Deemed Taxes QRLSP Info (Qualifying Retroactive Lump-Sum Payments)

sparrow here is question 5 the all important one.

5. Information needed to support your request:
This question does not apply for requests for refunds or reduction in amounts payable beyond the normal three year period.
Describe all the circumstances and facts supporting your taxpayer relief request. Please include a history of events including, if applicable,
any measures that you have taken to correct/avoid this tax situation. You may enclose a letter with this form to provide the information.

this would be the same for us all as far as i can see.

propat

AGREED PROPAT 100% WHAT CAN IT HURT TO ASK FOR?
Sparrow.

Me too: the Topic was tax Nuetrality, and to me i thought those Deemed taxes would be accounted for, and become Nuetral as a lot of posts here indicated that this was the goal.

sparrow the law is there the form is there we just have to fill it out.i just think having a tax lawyer wright it and with any luck a brief from the judge on the undue hardship this will bring to the class might go a long way.and if nothing elce i will fill it out on my own (takes 10 min tops)and send it in.

what can they say?no.

is 10 mins worth a chance at 20,000 ore whatever boat you are in?

thats up to each of us to decide i guess.

propat

Propat the Undue Hardship option may not be as easy as one would hope as Peter indicated it is done on a case by case basis through CRA and we know how that bureaucratic process is hit or miss. Perhaps dispite what Peter indicated, there could be a proposal put forth to CRA if not Undue Hardships then different wording within the existing settlement proposal which is excellent in my opinion and therefore we just need to sharpen the pencil and we need a legal beagle to help us do it or direct us in the right direction.Sparrow

I for 1 am ok with the deal also. I just want vets to know where we stand tax wise, and if we can get some extra kind of help, and i feel we should be afforded this due to the GAG order, that never really allowed alot of our personnal expierience, engage in the process, to help forward this case with our best interests and concerns addressed.

call same same i was thinking about it but thought we would get a true notional top up.so now we have to work this out.

propat

I think Lastchanceatfairness and Propat on another thread regarding Deemed Taxes (QRLSP) are suggesting that if we want to find a loophole within the existing settlement package we may well have an opportunity to do so within the CRA parameters. I am not experienced in matters of Revenue Canada hence I have H and R Block do them but if anyone can shed some light would be beneficial. Sparrow.

LOL You Know Navrat I thought this would work out better for us on the Notional tax top up. Had i thought different i would have posted all this info along time ago and, You probably back then, been all over this. Right/wrong? Im sorry for not posting this alot sooner.

boys no one is saying scrap the deal this is about putting our collective heads together to try to avoid the compleatly unfair demmed tax.

propat

sparrow the boxes to check in question one of that form and the moast important question 5 will be all the same for all of us.

propat

We cannot change the Tax issues we all face. But we can ask the judge that our legal fees be paid for by the GOC. Now that we know what this cost us, it should only be fair that Peter and his team be paid by the defendant and not us. That should help a lot of people that have issue with the proposal.

Navrat The lower amount may well be the QRLSP calculations but u also get the Unfair Deemed taxes added in those calculations.

nav you can also fill out the rc4288 e (11) form and maybe not pay the deemed tax.

propat

You can choose, these are CRA rules, the calculations will be done each way , and you take the lower amount, you get to choose!