hi
i have client - bohemian type. doesn’t really earn income and travels to mexico etc every year.
she was out of country for 184 days. she comes home to family and is here on december 31.
i believe she is factual resident?
thanks
This is complicated but basically 1) Where is her house - does she own/rent? If she owns in one place and not the other that tends to make her resident where she owns property. If she owns in both places or rents in both places then consider 2) Where is her center of vital interests - where would a person on the street say she lives & works. Form NR73 can help you to look at the factors considered by the CRA for this. If she lives equally in both places (like a snow bird) then 3) citizenship is the deciding factor. I assume she’s a Canadian citizen and not a Mexican citizen so this would tend to make her a Canadian tax resident under the treaty.
she doesn’t own a house and probably doesn’t even rent. i think she floats around - maybe house sits. hippie lifestyle
her mother lives in canada and she does come back for half of the year.
Did she give you a copy of the previous CRA assessment which followed on her previously filing a paper-filed tax-emigration T1 to CRA on a specific historical day?
Did she give you a copy of her Mexican tax return where she filed as a tax-resident of Mexico?
Did she give you a copy of a letter from any foreign tax authority certifying that she filed as tax-resident there?
As well, if she has not given you any information about her floating, her renting, her house-sitting, her employment, all her income, wherever its source, her government ID listing her address, then you may still be a long way away from having the minimum needed to be able to accept this person as a client.
1 Like
Sounds more like a fictional resident.
It’s surprising that such a person even realizes or acknowledges the existence of “government” and “taxes”. Maybe if you procrastinate a bit she’ll float off to somewhere else and you won’t have to determine her tax residency…
3 Likes
i agree!
thank you for the advice.
have a great day
I think you should work through this with your client. She may not have enough of the “ties” to any other country to be resident anywhere else, but she might not have enough “ties” to Canada either. This will help you determine what you and the client need to do.
See my comments within this thread with regards to residency.
Hard to say without knowing any other information here… but she is most likely a factual resident of Canada. I myself am a CAD/MEX dual citizen, having worked with many other dual citizens, and leaving the country often to see family and travel.
Normally, secondary factors are not enough to tie someone’s residency to Canada alone. However, this is quite a subjective situation, and I would argue that secondary factors, in addition with their primary interests being in Canada (think of the intent to return here as “home base”, as would be argued by a tax court) would not subject your client to the 183 day rule.
@laurie brought up some really good considerations with regards to citizenship.
Again, I just don’t believe there’s enough information to give you an accurate answer. @abechew309 is correct, there is still lots to solve for (most of which are secondary factors).
1 Like
thank you everyone