Article content

If you’re going to take your tax matter to court, as a first step, you had better be sure you end up in the right court or the judge will have no choice but to dismiss your appeal without even giving you a chance to argue the merits of your case.

Article content

For example, last year I wrote about a self-represented taxpayer who appealed his TFSA overcontribution tax to the Tax Court, which may seem logical enough. But the Tax Court dismissed the case as it has no jurisdiction to cancel the tax. Instead, the taxpayer needed to request relief from the Canada Revenue Agency. If the CRA rejects the request for relief, the decision of the CRA officer can then be appealed to the Federal Court, which will decide whether the CRA’s decision was reasonable.

Article content

Article content

Article content

The most recent example of a jurisdictional faux pas occurred earlier this month when another self-represented taxpayer attempted to appeal a case involving provincial residency to the Tax Court. Provincial residency cases could become even more popular in the future as the gap between provincial tax rates grows.

Article content

Article content

In the current case, the taxpayer reported her tax residence as Nunavut which, for 2025, has a top federal provincial marginal tax rate of 44.50 per cent. The CRA, however, believed that the taxpayer’s true provincial residence was in Ontario, which currently has a top marginal tax rate of 53.53 per cent. While it is unlikely that many taxpayers will be relocating to Nunavut solely for tax purposes, where you live in Canada can have a material impact on the amount of tax you pay, especially given that eight out of 13 provinces and territories have marginal tax rates above 50 per cent in 2025.

Article content

As far as what led the CRA to conclude that the taxpayer was an Ontario resident and not a resident of Nunavut we may never know as it was not reported. Instead, the judge’s short, three-page decision focused solely on the jurisdictional issue, and contained some harsh words directed toward the CRA. As he wrote in his opening comment, “I am publishing these reasons because I need to draw attention to conduct of the Canada Revenue Agency that is potentially depriving taxpayers of their legal rights of appeal and wasting this Court’s resources.”

Article content

Article content

The judge went on to explain that sometimes taxpayers report a certain province or territory of residence on their tax return and the CRA decides that it was, in fact, a different province or territory. As a result, the CRA reassesses the taxpayer, and the taxpayer then files a notice of objection with the CRA to dispute their reassessment. If, however, the CRA sticks to its assessing position, it then issues a notice of confirmation, which is where the problem arises.

Article content

Article content

In most cases, after receiving a notice of confirmation, a taxpayer can then choose to further dispute the CRA’s confirmation by filing a notice of appeal with the Tax Court of Canada. The notice of confirmation tells taxpayers how to do so.

Article content

But, if the dispute involves whether the taxpayer was a resident of one province or territory or another, then the next step will depend on the laws of the province or territory where the CRA believes the taxpayer lives. The Tax Court has no jurisdiction to hear a case relating to provincial tax unless the province in question has conferred jurisdiction on the Tax Court to do so.