Yes, but they don’t always tell you the client name until they have verified who YOU are, which sometimes requires 20 questions…
Easy peasy: I ask them (either on the VM or when they call me) to provide three numbers from the client ID (SIN or BN). They refuse, I tell ‘em to put their call where the sun don’t shine. 
Most have no problem complying when I say that I need to verify them just as much as they need to verify me.
I don’t let them do that. I just stop them and ask the client name. If they don’t, I hang up.
I guess I’m just really strict with them…they won’t give an inch…me either.
1 Like
I get those calls from time to time. It always annoys me that CRA calls me and asks me to prove who I am. If you called me, you must already know who I am. Usually, they start off with the client’s name, and I have a good idea what they want. I have no idea what a rep id even looks like, and I refuse to look it up. So, I tell them, I’ll submit the delinquent HST returns right away, but they can’t enter that as a note until they confirm my rep id. So, it’s a standoff, and we hang up. I’m of the opinion, the burden of proof is on the caller, not the callee.
They usually ask for whom they are looking and then Iadvise that I am an offsite accountant and that they need to contact client directly. If I recognize the client name is one who is not returning, I advise them.
I also advise CRA that I am not wasting my time going thru confidentiality as I wont be able to help them.
Most of the time, they say the individual’s name or give me a BN, which I can look up. But, unless it’s a client that my firm no longer represents, I will spend the time verifying my identity, in case it’s a simple question, whose answer will prevent further problems or work.
For instance, I have had CRA phone to get an explanation about a deduction or a strange GIFI code or to understand the taxpayer’s business operations, which made them say, “Oh, okay.” and allow the deduction or assess the tax return without further issue. If they didn’t get an answer, they would deny the deduction or launch an official investigation - which WOULD become official correspondence posted to their account (which I could access via RAC), but then would require me (or my client) to spend hours or days responding to it, proving it, etc.
The above was just one example why I cancel my firm’s access to “old” clients. For another, I don’t want my firm to be associated with clients who no longer want to deal with us. And, I don’t want my staff to be accessing those accounts (whether intentionally, or by accident - i.e. filing a GST return for the wrong client). I’m sure I could come up with more reasons. So, about once a year I go through the list (via RAC) and purge any client I have not seen or heard from in a couple years.
3 Likes
Generally…I do the same. But they have to provide “something” that gives credibility before I start giving them ANY info…especially my Rep ID. If they can’t be bothered to identify themselves, I’m simply not willing to take the risk and I tell them so.
Now, if I’ve initiated a call or question somehow and I’m expecting a return…sure, I’ll go through the drill. But if it’s out of the blue…not a chance. The liability is WAY too high.
I started asking, ‘before we go any further, can you please prove that you are calling from CRA?’. “O. Then we will send a letter.”.
Good, don’t waste my time.
So, are you saying we (representatives) should NOT be allowed to cancel our own authorization for any previous clients??? That’s how this question started, for which I gave ONE reason (of many possible reasons) that we SHOULD be allowed to remove authorizations from our own list of clients.
To repeat, if I boot them off my list of authorized clients, CRA is not going to phone me about them. I support that.
1 Like
Absolutely not. Just saying what I do to the annoying phone calls to me, asking to be an extension to their collection arm.
If it comes to authorizations, they created a nightmare for RC59s, (I like this name better), mildly said. They force everyone to have Business Account or My Account. Those who don’t have computers, or don’t know how to turn them on, too. I feel like I am back to communism.
And I will blame Trudeau for it. Him and his team run the show no matter what.
Now they create another nightmare with cancelling authorization. There is cancel authorization box for a reason on the form. If someone uses it without communicating with a client, he / she should not representing them in the first place.
In RAC you can delete whoever you want. Why do they need to play with the form. Create their employment?
I didn’t like it at first, but being able to email them and get issues responded to the same day or even the same week is a welcome change to the year that CRA takes to process anything.
They do that to me. As soon as they call I tell them “before we both verifying my authorization, I wanted to tell you we have nothing to do with client debt and you will need to contact the taxpayer directly” then they confirm the client number and take us off as the primary contact. No idea how we are always the primary contact but that’s why they are calling.
Sigh…
Yes, I know. That is not the point. The point is that I don’t want CRA to phone me about people who are NO LONGER CLIENTS OF MY FIRM.
When I said that, I was only responding to kevin’s question:
2 Likes