Accounting and Taxes Thread

[curves2000]

I am looking to make an amendment to the monthly tax installment for the current tax year. I want to increase my taxes paid monthly to reflect a higher income amount.

I can't recall how I initially set it up and I have tried searching for the proper document but there seems to be a million forms for this. I didn't do this from My CRA or anything and and I don't have a My CRA account. My accountant does all the taxes.

Any tips?

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by curves2000

I am looking to make an amendment to the monthly tax installment for the current tax year. I want to increase my taxes paid monthly to reflect a higher income amount.

I can't recall how I initially set it up and I have tried searching for the proper document but there seems to be a million forms for this. I didn't do this from My CRA or anything and and I don't have a My CRA account. My accountant does all the taxes.

Any tips?

Tax instalments?

Are you talking about withholding more at source (ie: off your paycheque)?
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-age...ed-source.html

Or do you mean literally just paying more instalments via online banking by selecting the correct CRA payment option in bills?

[curves2000]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

Tax instalments?

Are you talking about withholding more at source (ie: off your paycheque)?
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-age...ed-source.html

Or do you mean literally just paying more instalments via online banking by selecting the correct CRA payment option in bills?

It's more of question for my mothers taxes. She is self employed and has a pre-authorized debit for a tax installment payment for the current years taxes always. She pays monthly. She wants to amend the payment every month so she doesn't have as high as a year end tax bill.

She set it up years ago. CRA online agent says to talk to the bank, the bank says they have no clue. I tried searching for the form but a lot of forms. Hope this helps

Thanks!

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by curves2000

It's more of question for my mothers taxes. She is self employed and has a pre-authorized debit for a tax installment payment for the current years taxes always. She pays monthly. She wants to amend the payment every month so she doesn't have as high as a year end tax bill.

She set it up years ago. CRA online agent says to talk to the bank, the bank says they have no clue. I tried searching for the form but a lot of forms. Hope this helps

Thanks!

Oh, like the PAD payments?

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-age...zed-debit.html

The issue is that the CRA has changed a bunch of the old system in the last few years. The method you used before for Corp PAD might have been sealed off in the last 6 months or so. You may have to set up My Business to amend it. I think in general now, you can't authorize a rep for online access on a business account without authorizing it from the my business portal. Offline, sure. But I think CRA is forcing set ups of My Business accounts for T2.

The bank not having a clue is odd. Maybe ask for someone else who might know the answer. Still though, I'd recommend setting up the MYCRA account for your mom regardless of whether you use the portal to solve her remittances situation.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

Oh, like the PAD payments?

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-age...zed-debit.html

The issue is that the CRA has changed a bunch of the old system in the last few years. The method you used before for Corp PAD might have been sealed off in the last 6 months or so. You may have to set up My Business to amend it. I think in general now, you can't authorize a rep for online access on a business account without authorizing it from the my business portal. Offline, sure. But I think CRA is forcing set ups of My Business accounts for T2.

The bank not having a clue is odd. Maybe ask for someone else who might know the answer. Still though, I'd recommend setting up the MYCRA account for your mom regardless of whether you use the portal to solve her remittances situation.

I dont find it odd at all, first of all my opinion of most Banks couldnt get any lower, but further, CRA has been changing their standard practices every 6 months and not telling anyone.

The Bank being in the dark is entirely in line with the way CRA operates.

Because you're right, they're trying to force people to go online, but its so short-sighted. You've got people who have been retired or running businesses for ages who dont know how to do this.

And then people get confused and who do they call?? The Ghostbusters!! But then me. Because theres no point calling CRA, even if they answer the phone they have no clue. They'll tell you whatever it takes to get you off the phone.

So CRA change policies and practices with no notice or explanation...yeah, even as someone who abhors Banks, it makes perfect sense that they're all shoulders, and its not their fault.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by Locke

I dont find it odd at all, first of all my opinion of most Banks couldnt get any lower, but further, CRA has been changing their standard practices every 6 months and not telling anyone.

The Bank being in the dark is entirely in line with the way CRA operates.

Because you're right, they're trying to force people to go online, but its so short-sighted. You've got people who have been retired or running businesses for ages who dont know how to do this.

And then people get confused and who do they call?? The Ghostbusters!! But then me. Because theres no point calling CRA, even if they answer the phone they have no clue. They'll tell you whatever it takes to get you off the phone.

So CRA change policies and practices with no notice or explanation...yeah, even as someone who abhors Banks, it makes perfect sense that they're all shoulders, and its not their fault.

I guess that's true too. My mistake. Some of it is just dumb policy revisions that the bank doesn't communicate to their front line staff. It would have been better to say, "Ask someone else or ask that person to ask someone else until they find someone who knows how to do it." People do this for other arrangements. The only unique wrinkle here is that it goes to the CRA and must go to a specific account.

But yeah, clueless front line employees. Normal. Bank confirmations for instance is one of those infuriating ones.

"We don't do confirmations anymore. All confirmations must be done by confirmation.com".

Not true. We just need to talk to the right department. The client should pay $50CAD or whatever it is for your confirmation department to fill it in. Not like $200USD+ on confirmations.com.

Similar stuff is constantly happening for POA and executors. "Sorry, we cannot allow your authority without that person's permission."

What logical part of the person being incapable or dead do you not understand?

I don't want to needlessly rip into some of these front line employees who don't know too much, but sometimes, please ask around before stonewalling.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

I guess that's true too. My mistake. Some of it is just dumb policy revisions that the bank doesn't communicate to their front line staff. It would have been better to say, "Ask someone else or ask that person to ask someone else until they find someone who knows how to do it." People do this for other arrangements. The only unique wrinkle here is that it goes to the CRA and must go to a specific account.

But yeah, clueless front line employees. Normal. Bank confirmations for instance is one of those infuriating ones.

"We don't do confirmations anymore. All confirmations must be done by confirmation.com".

Not true. We just need to talk to the right department. The client should pay $50CAD or whatever it is for your confirmation department to fill it in. Not like $200USD+ on confirmations.com.

Similar stuff is constantly happening for POA and executors. "Sorry, we cannot allow your authority without that person's permission."

What logical part of the person being incapable or dead do you not understand?

I don't want to needlessly rip into some of these front line employees who don't know too much, but sometimes, please ask around before stonewalling.

Oh my God. Honestly among the Bane of my existence.

"Well they'll need to confirm it."

Well bucko. They're dead. But I'd gladly send you down there to get their signature if you want.

Hot Tip: "You don't want that."

Ugh...its so frustrating.

"I need their Authorization! Why are you taking me to a Church?"

Because unless you can get the Big Guy on the phone....good luck getting their Authorization.

[calgarygeologist]

I was doing my mom's taxes yesterday and it was interesting to me that one of the conditions for netfile is that the the person filing the return does not have more than 22 children.

[PaperBagger'14]

22 kids would mean she’s putting the Depends in dependents.

[GirlySports]

they could have made it 99, they just needed a number nobody could reach.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I was doing my mom's taxes yesterday and it was interesting to me that one of the conditions for netfile is that the the person filing the return does not have more than 22 children.

Dammit man!! They have to draw the line somewhere!!!

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

they could have made it 99, they just needed a number nobody could reach.

Challenge...accepted?

[Julio]

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/accounta...rvey-1.2056479

Fire up the Accountucoptors!

[Wormius]

So what’s the deal with rolling a spousal rrsp into my own? It’s more of an annoyance to have this thing that my wife contributed to for a year back in 2006 or whenever. It’s basically my rrsp going into another rrsp, why does it seems like it’s pulling teeth to just merge them together?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Wormius

So what’s the deal with rolling a spousal rrsp into my own? It’s more of an annoyance to have this thing that my wife contributed to for a year back in 2006 or whenever. It’s basically my rrsp going into another rrsp, why does it seems like it’s pulling teeth to just merge them together?

Well, it is like pulling teeth. If you are the spouse who gets the funds contributed and you divorce, putting that into your RRSP is nearly impossible. You can make it so that all your RRSPs are now spousal (which is not the goal, and in the case of an acrimonious divorce, the exact reason people want to be rid of the spousal!).

So, if I read your post right, you can either make all your RRSPs spousal or live with that spousal and your regular RRSP.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well, it is like pulling teeth. If you are the spouse who gets the funds contributed and you divorce, putting that into your RRSP is nearly impossible. You can make it so that all your RRSPs are now spousal (which is not the goal, and in the case of an acrimonious divorce, the exact reason people want to be rid of the spousal!).

So, if I read your post right, you can either make all your RRSPs spousal or live with that spousal and your regular RRSP.

We’re not planning on divorcing or anything. I am just curious why it can’t be easily done and why it has been made that way. I can’t easily merge it into my or her account. Why is it like this?

I guess I can live with it, it’s just not a huge sum of money, but I wouldn’t want to pay the taxes on it either to just close it.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Wormius

We’re not planning on divorcing or anything. I am just curious why it can’t be easily done and why it has been made that way. I can’t easily merge it into my or her account. Why is it like this?

I guess I can live with it, it’s just not a huge sum of money, but I wouldn’t want to pay the taxes on it either to just close it.

It's just the rules and regulations. I can't give you a reasonable answer to why you can't do it, unfortunately. I think that ostensibly it's to keep track of who received the tax savings, because those are attributable to the contributor for a couple of years, however after that point you would think it would be a non-factor and you could just move the funds.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Why is it like this?

Because the CRA hates us all.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Why is it like this?

Because there is no loving God and the CRA is hard evidence of that.

I know he promised 'No More Floods' but maybe one more? In Ottawa? Just for 'Old Time's Sake?'

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by Wormius

We’re not planning on divorcing or anything. I am just curious why it can’t be easily done and why it has been made that way. I can’t easily merge it into my or her account. Why is it like this?

I guess I can live with it, it’s just not a huge sum of money, but I wouldn’t want to pay the taxes on it either to just close it.

If the CRA doesn't like it, then very likely it has to do with some perceived unfair advantage they don't want you to have or are not supposed to have. Rollovers of RRSP/RIF without a death or divorce likely is due to concerns relating to improper income sprinkling.

Originally Posted by bizaro86

Because the CRA hates us all.

We are all guilty until proven innocent. That's the CRA way.