Mr. Speaker, I support this bill because it will prevent abuse by disability tax credit promoters by restricting the fees they can charge for requesting a determination of disability tax credit eligibility on behalf of a person with a disability.
This is an entirely reasonable initiative because certain rather unscrupulous individuals are preying on less fortunate people. This is a major problem, and the growing number of promoters has resulted in cases of fraud, as evidenced by a 2011 CBC report.
I agree that a study is needed to shed light on certain issues and answer some questions. More information is needed on how the bill’s provisions will be implemented. I will get into that a little more later.
Promoters must be stopped from abusing the system, but we must also realize that not all promoters are guilty of abuse.
Two things need to be considered. On the one hand, some promoters genuinely want to and can provide top-notch service to Canadians with a disability who would not be able to request a disability tax credit without their assistance.
A distinction must therefore be drawn between promoters who abuse the system and those who act as consultants and truly help persons with a disability to obtain a disability tax credit, which they undoubtedly would not have been able to secure on their own.
On the other hand, many promoters are swindlers who promise people that they will qualify for the disability tax credit, even though their eligibility is questionable, and charge fees amounting to as much as 40% of the benefits. It is truly disgraceful.
Nothing can justify their charging fees of this nature, especially given that tax refunds are retroactive and can result in payments totalling thousands of dollars.
Therefore, restricting the fees that can be charged by promoters is a positive move to prevent the abuse of persons with a disability.
This bill will prohibit promoters from charging more than an established maximum fee set by the Governor in Council.
Of course, this raises questions like knowing how and when the public and promoters will be informed.
The fact that there could be exemptions for some promoters leads to the question of which promoters will be exempt.
The other important issue concerning the disability tax credit is the fact that those applying will also need to have government support. This support is being jeopardized by the government’s cuts to the Canada Revenue Agency. Owing to the lack of resources at the agency, it cannot properly inform the public and make those concerned aware of the tax credit or deal with the demand by providing information sessions on the disability tax credit.
Staffing cuts, particularly for regional program officers, have led to the closing of CRA offices where Canadians are accustomed to meeting an advisor who can give them more information and direct them to the proper resources.
It is important to ensure that people with a disability have equal access to the tax credit, which is not currently the case. The bill does not solve any of the many problems with the tax credit, including accessibility.
The application process is still complex, and the tax credit is difficult to obtain. The application process therefore needs to be simplified.
Unscrupulous consultants focus on these people precisely because they know that the process is complex. The terminology and definitions used in the certificate are restrictive and unfair and lead to inconsistency and discrimination.
Participants have described the process of obtaining a tax credit as difficult, lengthy and exhausting. They have a great deal of difficulty understanding the form and in some instances, never complete it.
Some do not even take the trouble to apply because they feel that it is a waste of time. Under such circumstances, many turn to consultants.
Eligibility for the tax credit requires a significant impairment that prevents a person from taking part in everyday activities. This means that people with episodic disabilities or mental illness are often excluded. Indeed, it is difficult for them to prove that their everyday activities have been significantly altered, either because this is the case on some days and not others, or because they are physically capable of engaging in these activities, but incapable of doing so mentally or emotionally.
This determination based on the patient's basic activities of daily living is a real problem. The definition is restrictive and contradictory. It is contradictory because it differs from the provincial and territorial definitions to which practitioners refer and from definitions used by other programs, such as Canada pension plan disability benefits.
The other problem is that it depends on the understanding and good will of medical practitioners to fill in the required forms. Qualified practitioners have great difficulty filling in the certificate, especially in view of the complexity of certain disabilities and their evaluation according to the definition of the patient's basic activities of daily living.
Some people have been rejected simply because their doctor gave them poor advice, based on a mistaken understanding of the eligibility criteria. Even when the forms are filled in correctly, the decision about who is accepted and who is rejected can appear arbitrary and unpredictable. Any kind of family support may make a person ineligible for the disability tax credit because such support allows that person to function at a higher level. Many participants and practitioners question the reliability of the certificate on which the eligibility determination is based.
The tax credit was established to recognize some of the extra expenses that persons with disabilities have. It has become the prerequisite for almost all federal programs related to disability, such as the registered disability savings plan.
Thus, many people with disabilities are excluded from these income security programs that could help them attain a modest but sufficient level of income, to save for their future and reduce their stress levels. What we need, as soon as possible, is a plan to provide income security for all individuals with disabilities, including those with low incomes.
The programs now in place do not work together harmoniously to provide income security for people with recurring health problems. They include Canada pension plan disability benefits, employment insurance sickness benefits and registered disability savings plans. This all leads me to say that income support measures must work together to ensure real financial security for persons with disabilities.
Returning to the disability tax credit, the certificate specifies that to be eligible, a person must have a severe and prolonged impairment in physical or mental functions for a continuous period of at least 12 months. That effectively excludes people with recurring illnesses. The question is not new. It was raised by the Liberal government in 2002.
That said, I think the bill is essential in order to deal with the problem of abusive fees charged by promoters, and it is a good start. Still, a thorough study will be very useful.