[Zeke]

A small photographer wants to claim a camera for an expense. It is worth about $1200, being digital it will only last 2 to 3 years when it will be replaced. What class would that be under? Lenses under $400 what class? lenses over $600 what class?

Someone told me 12 for the camera but that would be 100% or maybe 8 which is only 20%.... beats me...

Zeke

[Easter1]

Zeke, on Apr 5 2009, 01:00 PM, said:

A small photographer wants to claim a camera for an expense. It is worth about $1200, being digital it will only last 2 to 3 years when it will be replaced. What class would that be under? Lenses under $400 what class? lenses over $600 what class?

Someone told me 12 for the camera but that would be 100% or maybe 8 which is only 20%.... beats me...

Zeke

WOW

Even if the neutrons are not firing, open up your 1st year text book....

Easter

[JohnNP]

Zeke, on Apr 5 2009, 02:00 PM, said:

A small photographer wants to claim

the photographer's size does not matter

have you checked schedule II for classes?

[Zeke]

JohnNP, on Apr 5 2009, 05:03 PM, said:

the photographer's size does not matter

have you checked schedule II for classes?

Have never found Schedule II

Sorry that I am such a moron

[JohnNP]

Zeke, on Apr 5 2009, 02:13 PM, said:

Have never found Schedule II

perhaps the small or large photographer should refer his tax return to his accountant?
his accountant will have a copy of schedule II in his library

[Zeke]

JohnNP, on Apr 5 2009, 05:18 PM, said:

perhaps the small or large photographer should refer his tax return to his accountant?
his accountant will have a copy of schedule II in his library

Sorry I thought this was a place a person could get help with a question by experienced people. My mistake, this is just for pompus asses.

Sorry for the intrusion

[Reg]

Zeke, on Apr 5 2009, 03:14 PM, said:

Sorry I thought this was a place a person could get help with a question by experienced people. My mistake, this is just for pompus asses.

Sorry for the intrusion

This is a place where a person can get help from experienced people.

You posted your query a forum for professionals. Your question is so basic that if you are holding yourself out as a professional you should rethink what you are doing for a living.

In, on the other hand, you are looking for assistance for a personal return, try the blue forum.

[Easter1]

Zeke, on Apr 5 2009, 02:14 PM, said:

Sorry I thought this was a place a person could get help with a question by experienced people. My mistake, this is just for pompus asses.

Sorry for the intrusion

Your question reflects more on you than one us! Can I steal your livelihood from you?

[Gordon Wiber]

While the initial question did appear to lack a understanding of Schedule II of the Regulations, the question itself does raise interesting classification issues.

Is a digital camera a “general-purpose electronic data processing equipment” within the meaning 1104(2) of the Regulations thus being classified in class 50 of Schedule II.

Are the lens “ancillary data processing equipment” thus qualifying for class 50 treatment – similar to CRA opined statement in “Interpretation — internal 2005-0163331I7 — Capital cost allowance of printers” that printers qualify for class 45/50 tax treatment.

If the lens is not a “ancillary data processing equipment”, then is it a “tool”. The term tool is not a defined term in the Act (or not defined to my knowledge).

From a quick google search a tool is defined as – “a handheld device that aids in accomplishing a task” So perhaps a position could be advanced the lens costing less than $500 are eligible for class 12 treatment.

Or the entire purchase doesn’t fit anywhere and becomes Class 8.

[unknown]

electronic data processing equipment - definately

general purpose - I think not.

portable small tool - yes

under $400 - no

thus not class 50

not class 12

must be class 8

[JohnNP]

Bert_Mulder_CGA, on Apr 6 2009, 07:21 AM, said:

electronic data processing equipment

note that my reading glasses to read my computer monitor are class 50 "ancillary data processing equipment" also

and this thread has been given much more attention than it deserves

[mikeei]

It's definitely late, by studying Sch II, I figured out it's class 8, but phoned CRA with the same question to confirm. They said MAYBE <_< .
Bert_Mulder and another certified accountant said it's Class 8, so we can assume it's class 8 by common sense.

[PeteP]

mikeei, on Apr 15 2009, 06:26 PM, said:

It's definitely late, by studying Sch II, I figured out it's class 8, but phoned CRA with the same question to confirm. They said MAYBE <_< .
Bert_Mulder and another certified accountant said it's Class 8, so we can assume it's class 8 by common sense.

I am assuming you are speaking about your own problem trying to allocate your office chairs on your own return?
You probably intended to post this to that post of yours is in the blue Quicktax forum here: http://community.int...mp;#entry219509

[mikeei]

PeteP,
My post was exactly about a digital camera over $500.

[PeteP]

mikeei, on Apr 15 2009, 10:24 PM, said:

PeteP, My post was exactly about

mikeei, please note that this orange section is the professional tax section.

Professional Accountants do not take tax advice or determine tax situations by reference to "someone told mes" or "CRA telephone people" or to "common sense", all three being irrelevant to Professional Accountants, so this type of "advice" is appropriate to the "blue quicktax forum".

Professional Accountants advise non-accountants on what needs to go on the tax returns, and how, which is one of the major functions of the profession, and that is why all businesses (and a lot of individuals), have accountants to assist with this function.

[mikeei]

PeteP, sorry I didn't know this is a restricted area.

In my language, assumption doesn't mean giving an advice.
I know allocating a chair is a silly question for a Professional Accountant. Though, you didn't say that.