PENSIONS |
Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development) v. Mahy
A-24-04, A-25-04
2004 FCA 340, Létourneau J.A.
12/10/04
14 pp.
Appeals from T.C.C. decision allowing respondents' appeals from Minister of Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) decisions under Old Age Security Act (OASA) re: applications for spouse's allowance, payment of guaranteed income supplement (GIS)--Respondents Maurice Mahy and spouse Marie Mahy--Maurice Mahy's reported income for 2000 minus $2,736 once GIS, OASA pension received deducted--HRDC interpreting OASA, s. 2 definition of "income" as not allowing negative income, adjusting Maurice Mahy's income to $0--Marie Mahy's income $2,736 --Respondents' request allowance, GIS be redetermined using joint income of $0 unsuccessful--T.C.C.'s brief reasons in support of allowing appeal from that decision inadequate, contrary to Tax Court of Canada Act, s. 18.23--Whether "income" under OASA, s. 2 including negative income-- Under Income Tax Act (ITA), "income" referring to zero amount or positive amount according to T.C.C., F.C.T.D. cases--Federal Court of Appeal herein agreeing ITA containing no notion of negative income--Notion of "income" in OASA same as in ITA--Purpose of deduction from income allowed in OASA not to create, determine loss but to ensure benefits under OASA not reduced by reason of receiving such income--Purpose also to determine whether pensioner entitled to maximum benefits--Pensioner, spouse entitled to maximum benefits when joint income zero-- Negative income not increasing maximum benefits--Where pensioner using spouse's negative income to bring joint income to zero, deduction not taken to ensure benefits payable not reduced by reason of receiving such income, but rather to increase maximum payable benefits that would otherwise have been less--Such deduction would allow respondents to be in better position than pensioners really having no income--This not intent of OASA--T.C.C. erred in ruling negative income concept exists, can be used to reduce, offset income of spouse--T.C.C. also erred in holding GIS miscalculated, as GIS not affected whether joint income of $2,736 or joint income of $0 used in computation--Appeals allowed--Old Age Security Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. O-9, s. 2 "income" (as am. by S.C. 1999, c. 22, s. 87)--Tax Court of Canada Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. T-2, s. 18.23 (as enacted by R.S.C., 1985 (4th Supp.), c. 51, s. 5)--Income Tax Act, R.S.C., 1985 (5th Supp.), c. 1.