A J Frost:—This is an appeal from the appellant’s income tax assessments for the 1967 and 1968 taxation years. Upon notices of objection duly signed and filed, the Minister of National Revenue reconsidered the assessments and confirmed them on August 10, 1970. The appeal was heard at Toronto on October 26, 1971 by the Tax Appeal Board as it was then constituted.
It was agreed at the hearing that the argument in this case should apply equally to that of Mary H Stewart v MNR who is also an employee of the National Sanitarium Association and a contributor to the said association’s registered pension plan.
The appellant has been employed with the National Sanitarium Association since 1944 and was always a participating member of the association’s registered pension plan (hereinafter referred to as “the plan”). At no time while employed was the appellant a non-contributor to the plan. During the 1967 taxation year, in addition to his regular contributions in respect of current services, he paid into the plan an additional $1,500 for services rendered prior to 1967 and in the 1968 taxation year he again paid in an additional amount of $1,500 for services rendered prior to 1968.
The question before the Board is whether or not the appellant, being a regular contributor to a registered pension plan, is entitled to deduct an amount in excess of $1,500 for current and previous services combined in any taxation year.
Paragraph 11 (1 )(i) of the Income Tax Act permits an employee under a registered pension fund or plan to deduct in calculating his income:
(i) current service contributions not exceeding in the aggregate $1,500 to the fund or plan;
(ii) past service contributions not exceeding in the aggregate $1,500 that were paid in the year into the plan or fund in respect of services rendered by the employee in previous years while he was not a contributor;
(iii) in respect of previous years’ contributions where a taxpayer was a contributor, such amount with respect to those services not exceeding an aggregate of $1,500 less any amount deducted under subparagraph (i) or (ii) of paragraph 11 (1 )(i).
The appellant in his argument contended that since subparagraph (i) gives $1,500 universally to anybody who is in a pension plan, subparagraph (iii) becomes “meaningless”. because he said “if you get $1,500 under paragraph (i) why in the world do you want to summon up (iii)?”. This contention is without foundation as the 1968 assessment allowed the appellant to deduct $1,419 for current contributions and an additional $81 in respect of previous service.
The section indicates clearly that where a taxpayer /s a contributor he is not permitted to deduct more than $1,500 for current and/or previous services in any taxation year. As the appellant was a participating member of the plan from 1944 and contributed to the plan on a regular basis, he is not entitled to deduct more than $1,500 in any taxation year.
Appeal dismissed.
Email this Content