http://community.intuit.ca/discussion/index.php Fri, 12 Feb 2010 23:13:21 +0000 15 http://community.intuit.ca/discussion/topic/41348-cra-nos-howe-too-speill/ http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/bsnss/tpcs/pyr...rmttng-eng.html

If the remittance due date is a Saturday, Sunday, or Canadaian public holidy, your remittance is due on the next business day.]]> Fri, 12 Feb 2010 23:13:21 +0000 http://community.intuit.ca/discussion/topic/41348-cra-nos-howe-too-speill/ http://community.intuit.ca/discussion/topic/33954-the-canada-revenue-agency-warns-canadians-of-mail-scam/
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/nwsrm/lrts/2008/l080818-eng.html

The Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) is warning taxpayers to beware of a recent scam where some Canadians are receiving a letter fraudulently identified as coming from the CRA and asking for personal information. The letter is not from the CRA. A PDF version of the letter is available on the CRA Web site at http://www.cra.gc.ca/alert

The letter claims that there is “insufficient information” for the individual’s tax return and that in order to receive any “claims,” they will have to update their records. The letter attaches a form specifically requesting the individual’s personal information in writing, via fax or email, including information on bank accounts and passports. This letter is not from the CRA and Canadians should not provide their personal information to the sender.

All taxpayers should be vigilant when divulging any confidential information to third parties. The CRA has well established practices to protect the confidentiality of taxpayers’ information.

The CRA has notified the proper law enforcement authorities of this scam.

For information about this and other similar scams, or to report deceptive telemarketing activity, visit www.phonebusters.com, send an email to info@phonebusters.com, or call 1-888-495-8501.]]> Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:28:22 +0000 http://community.intuit.ca/discussion/topic/33954-the-canada-revenue-agency-warns-canadians-of-mail-scam/ http://community.intuit.ca/discussion/topic/33158-cra-assails-sister-agencys-workers/ Don Cayo, Vancouver Sun
Published: Friday, June 20, 2008
For 12 years, helping Canadians in distress has been Tania Lam's job at Canada's Los Angeles consulate -- people who fall ill traveling, or families of those who die, people who get into legal trouble or who are left destitute when their Hollywood dreams collapse.
So it's a sad irony that, with Lam now distressed herself, the Vancouver native doesn't know what to do or who to turn to. And it's a bitter irony that the cause of this distress is none other than her long-time employer, the Government of Canada.
Specifically, her problem is cold-blooded dunderheads at the Canada Revenue Agency. With no apparent thought for the harm to either employees or their employer, and no attempt to work out a fair deal with U.S. tax agencies, they've "reinterpreted" a tax provision that used to make it affordable for dual Canada-U.S. citizens to work in the States for the Canadian government.
Lam's precise circumstances may be unique, but her plight is shared by a number of others -- about three dozen -- at Canada's embassy in Washington or its various consulates.
Until last summer, Lam was a citizen of just one country -- Canada, the land of her birth. But with an American husband and two U.S.-born children, she thought it was time to formalize her ties to her adopted country. As a long-time consulate staffer and a former employee of Citizenship and Immigration in Vancouver, she was well aware of the dual-citizenship provision, and on July 6 she took advantage of it.
Formerly, as a Canadian working for the Canadian government in the U.S., she paid her taxes only in Canada. Federal and B.C. income tax, Employment Insurance premiums and Canada Pension contributions were all deducted from her pay.
When she accepted U.S. citizenship, she assumed that -- like the other 30-odd government-employed dual citizens in the same boat as her -- she'd get a Canadian government waiver and start paying taxes in the U.S.
Then, in December, a re-interpretation pulled the plug, not only on her but on her colleagues as well. CRA rescinded any waivers already granted, and refused to issue any more.
The only reason Lam has received is a vague reference that it's "in response to jurisprudential developments that clarified the meaning of the word tax."
As a result, Lam has to continue paying her four Canadian taxes. And, although the U.S. government does honour a tax treaty with Canada and exempt her from its federal income tax, she must also pay a hefty U.S. Social Security levy. Other employees in the U.S. split this cost with their employers, but, because the consulate doesn't deduct and remit it for her, she's considered self-employed and must pay the full 15.3 per cent herself.
Plus, the state of California -- "one of two states that doesn't even read the tax treaty" -- takes an additional eight per cent.
So, on top of Canadian taxes, she loses nearly a quarter of her gross pay.
Her situation is at the point where she can scarcely afford to keep working, but she can't afford to quit. With the U.S. economy sagging, it's a crummy time to look for work in L.A. Besides, she doesn't want to be forced to give up a long-standing career in Canada's public service. And, most important of all, as a wife and mother she dares not give up her health insurance because her husband has none.
She briefly considered renouncing her American citizenship. But she no longer has a green card, which used to allow her to work in L.A., and there's no guarantee she'd get another one. She could be refused continued admission to the country.
Thus, renouncing her Canadian citizenship may be the only viable option. Most other Canadians will understand her reluctance, but it may come to that.
Aside from the unfairness of rushing to a policy change that imposes double taxation on a relatively small group of Canadian citizens, the CRA action is stupid. Several of those in Lam's position have already resigned their jobs or renounced their Canadian citizenship, and if this isn't resolved soon the rest won't be far behind. So there's no long-term revenue potential for Canada in this. And CRA is costing a sister agency, the consular service, some of its experienced employees.
The reinterpretation should be delayed and the waivers reinstated -- or in Lam's case issued -- until the ramifications of this policy are worked out satisfactorily. If the law makes no other interpretations possible, and if no compromise with U.S. tax agencies can be reached, then the law is -- once again -- an ass. And it needs to be changed. Pronto.
dcayo@png.canwest.com
ONLINE: Read Don Cayo's blog at vancouversun.com/blogs]]> Fri, 20 Jun 2008 18:41:34 +0000 http://community.intuit.ca/discussion/topic/33158-cra-assails-sister-agencys-workers/ http://community.intuit.ca/discussion/topic/32928-missing-2007-t4-returns-update/
They were originally sent to Ottawa.

So we complied with their request and sent another copy of the T4's to WTC.

Now we are receiving second requests (computer generated). When I call them they say "yes, I see they're received, but they're still not processed so the computer is generating these automatically. There's nothing you have to do."

T4's are still not processed??]]> Fri, 06 Jun 2008 14:52:32 +0000 http://community.intuit.ca/discussion/topic/32928-missing-2007-t4-returns-update/ http://community.intuit.ca/discussion/topic/32433-missing-2007-t4-returns/
Apparently CRA is behind in their processing of 2007 T4 Returns and their computer system is generating automatic requests for missing 2007 T4 Returns (even though they were long ago mailed to CRA).

These requests for missing 2007 T4 Returns are being mailed directly to clients.

Our office has seen 7 requests where we do about 200 sets of T4s. In all cases the T4 returns were mailed to the Ottawa Technology Centre in late Jan/early Feb.]]> Mon, 05 May 2008 18:19:04 +0000 http://community.intuit.ca/discussion/topic/32433-missing-2007-t4-returns/