Christie,
ACJTC:—This
appeal
relates
to
the
appellant’s
1982
taxation
year.
In
that
year
he
received
$5,117.20
from
the
London
Life
Insurance
Company
of
London,
Ontario,
as
“deemed
receipt(s)
on
deregistration”
of
two
Registered
Retirement
Savings
Plans.
At
the
time
of
the
establishment
of
the
Registered
Retirement
Savings
Plans
in
1980
the
appellant
paid
London
Life
$4,600,
but
his
maximum
allowable
deduction
in
relation
thereto
was
$2,370.20.
Nothing
transpired
from
1980
until
1982.
The
issue
is
whether
the
appellant
is
correct
in
his
contention
that,
in
calculating
his
taxable
income
for
1982,
he
is
entitled
to
deduct
the
over-contribution
of
$2,229.80
($4,600.00
minus
$2,370.20)
in
respect
of
that
portion
of
his
income
represented
by
the
$5,117.20.
The
appellant
argues
that,
if
he
is
not
entitled
to
make
the
deduction,
he
is
the
victim
of
double
taxation.
The
respondent
says
that
the
$5,117.20
is
an
amount
received
out
of
or
under
a
retirement
savings
plan
and
is
therefore
a
benefit
within
the
meaning
of
paragraph
146(1
)(b)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act
(“the
Act”)
which
is
to
be
included
in
the
computation
of
his
income
pursuant
to
subsection
146(8)
of
the
Act
without
the
deduction
claimed.
In
my
opinion
the
position
taken
by
the
appellant
is
incorrect.
There
was
a
course
of
action
open
to
him
to
avoid
that
of
which
he
now
complains,
but
unfortunately
it
was
not
pursued.
The
total
contribution
made
by
the
appellant
in
1980
having
been
less
than
$5,500,
he
could
have
obtained
a
refund
of
the
contribution
made
in
excess
of
that
allowed
under
subsection
146(5)
of
the
Act.
By
reason
of
subsection
146(8)
it
would
have
been
necessary
for
the
appellant
to
include
the
excess
in
his
income
in
the
year
of
refund,
but
this
could
then
have
been
offset
by
deducting
an
equal
amount
under
subsection
146(8.2)
of
the
Act.
In
order,
however,
for
subsection
146(8.2)
to
apply,
it
was
necessary
that
the
refund
be
made
in
the
year
of
contribution,
1980,
or
in
the
following
year.
This
was
not
done
and
consequently
the
appellant
lost
the
benefit
of
subsection
146(8.2).
As
previously
indicated,
nothing
affecting
taxation
on
income
was
done
in
relation
to
the
Registered
Retirement
Savings
Plans
from
the
time
they
were
established
in
1980
until
their
termination
in
1982,
at
which
time
the
$4,600
plus
interest
was
refunded
to
the
appellant
and
T4RSPs
were
issued.
The
legislative
provisions
of
the
Act
applicable
to
this
case
are
clear.
In
the
circumstances,
the
appellant
not
having
complied
with
those
of
them
which
would
have
enabled
him
to
claim
the
$2,229.80
as
a
deduction,
he
must
abide
the
consequences:
Rumack
v
MNR,
[1984]
CTC
2382;
84
DTC
1339.
The
appeal
is
dismissed.
Appeal
dismissed.
Email this Content