Careful moving your TFSA or the CRA might take an interest

Article content material

I acquired my 2023 Discover of Evaluation this week and it contained the complete particulars of my tax evaluation, a proof of modifications and different necessary data, together with a one-page detailed registered retirement financial savings plan (RRSP) deduction restrict and accessible contribution room assertion. What it didn’t comprise, nonetheless, was an analogous assertion about my accessible tax-free savings account (TFSA) contribution room.

Article content material

For this, you could go surfing to the Canada Revenue Agency’s portal, My Account or telephone the tax data telephone service (TIPS) at 1-800-267-6999. Assuming you’ve the persistence to carry (wait occasions this week have been 1.5 to 2 hours), you possibly can ask an agent for a TFSA Room Assertion and a TFSA Transaction Abstract, which present the knowledge the CRA has acquired out of your TFSA issuers about your contributions and withdrawals.

Article content material

Every year, all TFSA issuers are required to electronically submit a TFSA file to the CRA for every particular person who has a TFSA. Issuers should submit this data by the final day of February of the next yr, and report all TFSA transactions you made on or earlier than Dec. 31 of the prior yr.

It’s necessary, nonetheless, to check the TFSA transaction data the CRA has with your individual data to make sure the knowledge they’ve is right and updated. It’s potential that if you look on-line, particularly within the first few months of the yr, the CRA could not but have acquired and processed the earlier yr’s transactions, which means they’re not but mirrored within the TFSA quantities proven on-line. This might result in an overcontribution.

Article content material

Article content material

The penalty for overcontributing is the same as one per cent per 30 days for every month you’re over your restrict. In case you get assessed a TFSA penalty tax, you possibly can request the CRA to waive or cancel it, which the company has the facility to do if it may be established the tax arose “as a consequence of an affordable error,” and the overcontribution is withdrawn from the TFSA “immediately.”

If the CRA refuses to cancel the tax, you possibly can take the matter to Federal Court docket, the place a choose will decide whether or not the CRA’s resolution to not waive the tax was “cheap.”

The newest resolution involving a TFSA overcontribution, determined in April 2024, involved a taxpayer who went about transferring his TFSA from one monetary establishment to a different within the flawed approach.

The taxpayer had not less than two TFSA accounts. At the start of 2020, his unused TFSA room was $6,270. He contributed a complete of $46,000 in 2020, and so he exceeded his restrict by $39,730 and was consequently assessed a penalty tax.

The supply of his overcontributions could possibly be traced again to the taxpayer’s actions in early 2020. On Feb. 4, 2020, he withdrew $20,000 from his Fédération des caisses Desjardins du Québec TFSA account, and deposited it the subsequent day into his Nationwide Financial institution TFSA account.

Article content material

He did the identical factor once more the next month, when on March 9, 2020, he withdrew one other $20,000 from his Desjardins TFSA account, solely to deposit it the subsequent day into his Nationwide Financial institution of Canada TFSA. He had additionally deposited one other $6,000 into his TFSA account in early 2020, so his complete 2020 TFSA contributions have been $46,000, however he solely had $6,270 in unused room.

In July 2021, the taxpayer acquired a discover from the CRA advising him that he had exceeded his TFSA contribution restrict in 2020, and telling him he needed to pay $2,166 in penalty tax on his extra contributions for 2020.

In October 2021, the taxpayer despatched a letter to the CRA requesting that it cancel the tax on his extra TFSA contributions. In March 2022, the CRA wrote to him denying his request, saying it might solely accomplish that if the contributions have been made because of a “cheap error,” and the person instantly took steps to withdraw them from the TFSA, which was not the case right here.

Following this refusal, the taxpayer filed a second utility in April 2022 for the cancellation of the tax. In June 2022, the CRA once more denied his request “as a result of the transfers of funds made in 2020 from one TFSA account to a different TFSA account weren’t ‘direct transfers’ because the transfers weren’t made by the monetary establishment.” The outcome was that these transfers have been thought-about to be common contributions, placing the taxpayer in an overcontribution state of affairs.

Article content material

The taxpayer appealed this resolution to the Federal Court docket. He argued that “he (had) acted in good religion in transferring funds from one TFSA account to a different.” However the CRA maintained that the taxpayer’s error on this case was not a “cheap error” as a result of he admitted he had not made his transfers within the method prescribed by the CRA (by asking his monetary establishment to take action instantly) since he was unaware of the duty to take action. Within the CRA’s view, its train of discretion to waive the penalty tax wouldn’t be applicable within the circumstances.

The choose reviewed the arguments after which cited varied prior circumstances coping with comparable eventualities by which it was held that it was as much as the taxpayer to grasp the TFSA guidelines, together with the best way to property switch funds “instantly” from one TFSA to a different.

It may well’t merely be executed through a withdrawal and subsequent deposit, however should be executed instantly by the monetary establishment. In a majority of these circumstances, the courts have constantly held that the CRA’s refusal to deal with such errors as “cheap errors” (which might permit the CRA to waive the tax), was, itself, cheap.

Article content material

The choose in the end expressed sympathy for the taxpayer, however mentioned he was “certain by the jurisprudence and rules recognized by my colleagues. My function is to not rule on the deserves, however to evaluate whether or not the (CRA’s) resolution is cheap, figuring out whether or not it’s intelligible, clear and justified.” The choose concluded that it was, and dismissed the taxpayer’s case.

Whereas the CRA sought prices, the choose refused to award the company something owing to the unlucky circumstances of the case.

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

In case you favored this story, join extra within the FP Investor e-newsletter.

Bookmark our web site and help our journalism: Don’t miss the enterprise information you could know — add financialpost.com to your bookmarks and join our newsletters here.

Article content material