{"id":35975,"date":"2022-11-24T16:32:23","date_gmt":"2022-11-24T21:32:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cccc.org\/news_blogs\/?p=35975"},"modified":"2022-11-24T16:32:26","modified_gmt":"2022-11-24T21:32:26","slug":"federal-office-of-the-taxpayers-ombudsperson-update-on-examination-into-cra-audits","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cccc.org\/news_blogs\/legal\/2022\/11\/24\/federal-office-of-the-taxpayers-ombudsperson-update-on-examination-into-cra-audits\/","title":{"rendered":"Federal Office of the Taxpayers’ Ombudsperson: Update on Examination into CRA Audits"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The Federal Office of the Taxpayers\u2019 Ombudsperson released a statement<\/a> with an update about its examination into Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) audits. The statement reflects verbal testimony<\/a> given by the Ombudsperson, Fran\u00e7ois Boileau, to the Senate Committee on Human Rights<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The statement highlights challenges in accessing taxpayer information, specifically that information gaps make it difficult to compare what is in CRA taxpayer files with information shared by stakeholders about their experiences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why Does this Examination Matter?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n

Every aspect of government interaction a charity can experience … should be free from political interference.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

As regular readers know, we have been actively monitoring concerns about charitable status becoming politicized. Where there are questions about fairness in the audit selection process, we have similar concerns \u2013 audits should also not become politicized. Every aspect of government interaction a charity can experience – registration, education letters, audit selection, revocation, general inquiries – should be free from political interference.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A suggestion made at the Senate Committee meeting<\/a> was to disaggregate data about charities that advance religion; specifically, that CRA would disaggregate data to segment those charities by their specific religion. The Ombudsperson indicated that this recommendation would be included in the examination report.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Disaggregated data to segment charities … would be best applied across the <\/em>entirety of the charitable sector, not just for those that advance religion.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

While we will wait to see the recommendation, if this proposal is made and\/or acted upon, it would be best applied across the entirety<\/em> of the charitable sector, not just for those that advance religion. To limit it to religious charities presumes that there is a distinction of treatment only as between charities of different religions. This may or may not be the case, but it excludes the option of measuring distinction of treatment as between religious and non-religious charities. If accurate comparison is the goal, the data should allow for comparisons as between other subsets of charities as well. Consider charities that advance religion and education. If only data on charities advancing religion is disaggregated, their experiences cannot be compared with non-religious charities that also advance education.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Further, if the government proposes to categorize or segment religious charities, it must be done in consultation with representatives from religious charities and communities in order to accurately and appropriately reflect religious distinctions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Background<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The audit examination<\/a> was prompted by concerns from Muslim-led charities<\/a> about their experiences with CRA. Additionally, the examination was to look at how files are selected for audit, the quality of services provided to Muslim-led charities, and CRA\u2019s efforts to make its employees aware of any potential biases.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Specific questions for the examination include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n