cs3b3aj@maccs.McMaster.CA (Stephen M. Dunn) (04/07/89)
A friend of mine is considering buying a Mac to be used partly for school work and partly for his business (he is a semi-professional juggler). The question he would like answered has to do with taxation. He wants to know if he can write off part of the cost of the computer as a business expense (and the same for depreciation). As far as I know, if he can determine (and be able to prove to Revenue Canada, if requested) that he uses his computer for business purposes (business correspondence, financial management, etc.) x% of the time, then he can use x% of the buying price as a business expense and he can depreciate x% of his computer in future years. If this is true, what is the best way of being able to prove this percentage? If this is not true, then what are the rules? If you like, you can mail me answers, but I think there are probably many people on the net who would like to see, so maybe posting is better. advTHANXance. -- ====================================================================== ! Stephen M. Dunn, cs3b3aj@maccs.McMaster.CA ! DISCLAIMER: ! ! This space left unintentionally blank - vi ! I'm only an undergrad ! ======================================================================
pt@geovision.uucp (Paul Tomblin) (04/13/89)
In article <2364@maccs.McMaster.CA> cs3b3aj@maccs.UUCP (Stephen M. Dunn) writes: > > A friend of mine is considering buying a Mac to be used partly for school >work and partly for his business (he is a semi-professional juggler). The I wouldn't juggle a Mac if I were you, they make a horrible noise when you drop them. Try an Atari. :-) -- Paul Tomblin, First Officer, Golgafrinchan B Ark | PANIC - Bad Neuron UUCP: nrcaer!cognos!geovision!pt ?? | address list. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here aren't | "My brain hurts" necessarily even mine! |
jhp@apss.ab.ca (Herb Presley, Planning Officer ) (04/20/89)
In article <2364@maccs.McMaster.CA>, cs3b3aj@maccs.McMaster.CA (Stephen M. Dunn) writes: > > A friend of mine is considering buying a Mac to be used partly for school > work and partly for his business (he is a semi-professional juggler). The > question he would like answered has to do with taxation. He wants to know > if he can write off part of the cost of the computer as a business expense > (and the same for depreciation). > Why doesn't your friend call Revenue Canada for a ruling on his question, or at the very least, advice on whether or not it is permissable. I've seen a lot of questions about income tax rules that are posted to this and other Canadian Nets that could be resolved with a simple phonecall to R.C. If you become the recipient of bad advice on one of these networks you could be at best wasting your time to CLAIM something as a deduction from Income Tax and at worst could be open to accusations of cheating, etc. Besides, Revenue Canada will make the eventual decision anyhow on allowable deductions. So you might as well ask their advice to begin with. -- _______________________________________________________________ |* email : jhp@apss.ab.ca | |** mail : 10320 - 146 St. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T5N 3A2 | |*** ph : (403) 451-7151 |
cs3b3aj@maccs.McMaster.CA (Stephen M. Dunn) (04/21/89)
In article <1152@apss.apss.ab.ca> jhp@apss.ab.ca (Herb Presley, Planning Officer ) writes: >Why doesn't your friend call Revenue Canada for a ruling on his question, or >at the very least, advice on whether or not it is permissable. I've seen a lot >of questions about income tax rules that are posted to this and other Canadian >Nets that could be resolved with a simple phonecall to R.C. Yeah, you're right about this to a certain extent, and you're right that erroneous information could be posted (although, since we do have a tax lawyer whose name escapes me right now reading all of these articles, errors would get corrected quickly). However, as the summary says, RevCan screws up sometimes. Every year, the Toronto Star newspaper puts together a panel of tax experts (CAs, tax lawyers, etc.) and they come up with 15 or 20 personal income tax questions ranging from some pretty simple things to some more complex questions. In most years, RevCan got 50-75% right (I think); this year, however, they got something like 70% of the questions wrong! Of course, a survey of this limited size (and the questioning method perhaps - anonymous reporters called the RevCan help lines with the questions) is far from being a definitive measurement of RevCan's tax advice accuracy, but it is scary. Anyway, thanx for the message ... I'll pass it along to him. -- ====================================================================== ! Stephen M. Dunn, cs3b3aj@maccs.McMaster.CA ! DISCLAIMER: ! ! This space left unintentionally blank - vi ! I'm only an undergrad ! ======================================================================
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (04/21/89)
In article <1152@apss.apss.ab.ca> jhp@apss.ab.ca (Herb Presley, Planning Officer ) writes: >If you become the recipient of bad advice on one of these networks you could be >at best wasting your time to CLAIM something as a deduction from Income Tax >and at worst could be open to accusations of cheating, etc. The same, of course, applies if you get bad advice from Revenue Canada. Which isn't at all unlikely, especially with all the changes made this year. >Besides, Revenue Canada will make the eventual decision anyhow on allowable >deductions. So you might as well ask their advice to begin with. Unfortunately, the people giving the telephone advice are not the ones who will make the eventual decision, and advice given over the telephone is not legally binding on R.C. -- Mars in 1980s: USSR, 2 tries, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 2 failures; USA, 0 tries. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
dave@lsuc.uucp (David Sherman) (04/25/89)
jhp@apss.ab.ca (Herb Presley, Planning Officer) writes: >Besides, Revenue Canada will make the eventual decision anyhow on allowable >deductions. So you might as well ask their advice to begin with. Correction: Revenue Canada makes A decision, not THE decision. Revenue Canada, Taxation officials will make a decision as to whether to accept or deny a particular claim, and assess or reassess accordingly. But taxpayers may appeal to the Tax Court of Canada, which allows informal procedures and does not require you to have a lawyer. Of course, you do have to make a valid legal argument for your claim. David Sherman Tax Lawyer -- Moderator, mail.yiddish { uunet!attcan att utzoo }!lsuc!dave dave%lsuc@ai.toronto.edu
jhp@apss.ab.ca (Herb Presley, Planning Officer ) (04/26/89)
In article <1989Apr25.013838.13830@lsuc.uucp>, dave@lsuc.uucp (David Sherman) writes: > jhp@apss.ab.ca (Herb Presley, Planning Officer) writes: > >Besides, Revenue Canada will make the eventual decision anyhow on allowable > >deductions. So you might as well ask their advice to begin with. > > Correction: Revenue Canada makes A decision, not THE decision. > ............... > ............... But taxpayers may appeal to the Tax Court of Canada, > which allows informal procedures and does not require you to have > a lawyer............. > That's true. However, I do believe the gentleman was talking about the INITIAL claiming process. Most taxpayers would not want to get into a legal hassle with Revenue Canada, no matter how "informal" the procedures may be. The majority of taxpayers do not understand the tax laws, and unless they have rather complicated tax deductions are just as glad to get it over with each year with little or no hassle. So my point still stands. I would much rather call Revenue Canada prior to annual submission of my tax form to ensure that any item fell within the parameters of what they would consider acceptable than take the matter to Tax Court. Unless I were a lawyer, mind you, and understood such things as Tax Court appeals and the like........... -- _______________________________________________________________ |* email : jhp@apss.ab.ca (alberta!ncc!apss!jhp) | |** mail : 10320 - 146 St. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T5N 3A2 | |*** ph : (403) 451-7151 |