CRA, courtroom reject company’s ‘blame the accountant’ excuse for late tax submitting

Article content material

It’s vital to file your tax return on time, whether or not you’re a person taxpayer or submitting on behalf of your company. Failure to file your return on time can result in late-filing penalties and arrears curiosity, charged on the prescribed charge for underpaid taxes, which is presently at 9 per cent every year, compounded-daily — and isn’t tax deductible.

Article content material

Do you have to be hit with penalties and curiosity, you’ll be able to all the time ask the Canada Income Company to waive or cancel them below the taxpayer aid provisions. Ought to the CRA refuse your request for aid, you’ll be able to have the CRA’s resolution reviewed by a Federal Courtroom choose to find out whether or not it was “affordable.” That’s in the end what occurred in a current case that was heard in courtroom final month, involving a late-filed company tax return.

Article content material

The company taxpayer was assessed $8,783.14 in penalties and curiosity because of the late-filing of its 2018 company tax return. The company was represented in courtroom by its president and proprietor, who, whereas not a lawyer, was granted permission by the choose, in her discretion, to signify his company on the listening to.

Article content material

The enterprise proprietor argued that the late submitting of his company’s taxes was not the company’s fault, however fairly the fault of the company’s accountant. The proprietor argued that he had offered the earnings tax data to the accountant effectively earlier than the submitting deadline, however the accountant had relocated, and did not file the return on time.

The company filed its tax return for the yr ending Dec. 31, 2018 over six months late, on Jan. 17, 2020. The conventional company tax submitting deadline for companies is six months from its year-end, which on this case would have been June 30, 2019.

After getting hit with the late-filing penalty and curiosity, the company submitted an preliminary request for aid to the CRA to cancel or waive these penalties and curiosity. In that request, the company acknowledged that its tax return was late as a result of its president, the proprietor, had been occupied together with his ailing dad and mom and that his accountant had moved workplaces. Evidently company had offered its paperwork to the accountant on April 12, 2019, however the accountant didn’t file the company’s return by the June 30 deadline. The proprietor additionally cited “monetary hardship” and the company’s constructive compliance historical past.

Article content material

Article content material

The CRA officer, performing a first-level evaluation, denied the taxpayer’s request for aid, saying that the proprietor’s private monetary state of affairs was not related to the company’s monetary state of affairs “as they’re separate entities.” When it comes to the proprietor’s dad and mom’ medical state of affairs, the CRA officer was unable to conclude that there have been circumstances that prevented the company from submitting its return on time. Lastly, the officer held that, regardless of the accountant’s transfer, the company is in the end accountable for guaranteeing its tax returns are filed on time.

The company then requested a second-level evaluation of its software for taxpayer aid on the only real foundation that the first-level CRA officer didn’t correctly contemplate the failure of its accountant to file the tax return on time because of the relocation of the accountant’s observe.

Article content material

This second-level evaluation additionally denied the company’s request for aid, stating that “below Canada’s self-assessment tax system, companies are accountable for guaranteeing their tax returns are … filed on time.… Though you might use the companies of knowledgeable, the connection between a taxpayer and a tax preparer is certainly one of selection, and any adverse penalties of that selection stays between these events. Counting on knowledgeable, doesn’t absolve you out of your duty.”

The company then took the matter to Federal Courtroom, the place the choose was tasked with figuring out whether or not the CRA’s second-level resolution to disclaim aid was affordable. An affordable resolution is “one that’s primarily based on an internally coherent and rational chain of study and that’s justified in relation to the information and regulation that constrain the decision-maker.”

Article content material

The choose, in reviewing the proof, turned to the CRA’s revealed administrative pointers for cancelling or waiving penalties and curiosity. Particularly, in conditions involving third-party delays, the CRA will assess whether or not the circumstances have been past the taxpayer’s management, pursuant to sure components which embody: pure or human-made disasters, reminiscent of flood or fireplace, civil disturbances or disruption in companies, reminiscent of a postal strike, critical sickness or accident, and critical emotional or psychological misery, reminiscent of a demise within the speedy household. Finally, nonetheless, taxpayers are usually accountable for delays brought on by a 3rd occasion appearing for the taxpayer aside from in “distinctive conditions.”

Article content material

The company argued that the CRA did not correctly contemplate its cause for the late-filing of its tax return, particularly that its accountant had moved workplaces. In courtroom, the proprietor argued that this was a matter out of the company’s management and that the company shouldn’t be penalized consequently.

Sadly for the taxpayer, the choose concluded that the accountant’s transfer “doesn’t represent both a rare circumstance or an distinctive state of affairs … that prevented the well timed submitting of the (company’s) tax return.” Moreover, the choose famous that though the company offered its earnings tax data to the accountant on April 19, 2019, which was effectively earlier than the June 30 submitting deadline, the company did not follow-up to make sure the return was being filed on time and solely followed-up three months later, on July 20, 2019, after the submitting deadline had expired. Finally, the tax return was not filed till Jan. 17, 2020, which was over six months after the submitting deadline.

Article content material

Consequently, the choose decided that the CRA’s resolution to not cancel the penalties and curiosity was affordable. The choose was additionally sympathetic in direction of the enterprise proprietor, refusing to grant the CRA its requested “prices” of $2,040 in opposition to the taxpayer, “having regard to all of the circumstances of (the) case.”

Whether or not the taxpayer would achieve success in making a declare in opposition to the accountant (or, in the end, the accountant’s insurer) will depend upon all of the information and circumstances surrounding their interplay, and whether or not the taxpayer can reveal that the accountant was negligent in not submitting the company’s return on time.

Jamie Golombek, CPA, CA, CFP, CLU, TEP is the managing director, Tax & Property Planning with CIBC Non-public Wealth in Toronto. Jamie.Golombek@cibc.com

Article content material