Skip to content

An update on the impacts of COVID-19 on the tax dispute resolution process

Stephanie Stapleford and Allison Whelan,LL.M

In a previous Thought Leadership piece, “Tax update – response to COVID-19” (26 March 2020), we reviewed the Federal COVID-19 Emergency Response Act and provided an update on operational changes announced by the Canada Revenue Agency (the “CRA”) and the Tax Court of Canada (the “TCC”) in light of the COVID-19 outbreak.

In this segment, we provide an update specific to the impact of COVID-19 on objections to the CRA and litigation before the TCC and the Federal Court.

Objections to the CRA

Normally, taxpayers who wish to dispute an assessment or reassessment must file a Notice of Objection within 90 days of the date on the Notice of (re)Assessment. However, for any objections due between March 18, 2020, and June 30, 2020, the CRA has extended the filing deadline to June 30, 2020.

If the 90-day deadline to file the objection cannot be met due to circumstances outside of the taxpayer’s control, an application for an extension of time can be made within one year after the deadline. However, even in response to COVID-19 it appears that the CRA cannot further extend this one-year extension period (see, for instance, Canada (National Revenue) v ConocoPhillips Canada Resources Corp, 2017 FCA 243).

Accordingly, for objections that were due before March 18, 2020, we recommend filing a request for an extension of time as soon as possible. A member of our Tax Group may be able to assist with the filing of a Notice of Objection and, if necessary, the preparation of an application for an extension of time.

Taxpayers who are considering filing a Notice of Objection, or who have one in the pipeline, should anticipate significant delays in the resolution of their tax dispute. The CRA has identified objections related to Canadians’ entitlement to benefits and credits as a critical service during COVID-19, so these objections will continue to be processed; however, objections related to other tax matters for now will be held in abeyance.

The shut-down of the CRA’s Appeals Division also affects the TCC appeals process, as this Division provides direction to the Department of Justice in tax appeals. Accordingly, taxpayers can also expect delays in any settlement discussions at the appeals stage.

Appeals to the TCC

On April 17, 2020, the TCC announced the cancellation of all judicial sittings and conference calls scheduled to take place on or before May 29, 2020. Parties affected by these cancellations will be contacted by TCC Registry staff.

At this time, hearings that are scheduled beyond May 29, 2020, are expected to proceed, but the TCC will reassess by May 20, 2020, to determine whether the schedule must be further altered.

Similar to the timeline for filing a Notice of Objection, taxpayers who wish to appeal a Notice of Confirmation (or Notice of Reassessment further to their objection) normally have 90 days to file a Notice of Appeal with the TCC, with an additional one-year period to request an extension of time. Initially, the TCC had not granted any concessions with respect to the 90-day filing deadline. However, on April 17, 2020, in an effort to avoid numerous applications for extensions of time to appeal, the TCC ordered that all Notices of Appeal filed between March 16, 2020, and 60 days after the TCC reopens for business shall be treated as including an application for extension of time on the exceptional grounds that COVID-19 and the TCC closure prevented the timely filing of a Notice of Appeal. As a result, within 60 days after the Registry serves the Notice of Appeal on the Respondent Department of Justice, the Respondent will be required to confirm whether the appeal was filed:

  • in a timely manner, such that no extension application is necessary; or
  • after the statutory deadline, and whether the Respondent consents to, or opposes, the extension application.

With this potential that the Department of Justice may still oppose a time extension application, we recommend that, to the extent possible, all Notices of Appeal be filed in advance of their original deadline to prevent further delays in the tax dispute process.

In addition, the period from March 16, 2020, to 60 days after the TCC resume operations, is excluded from the computation of time under:

  • the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure);
  • Orders or Directions of the TCC made prior to March 16, 2020 (including orders dealing with litigation timetables); and
  • all other Rules made under the Tax Court of Canada Act governing the conduct of matters that are under the TCC’s jurisdiction.

Other statutory filing deadlines over which the TCC has no jurisdiction continue to apply, such as the ultimate one-year deadline to apply to the TCC for an extension of time to file a Notice of Objection or Notice of Appeal.

The TCC and its Registry offices across Canada remain closed until further notice. However, filings may be made electronically using the TCC’s online filing system or by fax. Notices of Appeal and other documents will likely not be processed or served on the Department of Justice until the TCC resumes its operations. If there is no statutory deadline, parties are asked to wait to file documents and requests until the TCC resumes its operations.

Applications for Judicial Review to the Federal Court

The Federal Court, which handles applications for judicial review of the CRA’s administrative decisions and audit powers, has suspended its normal operations through to May 15, 2020. This suspension period may be further extended by the Court if necessary.

The suspension period pauses timelines under, inter alia:

  • the Federal Courts Rules;
  • Orders and Directions of the Court made before March 16, 2020; and
  • subsection 18.1(2) of the Federal Courts Acti.e., the 30-day deadline for commencing an application for judicial review.

It should be noted that while the 30-day judicial review deadline under the Federal Courts Act has been temporarily suspended, any time limits and deadlines expressly provided for in the Income Tax Act and other taxation statutes continue to apply and cannot be extended or varied unless the applicable statute allows it. For instance, the 14-day time limit to claim solicitor-client privilege over documents seized by the Minister under section 232 of the Income Tax Act is not modified by the suspension period. We therefore recommend that taxpayers who are considering applying for judicial review seek legal advice before concluding that their filing deadline has been suspended.

All Federal Court hearings that had been scheduled to take place during the suspension period have been adjourned. No new date is being set for adjourned hearings—rather, parties must contact the Court to request that their matters be rescheduled once operations have resumed. Exceptions may be made for urgent or exceptional matters, which may proceed by telephone or video conference if the Court so directs.

Taxpayers should not expect that their judicial review application will be considered “urgent” by the Court unless the delay is likely to cause the taxpayer hardship or serious financial consequences. That said, even if a judicial review application is not urgent, the Court has indicated that it will endeavour to accommodate requests for hearings by telephone or video conference. Such requests will be assessed on a case-by-case basis and will only be approved if all parties consent and certain other procedural and logistical conditions are met. In some cases, parties may also request that their adjourned hearings be determined in writing, based on the materials that have already been filed with the Court.

Once operations have resumed, the Federal Court has indicated that the scheduling of matters that have been adjourned due to COVID-19 will be broadly undertaken on a first-in first-out basis, subject to the availability of the parties and priority given to urgent or time-sensitive matters.

Conclusion

The situation is continuously evolving, and the directives by the CRA and all levels of court are subject to change. All court levels have indicated that they will continue to monitor this situation and have expressed their intention to be as flexible as reasonably possible in response to the hardship caused by COVID-19.

The Stewart McKelvey Tax Group will continue to provide updates, though taxpayers are also advised to consult the websites for the CRA and the courts.


This article is provided for general information only. If you have any questions about the tax dispute resolution process or if you require assistance with a tax dispute, please contact a member of our Tax Group.

Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Client Update: Requirement to register as a mortgage brokerage and mortgage administrator in New Brunswick

July 7, 2016

On April 1, 2016 New Brunswick’s Mortgage Brokers Act came into force, requiring businesses acting as mortgage brokerages or as mortgage administrators in New Brunswick to be licensed. A mortgage brokerage is a business that on behalf…

Read More

Copyright does not monopolize facts – documentary filmmakers’ claim against book author and publisher fails

June 29, 2016

In May 2016, the Federal Court of Canada confirmed that copyright does not protect facts, even where a book’s author is clearly inspired by the content of a film (Maltz v. Witterick, 2016 FC 524 (CanLII)).…

Read More

Solicitor-client privilege vs the Canada Revenue Agency: the SCC speaks

June 10, 2016

By Jennifer Taylor “…firms of notaries or lawyers…must not be turned into archives for the tax authorities”1 So says the Supreme Court of Canada in one of two highly anticipated decisions on solicitor-client privilege, offering lawyers…

Read More

Why can’t we be friends?: Lessons on corporate dissolution from Smith v. Hillier

May 30, 2016

Joe Thorne1 and Clara Linegar2 As joint owners of a business, what do you do when the business relationship falls apart? And what if one owner undermines the business in the process? In Smith v Hillier,3 Justice Paquette…

Read More

Client Update: Supreme Court of Canada dismisses appeals in punitive damages cases

May 26, 2016

The Supreme Court of Canada has dismissed the appeals in Bruce Brine v. Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc.1 (with costs) and Luciano Branco, et al. v. Zurich Life Insurance Company Limited, et al.(without costs). Both of…

Read More

Client Update: Pension update: Countdown to Nova Scotia Pooled Registered Pension Plans

May 17, 2016

On May 4, 2016, the Nova Scotia Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act (“PRPP Act”) was proclaimed in force, and finalized Pooled Registered Pension Plan Regulations were released. While there were no major changes from the previously released draft regulations, the proposed rules…

Read More

Pension Primer: Pooled Registered Pension Plans (“PRPPs”) in Nova Scotia

April 22, 2016

By Level Chan and Dante Manna Pooled Registered Pension Plans (“PRPPs”) are closer to becoming a reality for Nova Scotian employers. PRPPs were established by the Federal government in an effort to address the lack of retirement savings…

Read More

Client Update: Perrin v Blake reaffirms the law on contributory negligence and recovery of damages

April 14, 2016

In a case where there is a contributorily negligent plaintiff and two or more negligent defendants, can the plaintiff recover 100% of her damages from any of the defendants? The answer in Nova Scotia is…

Read More

Client Update: Interest arbitration changes for New Brunswick postponed for further study

April 11, 2016

On Friday, the Province of New Brunswick announced that it would not proceed at this time with the recently proposed changes to binding interest arbitration. The Province announced that a joint labour management committee will be struck to examine…

Read More

Client Update: Universal interest arbitration proposed for New Brunswick

April 5, 2016

On March 29, 2016, the Province of New Brunswick tabled proposed changes to the Industrial Relations Act and the Public Services Labour Relations Act. If passed, these changes would dramatically alter well-established principles of private sector collective bargaining.…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top