That's my story.... one more time!

Two more court cases came into the media recently, both had to do with personal vehicle, log books, and company vehicles (in this example leases). I have been rather blunt regarding business use of personal vehicle or company vehicle used for personal use, even accused of being more rigorous than the average bean counter. These two situations may bring some clarity as to both my position and my “standards”.

The first was Jorgensen v. Canada, 2009 T.C.J. No. 20, T.C.C., Sheridan J., Jan 19/09. Digest No. 2846-025 (Approx. 7 pp.). A farmer had an extended cab diesel truck with no log books supplied. Other not so critical information was that the taxpayer traded in the lease as soon as the warranty expired or was about to expire. Additionally the “extended cab” was modified or converted to a “non-passenger”.

The judge (considering all the evidence) assessed that the truck was used all or substantially all for business purposes. Even though the taxpayers did not maintain a daily record of the trucks use, they maintained sufficient source records of their business activities to allow them to reconstruct a reasonable diary of the business use of the truck.

This, at face value, seems to contradict much of what I have been stating. However, let’s look at the second case.

The second is Martin v. Canada 2009 T.C.J. No. 2, T.C.C., Margeson J., Jan 05/09. Digest No. 2846-023 (Approx. 13 pp.). A corporation leased vehicle was provided to the wives of two shareholders. CRA assessed taxable benefits and standby charges for each participant. There were no log books supplied and the vehicles were licensed as personal use. The judge agreed with CRA in this case.

In my personal estimation 70%+ of personal vehicles that are used for business purposes (and are used as deductions) do not have log books. Too many accountants revert to the first case assuming they can “reconstruct” a defense after that fact. Many auditors don’t push the issue. The industry assumption becomes “no log book is defendable”. I still strongly disagree, especially in the trucking industry. The Jorgensen’s were farmers, which is a completely different industry than trucking. Driving to and from fields moving equipment and supplies is vastly different than using a “second vehicle” to transfer paperwork and supplies. Reconstructing a reasonable diary for a trucker (without a log) will be vastly different. It will be similar to the Martin case where vehicles are licensed as personal rather than farm use.

My position stands! No log book (for truckers using personal vehicle) no deduction. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.