Mr. Speaker, with respect to the above-noted question, what follows is the response from the CRA for the time period of April 1, 2015 to April 30, 2024, that is, the date of the question.

In response to part (a), for this request, the CRA understands “taxpayer” to mean a Canadian resident tenant, either individual or corporation, or an agent acting on behalf of the non-resident, held liable, as a result of an audit, for failing to withhold from residential or commercial rent an amount required under part XIII of the Income Tax Act, i.e., when paid or credited to a non-resident.

The CRA conducted a search of completed audits and found that, during the period from fiscal year 2015-16 to fiscal year 2022-23, eight years, very few audits resulted in a Canadian resident payer being assessed under part XIII. The CRA is bound by section 241 of the Income Tax Act, provision of information, which mandates the confidentiality of taxpayer information. This provision restricts the CRA from disclosing specific details regarding individual audit cases when the dataset is limited in size. The search conducted did not include audits that resulted in the non-resident property owner being reassessed.

The CRA has long-standing and established common practice of raising assessments to the non-resident owners in lieu of the individual Canadian resident tenant.

In response to part (b), disclosing this information risks breaching the confidentiality provisions of the Income Tax Act. The protection of taxpayer information is of utmost importance to the CRA. To protect the integrity of the CRA’s work and to respect the confidentiality of taxpayer information, the CRA cannot provide this information or comment on specific taxpayer files that it may or may not be reviewing.

In response to part (c), the CRA is bound by section 241 of the Income Tax Act, which mandates the confidentiality of taxpayer information. This provision restricts the CRA from disclosing specific details regarding individual audit cases when the dataset is limited in size. The CRA is therefore unable to provide the information requested.

Additionally, the CRA does not track payments against specific account adjustments like audits, as its systems apply payments to a taxpayer’s cumulative outstanding balance by tax year, which can represent multiple assessments, reassessments such as audits of different types, and other adjustments.

In response to part (d), based on the judgment, this case was dismissed, without costs. Please see https://decision.tcc-cci.gc.ca/tcc-cci/decisions/en/item/521069/index.do?q=3792391+Canada+Inc.+v+The+King%2C.

There were no expert witness fees.

Salary costs for the CRA employee working this case were estimated at $4,672. This was based on the court case complexity level, hours spent on the file and the officer’s salary rate. It does not include salary costs for indirect activities or other standard corporate costs, such as the employee benefit plan.

In addition, the Department of Justice billed the CRA for the amount of $48,714 for the support provided by the department in this court case.

Please note that these costs cannot be broken down by province or territory.

Marie-Claude Bibeau

$493,948.00