Criminal Prosecution For Tax Evasion And Failure To File
Another one of Paul’s interesting and surreal encounters when dealing with tax matters for his clients.
Articles
Avoiding Family Estate Fights
No family is perfect but when it comes to a death in the family, things can become much, much worse. Brigitte outlines how to mitigate family estate quarrels by planning ahead and being better prepared for the inevitable.
The Conflict of Interest of Bankruptcy Trustees
As tax lawyers, we do not have any conflict of interest and always work for the benefit of our tax debtor clients.
Joint Ownership of Assets
Avoiding probate fees is not a crime. When dealing with joint ownership of assets one must be best prepared because there can be serious consequences. Our team includes a retired insolvency trustee who is critical when dealing with such matters.
Canada Revenue Agency falling behind as uncollected taxes owed rise to $44 billion
Interesting article detailing just how much the government is behind with their tax collections. So if you owe taxes, come see us before the CRA knocks on your door!
New trust fund rules meant to crack down on tax evasion
Oh oh, who are you going to call? DioGuardi of course! Our name is synonymous with fighting the taxman on your behalf! Owe taxes? We can help. Undeclared income? We can help. Large unpayable tax bill? We can help.
Inside the offshore tax scheme that left iconic Olympian Donovan Bailey owing nearly $2.3 million in unpaid taxes
NOBODY is beyond the reach of the taxman! Call us before the CRA calls you! Tax evasion is a serious crime and if prosecuted can lead to large penalties and fines and in some cases criminal prosecution!
Canada’s taxman becoming more aggressive with real estate tax evasion in hot Vancouver and Toronto markets
Aggressive taxman? Are you evading taxes? Sooner or later, the CRA will find you. Do your family and yourself a favour, call us now so that you can come clean in a safe and legally protected manner and avoid penalties and criminal prosecution.
The CRA is cracking down on real estate tax dodgers in Canada’s red hot market
In today’s society, the CRA has access to very powerful technology that helps them zero in on tax evaders who think they can trick the government. These tax evaders are dead wrong! With access to ever more data and Artificial Intelligence in its arsenal, tax evaders will end up with large fines and penalties, crippling interest on the taxes owed and could well end up with a criminal prosecution to boot! Call us now so that you can come clean in a legally protected manner and avoid the penalties and fines but more importantly avoid criminal prosecution!
Copyright The Financial Post
Jamie Golombek November 25, 2016 1:45 PM EST
Earlier this year, the Canada Revenue Agency indicated that transactions in the Greater Toronto Area have been the subject of greater scrutiny
Evidence of the ongoing crackdown by the tax authorities on Canada’s red hot residential real estate sector is everywhere, from recently updated statistics that show increased real estate audit activities, to new rules governing the sale and reporting of your principal residence and even some recent tax cases.
Earlier this year, the Canada Revenue Agency indicated that transactions in the Greater Toronto Area have been the subject of greater scrutiny, including audits, for some years and that, more recently, the CRA has been actively monitoring and auditing real estate transactions in British Columbia. The CRA is focused on a number of areas of compliance risk in the real estate sector, which include: questionable sources of funds, property flipping, unreported GST/HST on the sale of new or substantially renovated properties, the new housing rebate and unreported capital gains.
Since April 2015 to the end of September 2016, the CRA indicated that in Ontario it has completed the audit of 13,403 files resulting in a recovery of $210.4 million. In B.C., during the same period, the CRA audited 2,366 files, resulting in $30.3 million in recovered tax. The CRA also charges a penalty equal to 50 per cent of the additional tax payable if a taxpayer knowingly makes a false statement when filing a return. During this period of increased audit activity, the CRA applied 663 penalties, totaling $12.5 million, with the highest single penalty being nearly $2.5 million.
“It is hard to imagine how the presence of someone living in the house could not be apparent to prospective buyers looking at a brand new never-lived-in home
Last month, in an effort to gather data about the dispositions of principal residences, the CRA reversed its longstanding published administrative policy that said you did not have to report the sale of your principal residence on your tax return if you were eligible for the principal residence exemption. Starting this year, the CRA said that it will only allow the PRE if you report the sale and designation of principal residence on Schedule 3, Capital Gains of your return.
The CRA is also pursuing, and winning, tax cases against individuals involved in real estate transactions. Take, for example, the most recent case, decided earlier this month involving the GST/HST new housing rebate, which allows an individual to recover some of the GST or the federal part of the HST paid for a new or substantially renovated house.
One of the main conditions to be eligible for the new housing rebate is that you must buy or build the house for use as your or your relative’s primary place of residence. In addition, if the intention at the outset is to flip the property, you won’t be eligible for the rebate.
The recent case involved an Ontario couple that attempted to claim an HST new housing rebate for a house they purchased in Milton. The purchase agreement was dated in October 2011 for a price of about $425,000. The purchase of the house closed on April 10, 2013 and it was immediately listed for resale on April 21, 2013 for $517,000 as a “Brand New Never Lived in Home.” The house sold shortly thereafter for about $510,000.
The CRA denied the couple’s claim on the basis that the couple never lived in the home when they bought it nor did they ever intend to based on the location of the house relative to where they then lived and worked and relative to where they later bought a different type and size and value of house into which they did move.
The couple argued in tax court that when their “financial and employment circumstances … changed, they decided they had to sell the new house by the time it was built but that her mother-in-law had moved into the house in the interim.” A relative living in the home would have satisfied the condition for the rebate.
Both the CRA and, ultimately, the Judge had serious doubts that the mother-in-law ever moved in since both the house’s listing and the advertising refer “in unqualified terms to the fact that the house was brand new and never lived in.” As the Judge wrote, “It is hard to imagine how the presence of someone living in the house could not be apparent to prospective buyers looking at a brand new never-lived-in home. It is equally hard to imagine a realtor taking such a risk.”
The judge reviewed the home’s utility bills for the short period of ownership. The gas bill showed an almost immaterial gas consumption, and the hydroelectric and water bills showed minimal amounts of electricity used and “0.00 cubic meters of daily water use.”
As a result, the judge denied the couple’s claim for the HST new housing rebate. He also pointed out that this was consistent with the CRA’s assessment of tax on the gain on the sale of the house, as opposed to a tax-free gain as a result of claiming the principal residence exemption.
