Section 118.6

CRA indicated that Kandasamy (finding that medical residents were entitled to claim the "education tax credit" and the “post-secondary textbook tax credit” as full-time students enrolled in a “qualifying educational program” of a “designated educational institution") “would be applied in similar or identical situations.”

Respecting an educational program offered in part to those still in the job market for which there were essentially no admission criteria, CRA stated that programs were not at the post-secondary level, so that the enrolled students were not eligible for the education credit under s. 118.6.

An employer paid the tuition fees of one of its employees at a master's program. However, the employee was required to reimburse the employer upon the employee’s failure to return to work for a specified minimum period following the program completion. CRA stated:

[A] taxpayer receives a benefit for the purposes of section 118.6, where the taxpayer’s tuition is paid by the taxpayer’s employer with whom the taxpayer is dealing at arm's length. We are of the view, however, that the taxpayer would not receive a benefit for the purposes of section 118.6 if the taxpayer were to reimburse all tuition fees paid by the taxpayer’s employer. In such a situation, the taxpayer could generally, subject to satisfying all the other conditions set out in section 118.6, claim the education tax credit.

A part-time student at a university registered for courses in 3 modules comprising one module per month of 2 consecutive days of 7.5 hours each, for a total of 45 hours per course. Each course generates 3 credits and leads to a degree. Do the courses meet the "3 consecutive weeks" requirement in order to qualify as a qualifying educational program? CRA stated:

[T]he term "program" used in the definition of "qualifying educational program" … refers to the program of study rather than to each individual course. A course offered in 3 modules with a module of 2 consecutive days per month could therefore qualify for the education tax credit under subsection 118.6(2) if the program otherwise qualifies as a qualifying educational program or a specified educational program in which the student must devote at least 12 hours per month, within the meaning of section 118.6.

In finding that educational program running from Friday September 8, 2006, to Monday September 18, 2006, or from September 8 to September 22, 2006, did not satisfy the requirement of “not less than three consecutive weeks duration,” CRA referred to various dictionary definitions of week including “a period of seven consecutive days of time.”

An organization offers courses, for a specific training program, that are offered in six full 4-day sessions (32 hours) in the months of February, March, May, September, October and December. CRA stated:

[T]he program could not be a qualifying educational program or a specified educational program since the weeks of instruction are not consecutive.

… [T]he educational institution may use the T2202A certificate or an official receipt to record the tuition fees paid.

The Directorate indicated that the word “period” in the pre-2004 version of para. (b) of the definition of “qualifying educational program” meant the length of time the student received income from an office or employment rather than the times at which duties of employment were performed.

RC employees receiving reimbursements for CGA or CMA courses typically would not be entitled to the education tax credit, because typically they are employed in an accounting-related occupation (as broadly defined) and, moreover, they are being reimbursed by their employer.

Regarding training programs offered by a college that require students to complete practicums (lasting 3 weeks at 10 hours per week) in a private business in order to graduate are qualifying educational programs, CRA stated:

[T]he fact that student interns are paid for work performed during the internships will not, in and of itself, prevent them from qualifying for the education tax credit as long as the remuneration is not an allowance, benefit, grant or reimbursement by the employer for the costs of the program in question. … The definition of "qualifying educational program" in subsection 118.6(1) excludes a student who receives a benefit in respect of the program fees. However, the absence of tuition fees is not considered a benefit if the program is generally available to the public without charge.

The Directorate stated that “where a postdoctoral fellow pursues an internship whose purpose is to acquire more specialized or complementary research expertise, the fellow is not a student for the purposes of the Act.”

Regarding whether a post-doctoral fellow entitled to the education tax credit under s. 118.6(2) in respect of the fellowship, CRA stated that “to be eligible for the education tax credit … the individual must be a student and enrolled in an educational program,” before finding that a fellow did not so qualify.

Can a university in Canada, as an accredited educational institution issue T2202A forms to students taking a particular course of 6 credits as part of a post-secondary program, where the courses are for several months, straddle two calendar years and provide one class per month. After referring to its position in S1-F2-C1, paras. 1.17 and 1.24, CRA stated:

It is the university that determines the number of months a student is enrolled in a specified educational program. We understand that the university will generally consider, and subject to certain exceptions (such as when a student has dropped out of a course or program), that a student is enrolled in an educational program for the expected duration of the program. In this regard, it is not essential that registration be reflected by the university's computer system during all months of the course duration that the student is enrolled in that program.