A simple question lies behind Patrick de Kruyff’s Tax Court of Canada victory last month over the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA): Who on earth would suggest taking Toronto’s Don Valley Parkway at rush hour?
An auditor in Vancouver, that’s who.
The basic rule for the deduction is that the move has to cut at least 40 kilometres off the daily commute.
But for some reason Google Maps kept giving the CRA a much shorter route than it did de Kryuff, despite the fact they both punched in the same coordinates at the same time of day Monday to Friday — the heart of rush hour, 4:45 p.m.
And then de Kruyff found the flaw that led to a precedent-setting ruling that could pave the way for tax relief for other urban commuters: the CRA’s employee was in B.C. — getting Google Maps’s suggestions to navigate Toronto traffic at 4:45 p.m. Pacific time.
That’s 7:45 p.m. Eastern.
If thats the case, why is there zero consideration for wàking, biling, or public transit? Why is there zero consideration for number of rooms (increasing for children, decreasing afterwards)?
I assumed the intent behind >40km was to change cities. I can’t see any way its related to the planet or life balance.
The intent does help city congestion, but there is no stipulation you had to move into a city area, just 40km closer. So you could live in farmville and move 40km and still be in farmville and have to drive into a city and that counts.
My understanding was for all the benefits that come with being closer to work, but maybe that is not the reason the government set it up.