Come on! Let's hear it for equality!

In my research on the application of subsistence to lease/owner operators I have found several firms that use it. However, none have done any public advertising because they seem to be intimidated by Canada Revenue Agency. In their defense CRA is not an easy book to read and not an exact science to practice. They appear to “let things go” and “draw the line” indiscriminately. Sometimes exposing a court case that proves them wrong only seems to delay their tactics rather than stop them.

Too many Canadians believe that CRA audit assessments or re-assessments are based entirely on the Income tax laws as supported by tax court rulings. Unfortunately they are not! They are too often formulated as a geographic application or interpretation. Sometimes one or a group of auditors take on a particular issue with an “end justifies the means” mentality. With the “ends” being tax revenue and the “means” being ignoring of court rulings. For example: I have a case right now on my desk where a T4’d executive (who was re-assessed for a particular tax year) filed a notice of objection against the assessment. Several months after filing it, suddenly the executive’s employer received a garnishment order. I personally presided over a phone call to the auditor assigned to the file. The garnishment immediately was repealed (no apology or explanation). It was repealed because I mentioned the “Notice of Objection”. The auditor acknowledged the filing on their data base and then immediately faxed the retraction. This is NOT an isolated case, in certain instances they are routine. The point is, CRA knew of the notice but ignored the legal requirement to suspend all collections until they were advised (by the citizen) that they (the citizen) knew of their rights under the law. Once it was clear the citizen knew the law, CRA obeyed it. It appears that the phrase “ignorance of the law is of no avail” only applies to citizens not to the government.

This is just one reason why most accountants (if they use subsistence) try and operate “beneath the radar”. They don’t want to be on the phone all day arguing with agents quoting court cases and being harrased with illegal and ignorant actions. I sympathize with them! It’s not a cake walk, especially if an accountant has to work for a living as well. CRA seems to have all the time and money! BUMMER!

This is an open invitation for accountants to ask for assistance in the application and defense of subsistence allowance. If this opportunity is ever to catch on, accountants have to feel comfortable with their application and know how to (or have someone) defend it. In my opinion the strongest means of defending subsistence is compliance and publicity. It’s kind of hard to garnish popularity when one profession is shy to publicize. Come on guys and gals, let’s hear it!