Just double check,
A daughter, single, live with her retired parents. Parents income is minimal. So I’m claiming the caregiver for one parent, and eligible dependent for the other. For that to happen, there should be no spouse transfer between the parents, correct? I prepare the return with the daughter as principle, and parents as dependents of the daughter, and claim the eligible dependent. However there still spousal transfer. So I just override the transfer?
Thanks,
I have forgotten how S118(4)© applies, but my recollection is that may prevent a line 315 if entitled to a line 305 or may prevent a line 305 if someone entitled to a line 303 or something… - Too busy to look it up again now…
yes, but because both the parents income is under the basic personal amount, there is no need for them to claim each other nor transfer an amount over to spouse. So I can override everything else (except basic and age amount), and let the daughter claim the eligible dependent? Is that allow?
For S118(4)© exclusion, I believe that the wording is ENTITLED… it does not matter if anybody is ACTUALLY claiming, the exclusion is based on ENTITLED to claim…
I see… eligible dependent always a tough topic… but I was reading this court case. May be will be of interest to you…
http://decision.tcc-cci.gc.ca/tcc-cci/decisions/en/item/65050/index.do
Maybe I was thinking of infirm claim 306 or something…
According to your original post, if the daughter can prove the requirements of financial support of the relevant dependent and the other requirements, and wishes to claim the caregiver line 315, it seems that maybe you have to ensure overrides to nil of line 303 in both of the parents returns.
You are correct
Joe seems to be throwing a disability credit (118.4(4)) into the mix erroneously. Since they are parents, the infirmity requirement does not have to be met, they simply need to be born prior to 1951
“they simply need to be born prior to 1951”
Not exactly…
The original concern of the OP was whether the Line 303s needed to be overridden manually in Taxcycle in the parents.
The answer to that question appears to be yes, since one of the conditions is that nobody else can “actually make” that claim in that year.
(My original top-of-the-head memory was that somewhere in there was the wording “entitled” rather than effectually “actually make” the claim, but upon checking, I was indeed referring to the wrong subsection, and the “entitled” refers to a different situation than the OP, so the condition is instead effectually “actually make”)