Besure to note the date of each fil...

Besure to note the date of each filing you make with the (IRA, and if CRA representatives don't answer to your filing within a reasonable amplification of time, don't just chalk it up to bureaucracycontact them for a status update. Don't be like the CA in this month story who took for granted that his filing was in the queue diverted out he was wrong. Read forward to find out what happened.

This fictionalized account is based loosely in succession an actual case before the Professional manner of life Enquiry Committee (PCEC). Names and circumstances have been changed to sustain anonymity.

The situation

Vancouverite Lisa and her husband Hans mov to Holland in the mid-199Os to place up a small organic farming business, retaining couple condominiums on Vancouver Island as investments.

When they decided to liquidate these investments in 2003 to raise enough capital to purchase thing owned adjacent to their farm, they discovered that-as non-residents-selling their condominiums would not be as simple as accepting exhibits and pocketing the proceeds. The CRA requires that a T2062A entreaty by a Non-Resident of Canada for a Certificate of Compliance Related to the Disposition of Taxable Canadian possessions be filed (where there's joint ownership, a separate T2062A must be filed forward behalf of each co-owner). originates of the sale must be placed in trust, and CRA approval must be received before the stores can be taken out of the fatherland A certificate of clearance is issued after the tax is paid.

Unable to travel to BC Lisa and Hans hired professional advisors in Victoria to help with the sale, a lawyer to act as their agent, and a CA-"Bruce"-to flic the T2062A forms.

Both properties sold in the spring of 2003 with a completion date of April 30 2003 and the take measuress were held in trust pending receipt of the CRA's clearance certificates. The couple's lawyer faxed documentation concerning the sales to Btiice onward March 15, 2003, and Bruce agreed to prepare the T2062A filings accordingly.

In July Lisa emailcd him for a status report. Bruce advised her that he'd made the filings earlier that month and was now awaiting the clearance certificates. Having heard nothing by means of the end of August, Lisa again contacted Bruce who advised her that CRA delays were not unusual.

Lisa continued to contact Bruce onward a regular basis throughout the fall of 2003 still he no longer answered her messages. As a follow she and her husband had to advance deep into debt to finance their quality purchase. Doing so cost them substantial interest, legal compensations and credibility with their lender Frustrated, Lisa hired a just discovered CA-"Peter"- in December 2003 to sort things revealed When Peter subsequently sent Bruce an enquiry literal sense Bruce took his time responding.

In February 2004 Peter contacted the C]RA to determine the status of the alleged T2062A forms. When the CRA told him they had no record of the filings, Peter immediately filed the forms. Exactly six weeks later, Lisa and Hans received their clearance certificates, and the act by methods were released from trust.

What hannened

Lisa hied a complaint with the Institute, and the PCKC authorized an investigation into Bruce's conduct

Bruce faced allegations of neglecting to make the necessary filings with the CRA (Rule 202 - to be ascribed Care); misleading his clients (Rule 205 - False or Misleading Representations); failing to pursue up with the CRA to determine the correct status of the filings (Rule 202 - befitting Care); and failing to be agreeable to promptly to his clients' and successor's inquiries (Rule 2011 - Maintenance of Reputation of the Profession and lordship 302.1 - Reply by Incumbent).

The outcome

Bruce told the PCEC he believed he'd made the filings forward behalf of his client in July 2003 and when no replication from the CRA had been forthcoming, he'd chalked it up to the busy post-tax season. He admitted that he should have contacted a C]IlA representative to go after up on the matter.

The PCEC institute Bruce in violation of command 202 for failing to file the clearance certificates forward a timely basis and failing to go in the rear [i]or[/i] in the wake of up with the CRA forward their processing of the turn backs The PCEC also found him in breach of empires 201.1 and 302.1 for his failure to be agreeable to to his clients and his successor accountant. However, the PCRC did accept that Bruce had actually filed the answers (or believed he had) and did not find him in violation of control 205 (misleading a client). Bruce was given an anonymous reprimand and charged with a $3000 fine and the costlinesss of the investigation.

The messaqe

Don't take anything for granted. If you make filings with the CRA on the contrary find that you don't hear back from its representatives within a reasonable amount of time, remember that the onus is forward you to follow up upon the matter.

Please note: The appeases of this article are merely for the general guidance of readers. The PCEC deals with each case individually, based forward its specific facts and circumstances.

By Chris Utley CA, Director of Ethics

Comment or questions? Contact me at utley@ica.bc.ca.

Copyright Institute of Chartered Accountants of British Columbia Nov 2004

Provided at ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved