Jamie Golombek: To deduct unreimbursed meals and lodging employment bills, a number of circumstances should be met

Critiques and suggestions are unbiased and merchandise are independently chosen. Postmedia might earn an affiliate fee from purchases made by way of hyperlinks on this web page.
Article content material
Some taxpayers attempt to write off the price of attending to work as a deductible expense for tax functions. However apart from the odd exceptional case, these bills are denied because the Canada Revenue Agency typically considers the price of driving backwards and forwards between residence and work as a non-deductible private expense.
Commercial 2
Article content material
However what if you happen to resolve to remain at a resort close to your employer’s place of job through the workweek to reduce your every day commute? Are you able to write off the price of your lodging, together with the price of meals whereas dwelling close to your work? Effectively, you possibly can actually strive. One Ontario taxpayer did and nearly acquired away with it, till the CRA challenged the taxpayer’s employment bills and the matter ended up in Tax Court docket.
Article content material
The current case concerned a commuter practice operator for GO Transit, the regional public transit service for the Larger Toronto and Hamilton Space. The job required him to work from numerous practice stations throughout Ontario. The taxpayer usually resided in Prince Edward County, and the corporate’s residence terminal was Toronto’s Union Station.
Commercial 3
Article content material
The taxpayer reported taxable revenue of $130,640 in 2014 and $110,729 in 2015, and claimed employment bills on his tax return of $17,604 and $20,408, respectively. The employment bills consisted largely of lodging bills (about $11,000 in 2014 and $14,700 in 2015), and meals (practically $6,000 in 2014 and $5,700 in 2015).
The CRA initially assessed his tax returns for 2014 and 2015 as filed, however the company subsequently reassessed the taxpayer in 2016 and denied all his employment bills for each years.
The taxpayer defined he was required as a commuter practice operator to work from numerous practice stations forming a part of the GO Transit community. On the trial, the taxpayer testified that in a typical working week, he would depart his residence in Prince Edward County on Sunday afternoon and head by automotive to Oshawa, returning residence solely on Friday evenings after his week’s closing shift was over. The driving distance between his residence and Oshawa is roughly 160 kilometres, representing a driving time of virtually two hours.
Commercial 4
Article content material
The taxpayer additional defined that he normally began and completed work on the Oshawa GO practice station and never at his employer’s residence terminal positioned in Toronto. Whereas away from residence, he typically stayed at a resort near the Oshawa GO station or in Pickering, the place he rented an condo close to its GO station for a interval of six or seven months in 2014, at a value of $9,500. He rented a special Pickering condo in 2015 at a value of $5,520, and commuted from there to the Oshawa GO station the place he labored.
There’s a particular rule within the Revenue Tax Act that permits transportation workers who’re repeatedly required to be away from their residence municipality to deduct unreimbursed meals and lodging employment bills. To be entitled to deduct these bills, a number of circumstances should be met.
Commercial 5
Article content material
First, the employer’s principal enterprise should be transporting passengers, items or a mixture of each. The taxpayer can also be required to repeatedly journey away from the municipality the place the employer’s institution is positioned (that’s, the place the taxpayer reported to work). As well as, the taxpayer should journey on autos utilized by the employer to move these items or passengers. Lastly, the taxpayer should be required by their duties of employment to pay for meals and lodging whereas away from their residence municipality.
The worker on this case had a correctly accomplished and signed Canada Revenue Agency Form T2200, Declaration of Situations of Employment, on which his employer licensed he was required to pay numerous kinds of bills for which he wouldn’t be reimbursed. Underneath the “Situations of employment” part, his employer acknowledged he was required to journey to areas that weren’t his place of job whereas performing his employment duties.
Commercial 6
Article content material
The shape additionally famous that the employer required the worker to be away for 12 consecutive hours from the municipality and the metropolitan space the place he routinely reported for work. His employer acknowledged on the T2200 kind that it doesn’t reimburse employment bills incurred by its workers.
The worker additionally accomplished and filed signed copies of the particular kind for transit workers, Form TL2, Claims for meals and lodging expenses, which the taxpayer hooked up to his 2014 and 2015 tax returns.
-
CRA denies taxpayer’s headhunter fees, but judge disagrees
-
CRA taken to court after denying support payments as tax deductible
-
Alberta taxpayer tries to claim parking costs as a medical expense
-
CRA cracking down on COVID benefit payments as one taxpayer found out
Commercial 7
Article content material
Throughout his testimony, the taxpayer testified his every day work shift was greater than 12 hours per day, and he gave details about particular routes to indicate that. However when cross-examined about his every day work shift, the taxpayer acknowledged “that a lot of his routes lasted lower than 12 hours and had been topic to separate shifts with interruption instances.”
Based mostly on the proof, the decide stated the taxpayer had not established that his duties of employment required him to repeatedly journey away from Oshawa, and away from the metropolitan space the place his employer was positioned, thus necessitating him to incur bills for meals and lodging. The decide famous that Oshawa is within the Durham Area, which is within the Larger Toronto Space. The taxpayer, subsequently, was not capable of set up that the employment bills he claimed had been incurred exterior the metropolitan space the place he reported to work.
“The deductions … (are) not supposed for workers who resolve, for private causes, to not return to their houses on the finish of every working day,” the decide concluded.
Jamie Golombek, CPA, CA, CFP, CLU, TEP, is the managing director, Tax & Property Planning with CIBC Non-public Wealth in Toronto. Jamie.Golombek@cibc.com.
_____________________________________________________________
When you appreciated this story, sign up for more within the FP Investor publication.
_____________________________________________________________