance so why would the employer pay LTD insurance on its own behalf? In addition, in 1997 it was revealed that only 75% of LTD insurance in Canada is tax free. Why is the one's who defend Canada, including the disabled civilians getting tax free LTD, getting a better benefit than the one's taking a bullet for them? This is so unfair it is almost beyond belief!

Therefore CRA has a choice to make so that we are treated fairly.

Tax us both, ensuring Horizontal Equity; or

Tax neither, ensuring Horizontal Equity.

To help you decide in my favor, imagine the public outcry if you change such a long-standing tax free source of funds. I find it hard to believe that the 1971 ITA amendment went through.

Take the Ratych SCC case, though it was talking about tort damages not tax, the principles are the same:

The group insurance will operate on the same principle as any private insurance scheme. Fairness requires that the member of the group be compensated in the same manner as the individual with the private contract of insurance. Workmen's compensation and sick benefits are compensation in the nature of insurance payments. Although their purpose is to make up for loss of wages to some extent, they are not themselves wages.

Stitzinger v. Imperial Life Assurance Company of Canada also has a good point as monthly LTD damage payments are NOT INCOME:

Income is, as the Oxford English Dictionary states, the "produce" of an existing ability or asset. Damages, on the other hand, remedy the loss of an ability or asset, whether a bodily or property asset. Damages therefore are not the produce of an existing ability or asset; they replace a lost ability or asset.

Speaking of employment income, I did not work for Manulife. This seems almost trivial but is fundamental. The insurance proceeds I receive are “in respect of the SISIP policy 901102” & not in respect to employment. “In respect of is used to relate two subjects. For example, I got wages “in respect of my service.” I got a LTD benefit “in respect of my service.” The actual insurance proceeds are therefore, once removed from my service. It is a small but vital difference. In fact, no proof of income loss is required, much like Canada Pension Plan Disability.

Take these facts into consideration & delete any T4A’s on my file so that I can be treated exactly as another disabled person is treated, receiving my periodic damages tax free. After all your body is a Capital Asset.

One final point, & this is a doozy. Canada wrote Queen's Regulations & Orders 208.53 in 1982 when it mandated all CF member's would participate in SISIP LTD & they made the premiums deductible from pay. Having worked at CRA from 1996-2012 as a tax collector, I find it totally inconceivable that SISIP LTD premiums would be deducted ahead of tax, CPP & EI. In other words, we paid taxes on our SISIP LTD premium & when you buy LTD out of after tax income, the benefit is tax free. Landry TCC is my reference. Precedent is important in a democracy as it shows that we are being treated fairly. The Brine TCC 2003 & 2006 cases also state that we must get tax free SISIP LTD as the four Federal LTD benefits are the same. Brine was a member of the PSMIP LTD plan while I was a member of Sun Life & SISIP LTD. As such, I add these irrefutable points to my appeal.

Yours Sincerely,


Matthew Edwards, B. PE, B. Ed., CD
Captain (Retired)
C39xxxxxx
SIN:


LawnBoy77777
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 196
Location : St. John's
Registration date : 2015-05-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Taxes

Post by Panserbjørn on Tue 30 Aug 2016, 14:00

Do you have an appeal in currently? I would like to know whether or not you are successful in the appeal.

Panserbjørn
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 141
Location : Surrey, British Columbia
Registration date : 2016-05-05

Back to top Go down

Re: Taxes

Post by Panserbjørn on Tue 30 Aug 2016, 14:05

Or if anyone has been successful in appealing SISIP tax.

Panserbjørn
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 141
Location : Surrey, British Columbia
Registration date : 2016-05-05

Back to top Go down

Re: Taxes

Post by LawnBoy77777 on Thu 01 Sep 2016, 19:15

I had appeal in for 18 months. They finally answered. Called & I talked for 2 hours. Agent agreed with every point. Then denied me! WTF?

She said she had to follow the ITA s. 6(1)(f)!

Then I said, "Treat me like Bruce Brine." He won 2 Tax Court of Canada cases & 2 court cases, was in PSMIP which is same as SISIP.

2 weeks later, denied again.

Brine got $500k damages for the aggravation Canada put him through. Reduced to $60k on appeal.

LawnBoy77777
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 196
Location : St. John's
Registration date : 2015-05-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Taxes

Post by LawnBoy77777 on Thu 01 Sep 2016, 19:16

From my group, edit if u like:

Draft for DM but will serve for anyone on SISIP. Simply change the personal items to fit your situation. Then print & mail. The comments have the evidence to prove the Appeal right.

Dear MNR or delegate,

Please re-assess my 2005 taxes as I failed to deduct my Long Term Disability premiums as I was entitled to under Income Tax Act s. 6(1)(f)(v).

My premiums were about $1500 per year, a combination of cash plus service of varying amounts. Service has value, see IBM v Waterman where Waterman "earned" his pension despite IBM paying 100% of the premium.

Additionally, I invoke Privacy Act s. 6 where CRA must have accurate information to properly assess my tax. The T4A on file from Manulife is false (Exhibit A & B). It would be foolhardy for me to ask Canada & Manulife to send you accurate information given their failure to follow CRA rules & law. I am referring to cases like TTC, National bank & Universitè de Laval. In those cases, the employer hired insurers to aboid CPP & EI premiums but CRA "caught" them.

In summary, I request the re-assessment of 2005 tax year & require you to deduct:

10 years service
$1500 per year
$15,000 from box 107 on the Manulife T4A

As a hail Mary, I request you delete ALL T4A's with Manulife named as payer based on

1. Priv Act s. 6
2. ITA s. 200 (I think)
3. Equity, Canada is hiding behind Manulife as shown in my Class Action from 2012.
4. Justice, the doctrine of illegality requires an illegal act not get state sanction.

I believe this may be systemic. SISIP/Canadian Forces/Department of National Defence do not tell us of this tax deduction. Please audit the SISIP, GWL & Sun Life plans. I realize this may be a Conflict of Interest but CRA must enforce taxes fairly or taxpayers will lose confidence & ask "why should I obey the law if the government won't?"

Yours sincerely,
Dennis Manuge
Cpl (Ret'd)

Exhibit A: My case affidavit showing Canada paid "through Manulife."

Exhibit B: Buote Estate case where Canada did the same through GWL.

Exhibit C: My COLA case where Canada paid "through Manulife."

Exhibit D: Nat Bank of Canada

Exhibit E: TTC case

Exhibit F: Universitè de Laval

Exhibit G: ITA s. 6(1)(f)(v)

Exhibit H: ITB 428 para 13

Exhibit I: IBM v Waterman

LawnBoy77777
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 196
Location : St. John's
Registration date : 2015-05-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Taxes

Post by Vet1234 on Fri 21 Jul 2017, 18:13

I just got approved DTC for years 2010-2020.
besides the DTC, is their anything else I could or should claim as a result of the DTC for those years?
thanks
avatar
Vet1234
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 461
Location : Ontario
Registration date : 2016-07-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Taxes

Post by Guest on Fri 21 Jul 2017, 18:23

Vet1234 wrote:I just got approved DTC for years 2010-2020.
besides the DTC, is their anything else I could or should claim as a result of the DTC for those years?
thanks

No,

Not with regarding the DTC.

Here is some topics on what you can claim for your taxes;

http://csat.top-talk.net/t2551-claim-all-your-tax-credits

http://csat.top-talk.net/t3268-pshcp-tax-rebate-retro-claim

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Taxes

Post by Vet1234 on Fri 21 Jul 2017, 18:24

I read on Matt Edwards FB veterans tax group about claiming amounts for medical expenses under pshcp, can I claim amounts paid through blue cross? such as prescription, psych, and massage?
avatar
Vet1234
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 461
Location : Ontario
Registration date : 2016-07-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Taxes

Post by sabrelove on Fri 21 Jul 2017, 21:41

Vet1234,
You can claim as a medical expense any co-pay for PSHCP and PSDCP. You can also claim any medical expense that exceed the limits under the plan. For example, chiropractic adjustment is covered under under PSHCP for $500, approx 10 sessions. But if you spend $1500 for 25 sessions, then you can claim the additional $1000 as a medical expense. You just need your receipts in case CRA asks to see them. In general, if you paid for it, and it was unreimbursed, then you can claim it.

The best advise is to go the CRA website and review what is covered annually as they change the list. Used to be able to claim hot tub purchased with a prescription for heat therapy, now that is gone. I check several times during the year to make sure I claim everything medical that my family is entitled to.

In deference to Matt Edwards, please fact check his references to ensure that you read the entire reference, not just the one line he quotes, and pay attention to the "and/or" at the end of sentences to make sure it applies (or not). His heart is in the right place, but sometimes interpreting legislation is a bitch.

Sabrelove



sabrelove
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 136
Location : Trenton, Ontario
Registration date : 2012-09-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Taxes

Post by Vet1234 on Fri 21 Jul 2017, 21:51

thanks Sabrelove. I appreciate it
avatar
Vet1234
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 461
Location : Ontario
Registration date : 2016-07-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Taxes

Post by bog6 on Sat 19 Aug 2017, 13:02


bog6
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 31
Location : Ontario
Registration date : 2017-02-07

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum