Stay on top of the CRA !!!

Sea Shells wrote:I am a first time viewer to this forum and what I read blows my mind away! The entitlement issues here are way over the top. Try living in the real world. Most of the non combat injured are soaking the system with diseases and disorders they either would have gotten or developed anyway. But they see there service as a ticket to great benefits and a take home pay that is much larger than they received while serving. I am glad Fantino has the balls to stand up to the 90 percent that soak the system and the new benefit charts on the VAC website I hope will inform the public about what is really happening. Once Joe civilian sees a private bringing home 6500 a month tax free in disability benefits I believe this gravy train will end.
Signed a real combat and I mean combat vet!

Sea shells, I am not sure how you can distinguish between the relevance of being a combat injured and/or non combat  injured soldier and more to the point to make a generalized assumption on individuals intentions or integrity. Besides, aren't we all simply soldiers first and foremost?  Dissention amongst soldiers isn't going to right any wrongs currently present within the system. BTW, interesting profile name coincidence, must be a combat thing us non combat soldiers don't get..

Agreed

Thanks for your post and opinion Sea Shells. And also, thanks for your service. Some members of forums get lost in the details about what they think they deserve vs what they actually deserve. We, the class in the sisip class action are very grateful for the win. Some on here have been denied benefits for quite some time. My claim goes back to 1989. Did I question it? The answer is no. Like a good soldier I let the government reduce my insurance benefits I paid for out of pocket. I paid my share of taxes, penalties and legal fees. I dont want Joe civy to think I am an elitist, asking for more than my fair share. I have accepted the deal, and have moved on, as most have. Some are still very bitter at the feds. This will come to pass. I am glad to live in the best country on earth, glad for selfless people like you who go into harms way to protect our rights and values. But please remember...this is exactly what we all have signed up to do. Some never left Canadian soil, getting severely maimed in a training accident. Others have traveled far and wide to bring peace to a troubled world.
I would like to receive 6500 per month for my injuries tax-free. But I do not. I raised a family on 1300 per month for 23 years. Now that my family is grown and gone, I have had my insurance benefits reinstated. It is taxable income. I only wish I could have gotten it when my family need it most.
Please don't judge us all by my posts on here. I try to contribute as I can, and being human, sometimes lose myself in the process. Have a good day. Chimo. Ubique.
A 4th Generation Canadian Soldier

I am a first time viewer to this forum and what I read blows my mind away! The entitlement issues here are way over the top. Try living in the real world. Most of the non combat injured are soaking the system with diseases and disorders they either would have gotten or developed anyway. But they see there service as a ticket to great benefits and a take home pay that is much larger than they received while serving. I am glad Fantino has the balls to stand up to the 90 percent that soak the system and the new benefit charts on the VAC website I hope will inform the public about what is really happening. Once Joe civilian sees a private bringing home 6500 a month tax free in disability benefits I believe this gravy train will end.
Signed a real combat and I mean combat vet!

ya guys agreed ive been sick of this issue every since my failure to show that deemed tax did exist and some of the possible implications of it prior to the deal being done when it mattered the most.

I just stuck with it after that in hopes of just putting enough doubt in everyone's heads that they would keep enough money from their retro put away in case deemed tax did exist.

then to try to find a way around it.

I do apologise but the more I read the act over and over again their is just to many anomalies to let go.

just one for instace:::

the GOC and CRA says that the INTEREST portion of the QRLSP is defined as DEEMED TAX under the ITA   I haven't seen where but they have said it so many times it has to be their somewhere.

one thing I can tell you is that DEEMED TAX is also defined as the prescribed rate of interest under the ITA. THATS RIGHT IT IS ALSO DEFIND AS INTEREST!!!!

deemed tax and the prescribed rate of interest are exactly the same with the exact same calculation.

so if we cant ask for relief from deemed tax . can we seek relief from the prescribed rate of interest????

their is just to many anomalies questions and unfairness under the fairness provision for me to let it go just yet.

i do apologise for that and for any post that seems like im getting a little frustrated because I do quite often.

always question authority

propat

I agree with your post Trooper, and also Propat. I am glad you two beat this topic to death, nay to a fine pulp, for the rest of us to digest easier. You post the glaring issues and also the perspectives of one who is backed into a corner. I try to let things go with regards to these tax issues. I followed the proper channels and submitted the paper work. This is all in the rhealm of my possibilities. I cannot continue to be bitter. I must move on. Thanks gents for posting. Have a great day.
Sap

propat,

it is always a pleasure sharing my views with you on the tax topic.

Even if we don't agree with each others views at times, it's all good.

I do believe that discussion is a good thing, even though sometimes
individuals do not see eye to eye on certain topics,
as long at it is kept civilized, I enjoy the discussions.

So thanks propat for taken the time to post your views,
and that goes for all members of CSAT.
It's reading the post of all the members,
that makes this site so impressive,
for me I am grateful to all, as I have stated before,
CSAT has educated me more than any other form of information when it comes to Veteran issues.
So I say don't be afraid to post, as the diversity of post is always a form of education.
With all the challenges we are met with going forward,
posting your thoughts, info, and or your questions, helps in some way shape or form.

Just take the time to read past post on the different variety of issues,
and you will see how such and outstanding group of individuals can band together,
to accomplish most anything.

Perhaps there may be some viewers who are getting a little tired of reading about the tax issue,
for those, I sincerely apologize for being so repetitive on the issue, as I understand how
someone would be getting bored on the subject, the reason for sticking to this topic for me is twofold,
first, if any poster can help another save, and or put money back in the pockets of others, this to me is important.

Secondly, the topic is a constant learning experience for me, and is one that serves a great deal of interest to me.

1. the thing is most of the scenarios for requesting tax relief are subjective. if you were to ill to pay the CRA can say you weren't that ill you couldn't sign over authority to someone else to pay them for you . if you say you were to broke to pay they may say people on this planet survive on a dollar a day and you had a lot more than that could have moved to a cheeper place or spent less on groceries ect ect well you get the picture.

our situation is a fact based situation. ya see the CRA does not want to accept tax dollars in

one year for retro you think you may get 10 years from now they also have no mechanism currently in the ITA to accept tax on that income even if it wanted to.

this fits perfectly in OTHER and THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN so the only way to make the decision would be only on the facts if it was retro the answer would be yes if you were BS ing and they can see you actually got it the year you should of the answer would be no . dunno about you but im sure I got enough paper floating around this place to show it was retro.

2. out of all the sanarios out their the one I would choose is where I pay no penalties' interest or deemed tax . and to accomplish this you would just need to be treated the same as any other Canadian that actually had the income in the year they were suppose to get it but didn't pay the tax on it in that year under the fairness provision. seems fair to me but I guess not to some others including the GOC.

3.in your application for tax relief you would be asking for relief from interest and penalties I mean that's what the frack its for if successful that's what they do they waive them no other proses needed.

4. most Canadians go through their whole lives without paying deemed tax so saying we payed the same tax as them but then had the advantage of 1198??????

we got the 1198 because unlike most Canadians are income was stolen then when thay gave it back they not only wanted to tax it they wanted to tax that tax!!!!

this is a fracking advantage some how???

ohhh pleas GOC steel some more coin from me over say the next ten years so I can get that 1198 advantage again oh and pay all those deemed tax again pleas sighn me up for that ride again???

on second thought maybe not.

advantage !!! WOW

yup they called it a QRLSP so little to no relief to be had the odd one will sneek through but that's it. so I used the 1198 just like I told everyone else to do numerous time because WE HAVE NO CHOISE.

its the best of two evils plain and simple.

what needs to happen is QRLSP recipients have the same access to the fairness provision of the act by allowing deemed tax to be waived under it . just the same as every other Canadian has when they actually had the income and didn't pay the tax on it for whatever reason and can have penalties and interest waived.

I know that just seems crazy to a lot of people.

something that FAIR being included in the fairness provision just fracking insane right?

what the hell though ill take the leap.

propat

That's all well said and done,

where does it state that you are guaranteed to get tax payer relief from the scenario you have provided ?

In our situation we did not need to apply for tax payer relief, as there was no relief to apply for.

To compare the two scenario's, I would choose the QRLSP, over having penalties applied to the past income,
and not being given any guarantee that you would be successful in applying for tax payer relief.
I would think that this would be a no brainer.
Even if you were to be successful in your application for relief,
you would need the CRA to waive all interest, and or penalties,
and hope that they allow you to claim all of your past income,
as if you received them in those years, charging just the regular tax,
that you would have had to pay.

This from the tax act : Certain QRLSP are eligible for a special tax calculation. (SISIP CLASS ACTION)

All other lump sum payments "DEDUCT INCOME TAX USING THE WITHHOLDING RATES FOR LUMP SUM PAYMENTS.

I cannot speak for anyone but myself, without any doubt, I am happy that ours was eligible for the special tax calculations.

We must not discount the fact, that when we claimed all of our income in 2013,
we paid the same tax that any other Canadian citizen would have paid
so no disadvantage to us in that respect,
the only difference between us and other Canadian citizens.
is that we were given a chance with the 1198,
where as your ordinary Canadian tax payer, did not have that chance.
To me we had and advantage over your ordinary Canadian citizen,
as we all know that our lump sums received would be in line with,
some of the regular yearly income that Canadian citizens would make.

We must not look at the 1198 as some sort of disadvantage placed upon us,
as that is just not the case.

That being said, I see no reason for us not to fight, and try to have the Deemed taxes waived,
in fact I encourage it.
If we would be successful in having them waive the Deemed taxes,
that would put money back in the pockets of Veterans.
That is a good thing.
The fact of the matter is that the 1198 was in my mind a welcome bonus.
If it was viewed as a disadvantage, we would not have submitted it.

1. if you receive a retroactive payment for past years that is not considered a QRLSP you CAN NOT CLAIM IT AS THIS YEARS INCOME. that is a crime and if caught doing that you may have a lot more than penalties' and interest to worrie about .

2.you will have to file an rc199 or a t1ajustment depending on the years in question) to claim it for the years it should have been received .

3. you WILL be charged interest and penalties if not accepted for fo a tax relief request witch you will be accepted for because the criteria is no longer speculative but fact based. either you could pay your tax in that year or couldn't and obviously in this case couldn't.

4. but like iv been saying for years now a QRLSP gets charged DEEMED TAX not interest or penalties so we technically do not have the access to the fairness provision others have that declare past incomes weather lump sum or not that are not considered QRLSP.

YUP THAT RIGHT FOLKS IF YOU ACTUALLY HAD IT AND DIDNT DECLAIR IT YOU COULD DECLAIR IT NOW AND SEEK RELIFE FROM THE PENELTIES AND ITEREST .

YUP IF YOU HAVE A RETROACTIVE LUMP SUM THAT DID NOT QUALIFY UNDER THE ITA AS A QRLSP THAN YOU WILL BE OPEN TO INTEREST IN PENELTIES BUT WILL BE ACCEPTED FOR TAX RELIFE.

IF YOUR LUMP SUM IS CONSIDERED A QRLSP YA DO THE 1198 THING PAY YOUR DEEMED TAX LITTLE CHANCE AT TAX RELIFE DO NOT PASS GO DO NOT COLLECT 200 DOLLARS.

you can think this is such a great thing good thing or bad I really don't care but this is all under the ITA and its FAIRNESS provision. AND IT AITN FAIR!!!!

ALWAYS QUESTION ATHORITY

PROPAT

Well propat,

If you were to receive past income, and it was not considered a QRLSP by the CRA , you more than likely are going to have to report all of that past income in the year of which you have received it.
Now depending on the circumstance as to what this past income is related to, you may or may not be charged penalties,
that decision would be made by the CRA.
If the CRA did impose penalties on that past income for whatever reason,
the recipient who received that past income, may or may not choose to apply for tax payer relief,
in regards to the penalties that were placed upon them.
The above scenario is exactly why the RC4288E exist in the first place.
The above scenario does not reflect our lump sum payments,
as no interest and or penalties were charged to us when claiming,
all of our income in the one year.
I have made this crystal from the very beginning.


.


The 1198 is a form provided to us, as a way to give us a chance to recoup,
some of the funds that were charged to us in filing our interest, and or
penalty free 2013 return.

Tax cheats who are caught, will be dealt with in the manner of which the CRA see's fit.
Tax cheats who are not caught, will obviously benefit from whatever cheating they did.



P.S. As always propat, great discussion.

ya trooper as I did you would send your tax relief request in first . second I really don't know what the heck you are talking about when you say "this will now for tax purposes be considered your total income for the year 2013." NO IT WOULD NOT THAT WOULD BE ILLEGAL .

TAX CHEETS DONT GET A BREAK UNLESS THEY HAVE A GOOD REASON WE WHO HAVE A GOOD REASON DONT GET A BREAK AT ALL!!!!!

unless they eliminated the RC199 form and all other forms of reporting previously received but unreported income witch would  require quite a substantial change to the ITA you may be correct.

ya see though trooper I really am not aware of changes that profound to the ITA so im thikin welllll I mean WOW buds that just aint right.

prpoat

Has anyone let the special tax people looking at our tax issues know what trooper and propat have said? They have a release date of Aug 12 which is coming up fast. (The number that was posted here)

propat,

To reply to your post,


"If we were not given an 1198 and this was not considered a QRLSP . when everyone's taxes were done with the request for tax relief included NO ONE and I mean NO ONE would pay interest penalties or deemed tax . THAT benefits everyone more than the 1198"

Well if we were not given and 1198, and this was not considered a QRLSP, this will now for tax purposes be considered your total income for the year 2013.
This would be your total income for the year.

When everyone's taxes were done, the request for tax payer relief would not be in place, and or there would be no reason to apply for relief, as it would
be considered normal income for that year, clearly resulting in no interest penalties, and or Deemed taxes.

So as I have stated in the past, without the 1198, your tax owed would be the status quo.
However, with the 1198, you now are given a chance to have dollars put back into your pocket.
So again, not being given the opportunity to use the 1198, you will not get any chance at getting any dollars put back into your pocket.
So are some benefiting from this 1198, absolutely !
So I would think that most individuals who were asked rather or not they would submit the 1198,
I would think most, if not all would choose to submit it., regardless of any interest, and or Deemed taxes,
that results from submitting it.

So I don't see where keeping it at the status quo, would be more beneficial, then having the opportunity to use the 1198.

If a doctor made $400,000 in 2013, and the CRA offered him a chance to have them calculate it for the past 10 years using the 1198,
and told the doctor that if it turns out not to benefit you, your owed taxes will remain the same, and then went on to tell him that
they will be charging him Deemed taxes.

What do you think the doctor will say ?

There is no doubt that the 1198 was a good deal for all of us, regardless if we benefited from it or not,
it gave us a chance above and beyond the status quo of what we owed paying all the tax in the one year.

So the 1198 was a tool available for us to give us a chance to lesson the burden of having to pay all the tax in the one year.
without it we would have not had a chance to lesson the burden.
So again the 1198 is over and above what we as Canadian tax payers are bound to pay our income tax each and every year.

I am not happy in which the way our 1198's were handled by the CRA,
however, I don't relate this anger, with the opportunity of being offered the 1198.
As a matter of fact, I am grateful for it.

As far as the Deemed taxes are concerned, well I don't think that I'm alone in what I think about them,
same goes for these taxes, I don't relate my anger towards these taxes, with the opportunity of being offered the 1198.
And again, I am grateful for it.

Bottom line here is that to somehow suggest that we would have been better off not being offered the use of the 1198,
and just go with the status quo, is not valid in any way.

With all do respect of course, just making discussion.

excerpt from Trooper
So my next questions is why ?

Is it because they are bound by the tax act, and cannot waive them ?

Is it because they simply don't know if they can be waived ?

Is it because they simply just want to recoup as much money as possible ?

Is it simply because they don't want to ?"
Trooper, unfortunately I believe it is for all the reasons you mentioned. The notional top up was said to offset the deemed taxes hypothetically.