If you think Indigenous people don’t pay tax, think again

Article content material

There’s a typical false impression that Indigenous individuals in Canada merely don’t pay tax, however that’s typically not true since so as to be exempt from tax, the revenue earned have to be located on a reserve.

A current case, determined earlier this month, handled the exemption and the way it’s utilized. The case concerned an worker who’s a Haudenosaunee Iroquois Confederacy Treaty Indian from the Six Nations of Grand River in Ontario who lives on the reserve and works as a clerk at a hospital simply exterior the reserve. She took the place that the revenue she earned from working on the hospital was exempt from tax.

Article content material

The worker is a “Standing Indian” throughout the which means of the Indian Act. Below the act, the private property of an Indigenous particular person located on a reserve is exempt from tax. Prior jurisprudence has concluded that the employment revenue of such an individual is private property, and so if the taxpayer’s employment revenue from her work on the hospital was located “on a reserve,” it will be exempt from tax.

The aim of the exemption for revenue earned on a reserve, as articulated by the Supreme Court docket, is to “protect the entitlement of Indians to their reserve lands and to make sure that the usage of their property on their reserve lands (is) not eroded by the flexibility of governments to tax, or collectors to grab.” Its goal is “to not confer a basic financial profit.”

Within the current case, the important thing query was whether or not the worker’s revenue might be thought-about to be earned on a reserve and, if that’s the case, be exempt from tax. A 1991 Supreme Court docket determination held that whether or not revenue is located “on a reserve” is decided based mostly on whether or not there are ample connecting components to the reserve.

Article content material

Article content material

The courtroom set out a two-step take a look at: establish the doubtless related connecting components that join the revenue to the reserve, after which analyze these components to find out how a lot weight should be given to every of them.

Prior jurisprudence has established 5 connecting components which can be doubtlessly related within the context of figuring out whether or not employment revenue could be stated to have been earned on a reserve: the residence of the employer, the residence of the worker, the placement the place the worker is paid, the placement the place the work is carried out and the character of the companies carried out.

The choose famous that because the central administration and management of the hospital didn’t happen on the Six Nations reserve, this argues for taxation. Then again, the worker lives on the reserve, a couple of 10-minute drive from the hospital, which argues for exemption from taxation. The worker was additionally paid by direct deposit to her checking account on the reserve, which additionally argues for exemption from taxation.

However issues bought a bit extra difficult when evaluating the placement of the work and the character of the companies carried out.

Article content material

The worker carried out the overwhelming majority of her work on the hospital, which isn’t on the reserve, however on personal land that was donated to the hospital in 1961. The worker took the place that the hospital land belongs to the Six Nations, having been given to them in 1784 below the Haldimand Proclamation in recognition of their service to the Crown throughout the American Revolution. She stated the proclamation gave the Six Nations all of the land inside six miles of the Grand River, which is an enormous swath of land described as being “roughly 9,000,000 acres, solely 5 per cent of which is roofed by the Six Nations reserve.”

The taxpayer produced a Google Earth map purporting to indicate that the hospital was inside six miles of the reserve, however, based mostly on the distances on the map and the map’s scale, it appeared the hospital could have been situated about 8.4 miles from the reserve. Nonetheless, the choose felt this was irrelevant since he wasn’t being requested to determine whether or not the hospital’s land rightfully belongs to the Six Nations, however whether or not the hospital itself is situated on the reserve.

Article content material

The time period “reserve” is outlined within the Indian Act as a “tract of land, the authorized title to which is vested in His Majesty, that has been set aside by His Majesty for the use and advantage of a band.” Whereas the choose was keen, for the aim of the enchantment, to simply accept that the hospital is situated on disputed land, authorized title to the hospital land is just not vested in “His Majesty” and concluded it’s nonetheless not situated on the Six Nations reserve, so the location-of-work issue argues for taxation.

The ultimate issue to be weighed was the character of the companies carried out. The worker’s function was to course of medical doctors’ orders, reply telephones and name bells, do scheduling, order provides, relieve different staff on switchboard duties and transfer beds when required.

The hospital serves the encompassing neighborhood, together with individuals who dwell on the reserve and is one in all 5 hospitals within the space. Folks residing on the reserve will typically go to whichever hospital is closest to the place they dwell. There was no proof to recommend that the majority of the hospital’s sufferers got here from the reserve. Equally, solely three of the hospital’s roughly 100 staff lived on the reserve.

Article content material

The worker was unable to level to something in regards to the nature of the companies she carried out or the operations of the hospital that may in any method join her companies to the reserve. She felt that appreciable weight must be given to the truth that the hospital is on disputed land, however the choose famous that this reality “may need been related if the character of (her) work had been carefully tied to the reserve.”

Ultimately, the choose gave reasonable weight to the worker’s residence and that of her employer, little weight to the place of fee and important weight to the placement and nature of her work. Based mostly on this, he discovered that the worker’s employment revenue was taxable.

Jamie Golombek, FCPA, FCA, CFP, CLU, TEP, is the managing director, Tax & Property Planning with CIBC Non-public Wealth in Toronto. Jamie.Golombek@cibc.com.

In the event you favored this story, join extra within the FP Investor e-newsletter.

Bookmark our web site and help our journalism: Don’t miss the enterprise information it’s worthwhile to know — add financialpost.com to your bookmarks and join our newsletters here.

Article content material