Capitalization Under the Child Support Guidelines Means More Than Capital Assets

September 2026

When a parent earns income through a business, the money reported on a tax return is often not the money available to pay child or spousal support. The Guidelines recognize this. Where a parent earns income through a partnership or a sole proprietorship, the rules allow a deduction from income for any amount the business properly requires “for purposes of capitalization”.^{FCSG Schedule III, para. 12}

That short phrase carries a great deal of weight, and I believe it is frequently read too narrowly. Many of the calculations I review treat it as permitting an adjustment only for the purchase of capital assets, such as equipment, vehicles and buildings. I wish to explain why I think the phrase means considerably more than that, why the difference matters, and how the amount can be measured in a way that is fair to both parents.

Two Meanings of One Word

The word “capitalization” is doing double duty, and I wish to clarify the two senses, because the confusion begins there.

The first sense is the accounting one. When a business buys a piece of equipment and records it as an asset to be written off over its useful life rather than as an expense of the year, the cost is said to have been “capitalized”. This is the meaning most accountants reach for first, because it is the meaning used every day in preparing financial statements.

The second sense is the older and broader one. To capitalize a business is to supply it with the capital it needs in order to function. A business that cannot pay its suppliers, carry its inventory or wait for its customers to pay is said to be under-capitalized, and no amount of equipment will fix that. The money tied up in running a business from day to day is ordinarily called “working capital”.

A respected general dictionary carries both senses, which is itself instructive. Merriam-Webster defines the verb “capitalize” at sense 2b as “to treat as an amortizable investment in long-term capital assets rather than as an ordinary operating expense to be charged against revenue for the period in which it is incurred.” That is the narrow sense, and it is the one an accountant will find first. Three senses later, the same entry gives sense 4 simply as “to supply capital for.”^{Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, s.v. “capitalize,” accessed September 17, 2026}

The noun matters more. “Capitalization” is defined as “the act or process of capitalizing,” without confining itself to any one sense of the verb, and separately as “the total liabilities of a business including both ownership capital and borrowed capital.” Note what that second definition covers. It is the whole funding of the business, equity and borrowings together, and not a category of accounting entry.^{Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, s.v. “capitalization,” accessed September 17, 2026}

Note the wording of the paragraph itself. It does not say that a deduction is allowed for capital assets purchased, or for amounts capitalized during the year. It says the deduction is for an amount required “for purposes of capitalization”. Read plainly, that describes a purpose rather than a transaction. It is money the business needs in order to be capitalized, not merely money the business happened to spend on something recorded as an asset. Hence, when Schedule III speaks of an amount required for purposes of capitalization, there is no reason in ordinary English to read it as confined to the purchase of capital assets.

I am confident in this interpretation, and I should say plainly where my confidence comes from. I sat on the Advisory Committee on Child Support for the federal Deputy Minister of Justice from 1999 to 2001, and I obtained clarification of this paragraph from Justice Canada officials at that time. It is not published authority, and a reader who wishes to rely on it should treat it as my opinion supported by my reasoning, and not as something a court has decided.

Why the Broader Reading Is Necessary

Businesses report income on an “accrual” basis rather than a cash basis. Revenue is reported when it is billed, not when it is collected. Expenses are recorded when the purchase is made, not when it is paid. The cost of equipment, inventory and prepaid expenses is paid in cash but is not deducted at the time of purchase; it is allocated to the years in which those items are used, in the case of equipment through depreciation, which appears on a tax return as capital cost allowance.

The result is simple to state. Reported income and available cash are two different numbers, and they can differ by a great deal in either direction.

Take an illustration. A business reports pre-tax income of $200,000. During the same year, sales grew, so the amount owing from customers rose by $60,000 and inventory rose by $40,000 to support expected future sales. The owner also repaid $30,000 of loan principal, which is not an expense at all. Before one dollar is taken home, $130,000 of that reported income has already been absorbed by the business. Remember that growth costs money. A growing business needs more cash tied up in receivables and inventory than a mature one, which is the opposite of what most people expect.

None of those three amounts bought a capital asset. Confine the deduction to capital asset purchases, and none of them is recognized at all. The calculation would treat the full $200,000 as money the owner could have taken home.

Measuring the Need

Saying that a business needs cash is easy. Putting a defensible number on it is the hard part, and this is where I find most disagreement arises. The method I use starts from cash rather than from income, and it runs in four steps.

The first step is to determine what actually happened to the company’s cash during the year. This means preparing a statement of changes in cash from the balance sheets and the income statements and comparing the result to the business pre-tax income for the same year. Where cash flow sits well below pre-tax income year after year, the business is using cash for capitalization, and the pattern shows it.

The second step is the one that keeps the exercise balanced. Cash flow can often be borrowed. When capital assets are bought, long-term financing is usually available for a portion of the purchase price, and an owner who pays cash instead has made a business decision rather than encountered a necessity. Paying cash is frequently the wiser choice, because it avoids loan payments during a downturn. That does not clearly answer the question of what money is available for support. Consider the case where the business owner has always paid for capital assets without using loans because of a risk averse personality. While this may be appropriate to continue, particularly in a high-risk business, I feel it is important to reconsider this practice. There is now a new and important need to consider, being the support of the children. If a reasonable amount of financing is available without undue risk, then I believe this additional cash flow should be recognized as a source of funds even if it has not been used. I accept that there needs to be a balance between borrowing risk, normal business practice and the need for additional cash flow to meet personal support obligations. The estimate needs a basis, such as the proportion of the purchase price a lender would realistically have advanced on the type and condition of the assets involved, along with reasonable repayment terms, the owner’s own historical borrowing rates, industry standards for debt financing, the financial condition of the particular business, and the owner’s obligation for child support, both financial and moral.

The third step keeps the exercise honest, and requires a review of the three years of financial history that the Guidelines require to be disclosed, or more years if they are voluntarily provided. Have there been unusual changes in assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses since the relationship broke down? Is there a possibility of manipulation, or of business practices that may reduce the calculation of pre-tax income? Examples include early purchases of new vehicles and equipment, a reduction in financing for new purchases, a significant increase in inventory on hand, early payment of supplier invoices, prepaying expenses or making advance deposits, and other such items that affect the timing of cash flows. Deferral of a large sale may do the same. So may paying some personal expenses through the business, such as legal fees related to the separation. Explanations should be obtained for unusual fluctuations, which may very well be reasonable but should not be overlooked, particularly if the impact is not eliminated after looking at all three years.

The fourth step combines the above. Actual cash flow, plus the additional cash that available financing would have produced, adjusted for anything the third step uncovers, gives an adjusted cash flow. Where that adjusted figure is lower than pre-tax income, the difference is the amount the business genuinely required for capitalization, and that amount was not available to pay support.

Two cautions belong with any such calculation. It rests on estimates and assumptions, and neither the past nor the future can be recreated with precision. Establishing what credit a lender would have extended several years ago is particularly difficult, since hindsight is 20/20, and a young company with little history and thin collateral may have had no realistic access to borrowing at all. Other professionals may use different methods and reach different opinions.

A Line of Credit Does Not Remove the Need

It is sometimes argued that a business with an operating line of credit has no capitalization problem, because it can always draw on the line to cover a shortfall. I do not accept that.

A line of credit funds the wait between doing the work and being paid for it. Where customers take 60 days to pay while employees are paid weekly and suppliers within 30 days, the gap is real and recurring. The line covers it, but the line must then be repaid out of the very receivables it was advanced against, so nothing is released for the owner. A business already near its limit has no further room, and a bank will commonly refuse to count receivables as collateral once they pass 90 days, precisely when a slowdown makes the money most needed. The negative cash flow caused by selling on credit is a genuine capitalization need, even though temporary funding exists to carry it.

It Is Not an Exact Science

What a business genuinely requires is a matter of judgment. The need changes from year to year, varies by industry and moves with economic conditions. A manufacturer and a consulting practice have very different requirements, and a business in a downturn has different requirements again. One year in isolation can be misleading, which is among the reasons the Guidelines permit regard to be had to the last three years.^{FCSG s. 17}

The useful question is not whether the money was spent, but whether the money was required. If income must be reinvested in the business to sustain its operations, it is not available to the owner. If it was retained for some other reason, that is a different matter entirely.

Why This Matters to an Incorporated Business

Schedule III, paragraph 12 of the Guidelines, discussed above, applies only to partnerships and sole proprietorships. It does not apply to corporations, and I do not suggest otherwise.

It is, however, a useful analogy, and I have relied on it as one. Where a parent is a shareholder, director or officer of a corporation, and the income shown on the tax return does not fairly reflect all the money available for support, a court may include all or part of the pre-tax income of the corporation in that parent’s income. The Guidelines give little direction on how much. What the corporation genuinely requires in order to keep operating is plainly one of the considerations, and the reasoning does not change because the business happens to be incorporated.^{FCSG s. 18(1)}

While I am not a lawyer, my own reading of the court decisions suggests that the courts have said as much. In an early and frequently cited decision, the British Columbia Court of Appeal held that regard should be had to the nature of the company’s business and to any evidence of legitimate calls on its corporate income for the purposes of that business. More recently, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal set out the considerations relevant to attributing corporate income and observed that one should not interfere with reasonable economic decisions needed to meet corporate sustainability.^{Kowalewich v. Kowalewich, 2001 BCCA 450; Ward v. Murphy, 2022 NSCA 20}

Two cautions belong with that. Neither decision uses the phrase “working capital”, so they support the broader reading without proving it. And the onus sits squarely on the parent who owns the business. A payor who says the money is not available must lead clear evidence to show it, and a bare assertion that the company needs its cash will not carry the point.^{Hausmann v. Klukas, 2009 BCCA 32; Teja v. Dhanda, 2009 BCCA 198}

There is also a floor. Where the adjusted cash flow is deeply negative, the arithmetic above will produce a reduction larger than the pre-tax income itself. That does not create a deduction from the parent’s personal income. The most a capitalization adjustment can do is reduce the corporate inclusion to nil. Where a corporation has an overall loss after the required adjustments, no pre-tax corporate income is available to attribute at all.^{Ward v. Murphy, 2022 NSCA 20 at para. 153}

I do not review the case law further here, and I leave that to legal counsel, as I am not a lawyer and am not offering legal advice. The concept produces the same type of calculation either way. A helpful overview of the principle and the related cases is set out in an article titled Determination of Income under S. 18 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines, prepared in June 2009 by Dinyar Marzban Q.C. and Jane M. Reid of Jenkins Marzban Logan LLP, Vancouver, for the Continuing Legal Education Society of British Columbia.

A Closing Thought

The point of all of this is fairness in both directions. A calculation that ignores what a business truly requires will overstate what a parent can afford to pay. A calculation that accepts every corporate expenditure as a necessity will understate it. Neither result is what the Guidelines intend.

If you are preparing or reviewing one of these calculations, you must investigate cash flow as well as income, look past the capital asset additions, ask what financing was realistically available and not used, ensure there has been no deliberate manipulation affecting the calculation of income, and look at several years rather than one. If you are a parent on either side of one of these calculations, ask your advisor to explain how the pre-tax business income was determined in your case.

Return to Articles Listing

Blair Corkum, CPA, CA, R.F.P., CFP, CFDS, CLU, CHS holds his Chartered Professional Accountant, Chartered Accountant, Registered Financial Planner, Chartered Financial Divorce Specialist as well as several other financial planning related designations. Blair offers hourly based fee-only personal financial planning, holds no investment or insurance licenses, and receives no commissions or referral fees. This publication should not be construed as legal or investment advice. It is neither a definitive analysis of the law nor a substitute for professional advice which you should obtain before acting on information in this article. Information may change as a result of legislation or regulations issued after this article was written.©Blair Corkum

Determining Income and Schedule III (Special Expenses) Adjustments – Child Support Guidelines

September 2010

The Child Support Guidelines were enacted in May 1997, giving rise to a new approach to determine child support payments. In short, the payer’s income is determined, and this income amount will determine the base level of child support to be paid based on standardized Tables authorized by the federal, and most provincial and territorial governments. These amounts may be supplemented by specifically defined add-ons (Section 7 special expenses) or revised by judicial discretion in certain areas.

In many cases, the determination of income is straight forward, and the subsequent process of determining child support is simple; in others, it can be quite complicated. In shared custody, split custody and undue hardship cases, the income of both parents (and sometimes that of their new spouse) must be determined. Parents and their new spouses may not cooperate, introducing the first level of difficulty.

A second level of difficulty arises when parents are self-employed, or have various sources of income that must be evaluated to determine a “fair” income.

Based on the Guidelines, the personal tax return is the starting place for determination of income. In particular, Line 150 (Line 15000 starting in 2019), Total Income, is the number to be used. Then, this number is revised for a number of additions and deductions, depending on individual circumstances.

Interpretation of personal tax returns and business financial statements is not an aptitude possessed by every member of the legal profession and of court workers who are involved in this process. Ideally, in complex situations, a professional accountant with a thorough understanding of the Child Support Guidelines will be involved. (When you seek the advice of an accountant, ensure that he or she is comfortable with the Guidelines, because the adjustments required here differ significantly from their typical assignments, and the adjustments have specific meaning in certain cases.)

In any case, a thorough understanding of the adjustments set out in Guideline Sections 15 to 20 and Schedule III is important. Appendix A sets out these Sections for your reference. At least a general understanding of income taxes and related issues is important to identify when outside advice is needed.

When advising clients on matters that may have long-term cash flow effects, an error of a few dollars can be significant. For example, a discrepancy of $10.00 per month for a newborn child will accumulate to over $2,000.00 by the time the child is 18 years of age. At an interest rate of 5%, to-day’s value of that $10.00 per month is over $1,300. This means you need to invest $1,300 today in order to provide that parent with $10.00 per month for 18 years. In other words, if you err in your calculations by $10.00 per month, the cost of that error to your client is $1,300 today.

The goal of this article is to review the Guideline rules as they relate to determination of income. I will not be discussing detailed analysis of self-employed and corporate financial statements other than to identify the adjustments to consider. For more detailed analysis in this area, I refer you to my article in the Child Support Guidelines Reference Manual titled, “An Accountant’s Response to Common Questions Regarding Determination of Income – Self-Employment Situations.”

The rules discussed in this article apply equally to written separation agreements as well as court orders. Throughout this article, when I refer to agreements, court orders are included, unless otherwise specified.

The financial disclosure requirements are set out in legislation, and are also detailed more precisely in my reference manual article I referred to earlier. My first recommendation is that you obtain all of the required information so that you can interpret it appropriately. This is specifically important with respect to self-employment situations. Ensure that you obtain breakdowns of payments or benefits paid to, or on behalf of, persons or corporations with whom the spouse does not deal at arm’s length.

I also remind you of the goal of the income determination exercise, for which I quote from Holtby v. Holtby [(1997) 30 R.F.L. (4th) 70, Aston J.]:

“Projected annual income, not historical income, is the income figure to be used for the Table amount. Past income is the basis upon which to assess future income.”

The reason I present this quote is to remind you that we are trying to determine the parents’ income from which they will be paying child support. Historical information will not be as important if a person has obtained a new job or their income has recently changed for some other reason.

The determination of income calculation is set out from Section 15 to Section 20 of the Guidelines, with reference to Schedule III.

Section 15(2) allows both spouses to agree in writing on the annual income of a spouse. If the Court thinks that this amount is reasonable having regard to the income information provided under Section 21, it may be used for a Guideline purposes. This is certainly the easiest way of reaching the final result.

Unless a written agreement is reached between the spouses on the amount of income, further analysis is required. The income calculations will commence using the personal income tax return of the payer. Remember that the payer may be both spouses in situations where there is split or shared custody.

There are two mathematical approaches that you may use to calculate Guideline income. You may refer to the personal tax return and, starting from the first line, combine all of the appropriate income and deduction figures to reach the appropriate total. Alternatively, you may start with total income on Line 150 (Line 15000 starting in 2019) and make upward or downward adjustments to that total as permitted by Schedule III.

I use this latter approach because it follows the reading of the legislation.

I shall now review the adjustments outlined in the legislation, starting with each Section of Schedule III:

Employment Expenses

1. Where the spouse is an employee, the spouse’s applicable employment expenses described in the following provisions of Income Tax Act are deducted…

If you start with total income on line 150 (line 15000 starting in 2019) of the tax return, the first adjustment is to deduct applicable employment expenses as set out in Section 1 in Schedule III. The most common of these deductions will relate to salesperson expenses, employee vehicle and/or trucker expenses, union/association dues and certain artists expenses. These expenses will usually be found on line 212 and 229 of the personal tax return. (I say “usually” because sometimes deductions are erroneously entered on the wrong line of the tax return.)

Note that Schedule III paragraph 1(i) refers to deductions for Canada Pension Plan contributions and Employment Insurance Act premiums. These are not the taxpayer’s premiums. These amounts relate only to the rare situation where the taxpayer has hired an employee as an assistant, and the taxpayer is required to remit CPP and EI on behalf of that assistant. The parents’ Canada Pension Plan contributions and Employment Insurance Act premiums as shown on their T1’s are not a deduction for Guideline income.

Child Support

2. Deduct any child support received that is included to determine total income in the T1 General form issued by the Canada Revenue Agency.

The next adjustment is to remove any child support received that is included in total income, which should be reported on line 128 of the tax return. All child support, regardless of which relationship it relates to, is excluded from Guideline income.

Spousal Support and Universal Child Care Benefit

3. To calculate income for the purpose of determining an amount under an applicable table, deduct

1. the spousal support received from the other spouse; and
2. any universal child care benefit that is included to determine the spouse’s total income in the T1 General form issued by the Canada Revenue Agency.

Special or extraordinary expenses

3.1. To calculate income for the purpose of determining an amount under section 7 of these Guidelines, deduct the spousal support paid to the other spouse and, as applicable, make the following adjustment in respect of universal child care benefits:

1. deduct benefits that are included to determine the spouse’s total income in the T1 General form issued by the Canada Revenue Agency and that are for a child for whom special or extraordinary expenses are not being requested; or
2. include benefits that are not included to determine the spouse’s total income in the T1 General form issued by the Canada Revenue Agency and that are received by the spouse for a child for whom special or extraordinary expenses are being requested.

Parents receive a Universal Child Care Benefit (UCCB) of $100 per month for each child under the age of 6, which is included on line 117 of the tax return. The UCCB is deducted from total income for calculating basic child support, under section 3 of Schedule III. However, under section 3.1, the UCCB is included in parental incomes for purposes of section 7 expense sharing, but only for those children for who section 7 expenses are requested. Any UCCB for another child is not to be included in a parent’s income.

Under Section 3 of Schedule III, spousal support received from the other spouse must also be excluded from Guideline income. Please note that this is only spousal income received from the other parent involved in this child support agreement. Spousal support from other relationships is counted as Guideline income. Of course, a payer of child support is not typically a recipient of spousal support, so this adjustment will not be necessary in most situations. The exception is split custody, shared custody, or certain other situations where income of both parents must be determined.

With respect to spousal support, it is also important not to be confused when it is time to calculate Section 7 Special Expenses. For this purpose, spousal support is added to Guideline income in order to determine the appropriate ratio for sharing expenses. This calculation creates an awkward situation whereby the judicial system must determine child support, including the allocation of special expenses, before the amount of spousal support is determined. Then, spousal support is determined, and the allocation of special expenses must be recalculated to account for the change in income created by the spousal amount.

Line 128 of the T1 reports taxable child and spousal support, so a breakdown of this figure will be required to perform your calculation.

Social Assistance

4. Deduct any amount of social assistance income that is not attributable to the spouse.

If a client receives social assistance income, it will be reported on line 145. This figure must be adjusted so that it only includes the amount related to the parent. Any amounts related to other family members must be excluded. This allocation will not be available from the tax return, and you may need to contact your local social assistance office.

Dividends from taxable Canadian Corporations

5. Replace the taxable amount of dividends from taxable Canadian corporations received by the spouse by the actual amount of those dividends received by the spouse.

Capital Gains and Capital Losses

6. Replace the taxable capital gains realized in a year by the spouse by the actual amount of capital gains realized by the spouse in excess of the spouse’s actual capital losses in that year.

Many individuals are now investing their savings in mutual funds and other such investments. This gives rise to several adjustments that are required to determine total income.

When dividends are received from a Canadian public corporation, the cash amount of the dividend is inflated. This “gross up” may be 25% or from 38-45% depending on the year and type of dividend when it is reported on the tax return. Therefore, a $100 tax dividend is taxed as $125, $138 or up to $145. (This increase is later offset by a dividend tax credit as part of the federal tax calculations.) This excess amount ($25 – $45) must be deducted from total income.

In contrast, capital gains and losses that are reported from sales of investments, real estate and other capital property are reported at 50% of the actual amount. If the person makes a $100 capital gain on sale of investments, the figure reported on the tax return will be $50. (Capital losses realized during the year are offset against capital gains, with only net capital gains being reported.) The figure for taxable capital gains must be inflated to restore it to its original cash value. (In my example, add $50 to total income.)

Taxable dividends from Canadian corporations are reported on line 120 and 121, and capital gains are reported on line 127. Both of these amounts are supported by attached schedules, which you can refer to for further details, including the appropriate cash amounts if you do not wish to do the calculations.

Business Investment Losses

7. Deduct the actual amount of business investment losses suffered by the spouse during the year.

While still reviewing adjustments for investments, Schedule III Section 7 allows the deduction of the actual amount of business investment losses. Allowable business investment losses are also reported on the tax return at 50% of their full value, on line 217. Schedule III suggests that you convert the 50% amount to its original 100% figure, and deduct it from total income. However, when doing this, you should also carefully consider Section 17 (2) of the Guidelines, which indicates that it may be appropriate to ignore these losses because they are non-recurring.

Section 17(2) specifically refers to non-recurring capital or business investment losses, as discussed in Sections 6 and 7 of Schedule III. With the increasing use of mutual funds and equity investing by the general public, capital gains and losses may be recurring items. However, business investment losses normally occur from the loss of an investment in a private business venture, and I would not expect these to be recurring items.

Carrying Charges

8. Deduct the spouse’s carrying charges and interest expenses that are paid by the spouse and that would be deductible under the Income Tax Act.

On line 221 of the T1, supported by Schedule 4, is an amount deducted for carrying charges and interest expenses. This amount is deductible from total income for Guideline purposes. These amounts are typically safety deposit box charges (prior to 2014), investment counselling fees, tax preparation fees and interest on investment loans. If a portion of these carrying charges relate to an allowable business investment loss, as discussed above, you may be required to make an adjustment. If the allowable business investment loss is excluded from your calculations as a non-recurring item, any related carrying charges are not allowed as deductions either.

Employee Stock Options with a Canadian-Controlled Private Corporation

13.

1. Where the spouse has received, as an employee benefit, options to purchase shares of a Canadian-controlled private corporation,   or a publicly traded corporation that is subject to the same tax treatment with reference to stock options as a Canadian-controlled private corporation,  and has exercised those options during the year, add the difference between the value of the shares at the time the options are exercised and the amount paid by the spouse for the shares and any amount paid to acquire the options to purchase the shares, to the income for the year in which the options are exercised.

Disposal of Shares

2. If the spouse has disposed of the shares during a year, deduct from the income for that year the difference determined under subsection (1).

These sections require adjustment to Guideline income for stock options related only to private corporations, not the more commonly encountered situations with public corporations. Stock option benefits are not reported on personal tax returns until the shares are sold. Hence, the personal income of the payer must be increased in the year such benefits are received, and decreased when they are actually reported (to prevent double counting).

Sections 9 through 12 of Schedule III outline several adjustments to self-employed income.

Net Self-Employment Income

9. Where the spouse’s net self-employment income is determined by deducting an amount for salaries, benefits, wages or management fees, or other payments, paid to or on behalf of persons with whom the spouse does not deal at arm’s length, include that amount, unless the spouse establishes that the payments were necessary to earn the self-employment income and were reasonable in the circumstances.

You must be careful to interpret the phrases “on behalf of” and “does not deal at arm’s length” correctly. This paragraph indicates that all payments to or on behalf of related persons will be added back to Guideline income unless the amounts can be established as necessary and reasonable. One could argue that some payments are reasonable for the work done, but that an additional person is not required to perform those functions. If an existing employee could accomplish the same work, but a related person is hired to justify income splitting for tax purposes, this may not meet the “necessary” requirement. The other focus will be whether the payment is reasonable for the amount of work performed, and this is a judgement based on industry averages for similar work under similar circumstances. However, a key issue here is the fact that these amounts are added back to income unless the spouse establishes their necessity and reasonableness, which puts the onus on the spouse to justify those amounts.

Additional Amount

10. Where the spouse reports income from self-employment that includes, in accordance with sections 34.1 and 34.2 of Income Tax Act, includes an additional amount earned in a prior period, deduct the amount in the prior period, net of reserves.

In 1995, self-employed individuals were either required to change their fiscal year end to December 31, or to make annual adjustments to their fiscal year results to convert it to a calendar year basis. Because of this conversion required in 1995, many self-employed individuals would have had to report in excess of 12 months of profits for their 1995 personal tax return. To reduce the impact of this one-time change, an individual was allowed to claim a reserve in 1995 for this excess income, and allocate it in prescribed percentages from 1995 through to 2004.

As a result, throughout this time frame, an individual may be required to report more than 12 months of income from self-employed earnings. This adjustment is not readily apparent on a personal tax return to an uninformed reader. You should look for the Form T1139 Reconciliation of Business Income for Tax Purposes to identify that such a reserve has been utilized. This form will show the opening and closing reserves calculated for the particular taxation year. The net change will be added to the self-employment income prior to being inserted on lines 135 through 143 of the income tax return. These amounts should be removed from the calculation of Guideline income for each of the three years you may be reviewing. This adjustment will not be relevant to tax returns for 2005 and later.

Capital Cost Allowance for Property

11. Include the spouse’s deduction for an allowable capital cost allowance with respect to real property.

Capital cost allowance with respect to real property consists of a calculation of depreciation on real estate, being buildings. The purpose of this adjustment is to eliminate any deduction for such depreciation because buildings usually do not decline in value over the years. In order to locate capital cost allowance amounts for buildings, you will need to review the business’s income tax return and the accompanying schedules of capital cost allowance. These will accompany the statement of real estate rentals, as well as the statements of business, professional, commission, farming and fishing activities. The net income from these activities is reported on line 126 and lines 135 through 143 of the personal income tax return. If there are no amounts on these lines, also check line 160 and lines 162 through 170 that report the gross income from such activities. In some cases, gross income will be fully eliminated through expense claims and no amount will be reported on the net income line. However, capital cost allowance may still have been claimed as an expense.

For income tax purposes, buildings are reported in certain “classes” for capital cost allowance purposes. Classes 1, 3, 6, 31 and 32 are the typical classes for buildings, although occasionally other types of assets may also be included in these classes. Certain storage, farm and specialized buildings may be classified as Class 8, although Class 8 usually represents equipment. In addition, Class 20 represents certain buildings acquired from 1963 to 1967.

Partnership or Sole Proprietorship Income

12. Where the spouse earns income through a partnership or sole proprietorship, deduct any amount included in income that is properly required by the partnership or sole proprietorship for purposes of capitalization.

Capitalization of a business can be defined as the cash required to establish and operate the business. “Working capital” is required to provide the company with resources to operate on a day-to-day basis, and this capital can come from several sources. It may be borrowed, contributed by the owner, or retained from operating profits. In a new business, or in a growing business, you will typically see purchase of new equipment, increasing accounts receivable balances owing from customers, and rising inventory. All of these situations create a need for cash, which must come from the aforementioned sources. When a business reports a profit for income tax purposes, this profit may not be available as cash flow to the owner because of these needs. For example, a business that makes $10,000 profit may not have any cash because they have not collected their sales proceeds from a customer yet.

A review of the balance sheet and statement of changes in financial position (cash flow statement) will be useful in evaluating this situation. Looking at the balance sheet, an increase in assets does not necessarily mean that profits were required to further capitalize the business. If liabilities increased by a similar amount, the additional cash required was generated by taking on additional debt. If the cash flow statement is produced, it will demonstrate the sources and uses of cash through the year and will greatly assist in making this evaluation.

Of course, an individual could use cash to buy capital assets or to finance increases in other assets deliberately, allowing him or her to use paragraph 12 to reduce Guideline income. It is normal business practice to obtain a line of credit from a bank to finance increases in accounts receivable and inventory and to borrow using term loans to finance purchases of capital assets (up to certain limits, as dictated by the lenders). You must consider whether these facilities were available prior to making an adjustment under paragraph 12. The key issue here is to deduct any amount included in income that is properly required for purposes of capitalization.

To this point, we have been discussing Section 16 of the Guidelines, which refers to the total income from the personal tax return, and adjustments required in accordance with Schedule III. Section 17 through 20 relate to other considerations.

Section 17 refers to concerns about fluctuating incomes, and provides the Court with leeway to make adjustments if Section 16 does not provide a fair determination of annual income. When using Section 17, note that it refers to income from each source, not just total income on a combined basis. It also provides that the Court may determine the annual income from that source using certain recommendations, but they are not mandatory. Where the amount from a source of income has consistently increased or decreased in each of the most recent three years, the most recent year may be the most appropriate. Where this consistency does not exist, an average or some other amount may be appropriate. In all cases, you should look at the individual circumstances.

As referred to earlier, if the payer has incurred a non-recurring capital or business investment loss, that item may be excluded from the determination of income. An appropriate amount of that loss, including any related expenses, carrying charges and interest expenses, may be used instead of the actual amount.

Where a person is a shareholder, director or officer of a corporation, that person’s personal tax return may not reflect all of the cash flow available to him or her to meet child support obligations. The purpose of Section 18 is to provide the Courts with the ability to include corporate income in the calculation of a spouse’s Guideline income. If the Court determines that the spouse’s annual income as previously determined under Section 16 does not fairly reflect all the money available to the spouse for payment of child support, the issues in Section 17 may be considered and adjustments for corporate income may be made. These include either all or part of the pre-tax income of the corporation and any of its related corporations for the most recent taxation year, or an amount commensurate with the services that the spouse provides to the corporation (as long as that amount does not exceed the corporation’s pre-tax income).

In determining the pre-tax income of a corporation, payments and benefits to or on behalf of related persons must be added back to that pre-tax income, unless those amounts are established to be reasonable in the circumstances.

The analysis and interpretations of corporate income can be a very complex matter. You may wish to refer to my article in the Child Support Guidelines reference manual titled “An Accountant’s Response to Common Questions Regarding the Determination of Income- Self-Employment Situations” for further guidance in this area. The usefulness of a professional accountant to assist you in evaluating corporate income should be considered.

Finally, to meet the needs of the Court where a fair determination of income is not otherwise possible, Section 19 allows the Court to impute certain amounts. Section 19 is not all-inclusive, but provides examples when imputing may be appropriate. Effectively, it gives the Court jurisdiction to adjust a person’s income to that which is fair, which may occur because of a deliberate intent to understate income or solely due to the nature of income received. For example, certain income is received free of income tax, and this provides more cash flow to a person than the equal amount of income if it were taxable. Such amounts include Worker’s Compensation benefits, Social Assistance benefits, guaranteed income supplement and income earned by certain exempt persons. These amounts must be increased to equivalent taxable amount prior to applying the Guideline tables.

For example, assume taxable income of $30,000 results in taxes of $6,000, leaving a net cash flow of $24,000. In P.E.I., the table amount for $30,000 for one child would be $263 per month. If a person receives a $24,000 pension from Worker’s Compensation benefits, and this income was used for Guideline purposes, the monthly award would only be $204. This would not be fair because both parties have the same amount of after-tax income, being $24,000. Therefore, the person receiving Worker’s Compensation must have his or her income inflated to a pre-tax equivalent amount, which in my example would be $30,000.

A review of Section 19 to consider the other possible situations where imputing may be appropriate is worthwhile, but remember that this is not an exhaustive list.

Section 20 raises one final issue with respect to the determination of income. When a person is a non-resident of Canada, that person’s annual income is determined as if he or she were a resident of Canada, with a reduction to income made to account for higher tax rates. This also means that the income would be converted to Canadian dollars. Section 19 also provides that income will be imputed if tax rates on that foreign income are lower than they would be in Canada.

Remember your goal, which is to determine a fair income for the payer from which cash will be available to meet his or her child support obligations.

Excerpt from the Federal Child Support Guidelines

Determination of annual income

15. (1) Subject to subsection (2), a spouse’s annual income is determined by the court in accordance with sections 16 to 20.

Agreement

15. (2) Where both spouses agree in writing on the annual income of a spouse, the court may consider that amount to be the spouse’s income for the purposes of these Guidelines if the court thinks that the amount is reasonable having regard to the income information provided under section 21.

Calculation of annual income

16. Subject to sections 17 to 20, a spouse’s annual income is determined using the sources of income set out under the heading “Total income” in the T1 General form issued by the Canada Revenue Agency and is adjusted in accordance with Schedule III.

Pattern of income

17. (1) If the court is of the opinion that the determination of a spouse’s annual income from a source of income under section 16 would not be the fairest determination of that income, the court may  have regard to the spouses income over the past three years and to determine an amount that is fair and reasonable in light of any pattern of income, fluctuation in income or receipt of a non-recurring amount during those years.

Non-recurring losses

(2) Where a spouse has incurred a non-recurring capital or business investment loss, the court may, if it is of the opinion that the determination of the spouse’s annual income under section 16 would not provide the fairest determination of the annual income, choose not to apply sections 6 and 7 of Schedule III, and adjust the amount of the loss, including related expenses and carrying charges and interest expenses, to arrive at such amount as the court considers appropriate.

Shareholder, director or officer

18. (1) Where a spouse is a shareholder, director or officer of a corporation and the court is of the opinion that the amount of the spouse’s annual income as determined under section 16 does not fairly reflect all the money available to the spouse for the payment of child support, the court may consider the situations described in section 17 and determine the spouse’s annual income to include

(a) all or part of the pre tax income of the corporation, and of any corporation that is related to that corporation, for the most recent taxation year; or

(b) an amount commensurate with the services that the spouse provides to the corporation, provided that the amount does not exceed the corporation’s pre-tax income.

Adjustment to corporation’s pre-tax income

(2) In determining the pre tax income of a corporation for the purposes of subsection (1), all amounts paid by the corporation as salaries, wages or management fees, or other payments or benefits, to or on behalf of persons with whom the corporation does not deal at arm’s length must be added to the pre-tax income, unless the spouse establishes that the payments were reasonable in the circumstances.

Imputing income

19. (1) The court may impute such amount of income to a spouse as it considers appropriate in the circumstances, which circumstances include the following:

(a) the spouse is intentionally under-employed or unemployed, other than where the under-employment or unemployment is required by the needs of a child of the marriage or any child under the age of majority or by the reasonable educational or health needs of the spouse;

(b) the spouse is exempt from paying federal or provincial income tax;

(c) the spouse lives in a country that has effective rates of income tax that are significantly lower than those in Canada;

(d) it appears that income has been diverted which would affect the level of child support to be determined under these Guidelines;

(e) the spouse’s property is not reasonably utilized to generate income;

(f) the spouse has failed to provide income information when under a legal obligation to do so;

(g) the spouse unreasonably deducts expenses from income;

(h) the spouse derives a significant portion of income from dividends, capital gains or other sources that are taxed at a lower rate than employment or business income; and

(i) the spouse is a beneficiary under a trust and is or will be in receipt of income or other benefits from the trust.

Reasonable of expenses

(2) For the purpose of paragraph (1)(g), the reasonableness of an expense deduction is not solely governed by whether the deduction is permitted under the Income Tax Act.

Non-resident

20. (1) Where a spouse is a non resident of Canada, the spouse’s annual income is determined as though the spouse were a resident of Canada.

(2) Where the spouse is a non-resident of Canada and resides in a country that has effective rates of Income Tax that are significantly higher than those applicable in the province in which the other spouse ordinarily resides,  the spouse’s annual income is  the amount that the court determines to be appropriate taking those rates into consideration.

Return to Articles Listing

Blair Corkum, CPA, CA, R.F.P., CFP, CFDS, CLU, CHS holds his Chartered Professional Accountant, Chartered Accountant, Registered Financial Planner, Chartered Financial Divorce Specialist as well as several other financial planning related designations. Blair offers hourly based fee-only personal financial planning, holds no investment or insurance licenses, and receives no commissions or referral fees. This publication should not be construed as legal or investment advice. It is neither a definitive analysis of the law nor a substitute for professional advice which you should obtain before acting on information in this article. Information may change as a result of legislation or regulations issued after this article was written.©Blair Corkum

Understanding Financial Statements for Support Purposes

January 2000

To determine child and spousal support, income of the payer(s) must be determined.  Where self-employment or corporate income is involved, this determination becomes quite complex.  I wrote this article in 2000 to assist you in gaining some understanding of how to read financial statements and tax returns.  In this way, hopefully you can interpret the information to calculate income, or to judge someone else’s calculation.  Click below for the PDF file.

NOTE THAT THE WORDING OF THE AUDITOR AND ACCOUNTANT REPORTS HAVE CHANGED SUBSTANTIALLY SINCE PUBLICATION OF THIS ARTICLE.  However, the level of reliability related to the reports will be similar to that discussed.  THE TAX RETURN FORMAT AND LINE NUMBERS HAVE ALSO CHANGED, but the concepts still apply, and most line numbers are the same with a couple additional zero’s added.  The theory still applies, but the tax return referencing may be difficult to follow.  I know the article should be updated, but finding time is a challenge.  Contact me if you have questions.

Understanding Financial Statements and Tax Returns for Support, originally published in 2000

Please review my other web site articles to obtain further information about determination of income.

Return to Articles Listing

Blair Corkum, CPA, CA, R.F.P., CFP, CFDS, CLU, CHS holds his Chartered Professional Accountant, Chartered Accountant, Registered Financial Planner, Chartered Financial Divorce Specialist as well as several other financial planning related designations. Blair offers hourly based fee-only personal financial planning, holds no investment or insurance licenses, and receives no commissions or referral fees. This publication should not be construed as legal or investment advice. It is neither a definitive analysis of the law nor a substitute for professional advice which you should obtain before acting on information in this article. Information may change as a result of legislation or regulations issued after this article was written.©Blair Corkum

Answers to Questions about Income for Support Calculations

January 1998

The Child Support Guidelines, and the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines, provide need for determination of a parent’s income. In many cases, this is a simple process; in others, it can be quite complicated. Interpretation of personal tax returns and business financial statements is not an aptitude possessed by every member of the legal profession and of court workers who are involved in this process. Ideally, in complex situations, a professional accountant or a Chartered Financial Divorce Specialist with a thorough understanding of the Child Support Guidelines will be involved. Whether or not this is the case, a general understanding of income taxes and financial statement reporting concepts is still valuable to interpret reports received from these accountants. The goal of this article is to review some of the more common questions raised by various professionals involved in determining income from self‑ employment.

The following questions will be discussed in the attached PDF article, originally published in 1998.  Some information that is referenced may be out of date, such as the wording of the Canada Revenue Agency taxable benefit guide, but the answers remain relevant.

1. What financial information should be requested from the parents?
2. What financial statements can we expect from businesses and which ones are important to look at?
3. How do business owners understate their profits in order to reduce their income for child support and/or tax purposes? How can we find these types of adjustments?
4. How much reliance can we place on financial statements?
5. What special issues arise when evaluating farming or fishing income statements?
6. What payments or personal benefits may be made to spouses and where are they on the financial statements?
7. Could you explain some of the adjustments to self-employment income outlined in Schedule III to the Guidelines?

Please click below for access to the PDF file:

Answering Common Questions – Determining Income for Support Purposes

Return to Articles Listing

Blair Corkum, CPA, CA, R.F.P., CFP, CFDS, CLU, CHS holds his Chartered Professional Accountant, Chartered Accountant, Registered Financial Planner, Chartered Financial Divorce Specialist as well as several other financial planning related designations. Blair offers hourly based fee-only personal financial planning, holds no investment or insurance licenses, and receives no commissions or referral fees. This publication should not be construed as legal or investment advice. It is neither a definitive analysis of the law nor a substitute for professional advice which you should obtain before acting on information in this article. Information may change as a result of legislation or regulations issued after this article was written.©Blair Corkum