Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Child Tax Credit and Spousal Credit in shared custody

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by logicalvelocity View Post
    Hubby,

    I receive the ctb 6 months of the year and my sons mother the remainder 6 months. We negotiate every year who will claim the equivalent to spouse amount for our child as we do have equal 50-50 time sharing.

    LV
    My X has remarried this past Dec. I was told that since she remarried she is no longer eligible for the Equiv. to Spouse claim. We have an approximately 60/40 joint custody arrangement and I have a signed letter from her stating that I pay support for ONE of our 2 children only.

    I wanted to know if I am eligible to claim the amount?

    CRA hassled me about it the past 2 years and they want a ridiculous amount of 'info' that frankly is not even possible to attain. I'm thinking thier objection was mostly a red flag since my X and I were BOTH claiming the amount.
    Is it likely they will relax if now only one of us is claiming it?

    Tks P2

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by DadofTwoGirls View Post
      If you look at the following link:

      Information has been moved

      It seems to indicate that a person can't make a claim for an eligible dependant if support payments are made to another person for that dependant.
      Yup... that's the way it appears. Welcome to the grotesquely unfair world of RevCan.

      Wife decides to run off with some other guy, has her own business but repeatedly claims zero income. Giving her 50k a year, paying full tax on it and she gets it tax free as she refuses to cooperate in getting an agreement. Top it all off she's welcome to claim the equiv to spouse but because I'm giving her 50k a year (actually more like 75k+ in earnings given tax) I'm "not allowed". Uhhhh what on earth is the rationale there?!

      Oh and if she wants to legally harrass for more support (even though I'm paying exactly the CS tables in spite of shared custody, and a bit more than the expected ruling for SS), she's welcome to deduct those legal expenses but my defense of the same is non deductible.

      Rant complete...

      Comment


      • #33
        I believe if you have shared custody, either one can make it. There's a presumption that you're both making support payments, but only the highest earner pays the net amount.

        As per CRA's website

        What are the situations in which you cannot claim the amount for an eligible dependant?

        Note
        If you and another person were required to make support payments for the child for 2009 and as a result, no one would be entitled to claim the amount for an eligible dependant for the child, you can still claim this amount providing that you and the other person(s) paying support agree that you will be the one making the claim. If you cannot agree on who will claim this amount for the child, neither of you can make the claim.

        Comment


        • #34
          I always get a kick out of that equivalent to spouse amount. It's a royal pain in the behind. The long and the short of it is, in a "shared" custody agreement, you should be dealing with OFFSET table amounts, and therefore as long as you both agree whose claims the kid when, you should be eligible to claim it.

          The rule that's been quoted about (not claiming it for a dependant you are paying support for) is there to prevent a NCP from claiming the child as equivalent to spouse and screwing up the claim of the CP who is legitimately claiming the child as equivalent to spouse.

          ie. if you are in a shared (50-50 or 60-40) split arrangement, your options boil down to:

          1. Parent's come to an agreement about who claims the child, one parent claims child as equivalent to spouse, the other does not, credit is allowed to go through.

          2. Neither side can agree, so both parent's try to claim child as equivalent to spouse, neither get to claim it. (Not a damn thing the courts can do about this either, since it's part of the income tax act, and outside their scope of responsibility)

          If you are in a SOLE custody situation, the person with sole custody claims the child as equivalent to spouse. Period.

          CCTB operates somewhat differently, as long as you have custody of the child 3 days out of 7 (ie. > 40%) then you are entitled to claim it. You do not need the other parties signature, but you WILL have to provide CCRA documentation to support your claim. (also this year it appears that the CCTB in a 6-month/6 month split will be equilized, so BOTH parties will receive a check every month, it will simply be the amount you would receive that year / 12)

          Comment


          • #35
            (also this year it appears that the CCTB in a 6-month/6 month split will be equilized, so BOTH parties will receive a check every month, it will simply be the amount you would receive that year / 12)
            Just curious...where did you read this?

            Comment


            • #36
              Insider information From what I hear, that is what the CCRA is planning on doing for this year. You probably won't see anything about it officially until approximately July, when the new payment schedule takes effect.

              Comment


              • #37
                It makes sense for them to make this change...thanks for the heads up!

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by NBDad View Post
                  ...

                  ie. if you are in a shared (50-50 or 60-40) split arrangement, your options boil down to:

                  1. Parent's come to an agreement about who claims the child, one parent claims child as equivalent to spouse, the other does not, credit is allowed to go through.

                  2. Neither side can agree, so both parent's try to claim child as equivalent to spouse, neither get to claim it. (Not a damn thing the courts can do about this either, since it's part of the income tax act, and outside their scope of responsibility)

                  ...
                  But what should be done with the 'windfall' - how should it be split in this situation?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    That depends on how agreeable the parents are. Ideally, the parent who would benefit the most should make the claim each year, and then split the refund, or put it into an RESP.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      in negoitating child and spousal support changes my ex's lawyer has recently requested that the agreement be amended to enabler her to get the CTB etc for 12 months in a 50/50 split as it would increase her monthly income and offset the small % more she has the kids - my understanding now is that her lawyer is wrong and it has to be rotated and he is not updated on the CCRA rules. Correct????

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        CRA does not police this, and if she already has the CTB for the full year, you can leave it alone and the CRA won't check where the kids are sleeping.

                        It's not quite officially grandfathered, but there is no penalty if they find a discrepancy, they will just switch it to 6 month rotation.

                        No court order or separation agreement can over-ride the CRA rules on this, if it is reported they will change it.

                        Between the two of you, you can honour the request, but this is your discretion. On the whole it is better for the children if the family as a whole is receiving more income, but you are under no obligation to agree to this, and they can't force it on you.

                        Here is the CRA Faq on Shared Eligibility. You want to read question 3, and note that "there are no plans to look for individuals in your situation."

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Mess, do you know if they'll change the UCB/CTB payment schedule if I we rotate the equivalent to a spouse?

                          For the next 2 years, my ex will be in a common law relationship, so not able to claim the equivalent to a spouse, but I'll still be single.

                          I would like for her to keep 100% of the CTB/UCB, but for me to claim the equivalent to a spouse.

                          It seems that by doing it, it would flag our case automatically and they would change the CTB payment schedule to 6 months rotations.
                          Last edited by Foredeck; 04-28-2010, 07:32 AM. Reason: read the CRA site

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            I don't know for sure but I think that would be a flag. If you were under 40% then you would qualify for equivalent to spouse, so you would be flagging yourself.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Really hard to say. Legally if you are in a shared custody situation you are obligated to inform CCRA.

                              It's one of those things where technically it's fraud, but I've never even heard of them enforcing it. Though it is the government, if they wanted to bend you over the barrel about it, they ARE allowed to. Take that info for what's it worth.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                According to the FAQ I linked to, they state that they will not police it. This isn't fraud (criminal), there are no charges laid, no fines and no penalties. If the info becomes updated, they will change the payout. The only stipulation is, you can't change it back and forth without something showing an actual change in custody.

                                There are plenty of goverment regulations that state just the opposite, if you don't update changes in your info, you are violating some law or another, even not changing your driver's license info when you move.

                                I find it a bit peculiar, they should either grandfather it, allow it to be the parent's choice, or enforce it with penalties. They have done none of this, it's the most passive rule I've ever come across from the CRA.

                                If it was the case where the goverment were "supporting the family" then they would trumpet the program. If it were an exploit or a loophole they would close it. The CRA knows about it, but they aren't persuing it.

                                In one sense, it's unenforceable, except through who claims the Equivalent to Spouse, so I suppose that is the reason they are soft on it. But they don't treat it as fraud.

                                Comment

                                Our Divorce Forums
                                Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                                Working...
                                X